Press

For several years now, cognitive psychology and educational neuroscience have been producing results that can lead to educational recommendations. Comparing these results with other positions from different fields of expertise has sparked debate. This unprecedented situation requires all these results to be tested as objectively as possible. There is such a logical solution: experimentation under real teaching conditions. Applying these methods in the school environment requires an ethical framework, which the CCNE outlines in its new Opinion "Ethical framework for educational experimentation in real-life situations" (Opinion 131 published on 7th November 2019). The CCNE also makes a number of recommendations. 

Cognitive psychology and the neurosciences of education produce results that can lead to precise recommendations on ways of teaching knowledge or learning. The confrontation of these results with other positions, originating from different fields of expertise, is the origin of debates, even frank oppositions. This situation is unprecedented and has led the CCNE to take up the issue on its own initiative. 

In view of the large number of studies, their sometimes divergent interpretations and their potential applications in the world of education, the CCNE, in its new opinion 131, considers it "urgent and essential to sort out these results in the least arbitrary way possible, in order to guarantee the best educational decisions for schoolchildren". Such a rational solution does exist: it is experimentation carried out in a real situation. It originated in medicine in the form of clinical trials, and has since been developed in other disciplines, such as economics and public policy evaluation. In the field of education, a number of studies have already confirmed the relevance of such interventions. This approach makes it possible to take into account all forms of experimentation, to use a rigorous methodology (based in particular on randomisation and the notion of controlled experimentation), and even to control for any biases.  This in situ measurement of a teaching practice differs from laboratory experiments, which are conducted in a very different context from that of the classroom. 

The CCNE's aim is not to decide on the superiority of one teaching or learning method over another, but to propose a general ethical framework for this research, which it considers indispensable. 

There are a number of important questions concerning the pupils, classes, and their teachers: 

- How can the risks inherent in experimentation be minimized? 

- How can we avoid interfering with current practices, delimit the strictly scientific framework of the research in progress, and guarantee its independence from the educational and political choices made elsewhere?

- How can we address the issue of the informed consent of minors? 

How can we ensure that the experiment and its results are socially equitable? What criteria should be used to determine the notion of educational effectiveness? 

- How can we manage the risk of methodological standardization?

The CCNE's work has been shaped by a number of issues arising from the tension between the search for the most accurate pedagogical knowledge possible, ethical respect for the individual and the principle of scientific independence. They have led to the formulation of several recommendations. These include:

The ethical imperative of "beneficence" means minimising the risks to which pupils are exposed. The study should therefore be preceded by research strongly suggesting the effectiveness of the planned experiment. The experiment conducted under real conditions should be as short as possible and involve as few pupils as possible, unless justified by the experiment. It is also suggested that the most appropriate tools be put in place to collect any undesirable effects of the studies conducted, and that the informed consent of under-age pupils be obtained, even if such consent is not legally required in France.  (Parental consent is required).

The independence of research teams (particularly in relation to institutional practices or policies) is essential. It is up to them to establish a solid rationale for their studies in which the criteria of effectiveness evaluated are precisely determined: while measurements of children's 'instrumental' performance (arithmetic, reading, etc.) are essential, so is the evaluation of critical thinking or creativity, which may be less easy to measure. Researchers should make the methodology and results of their work, both positive and negative, available to everyone, especially teachers.

Respecting the timeframe of such research means not confusing the timeframe of the experiment with that of any decisions to modify recommendations and current teaching practices.

All educational experiments in real-life situations should be supervised by an operational ethics body.

Educational experimentation should not be confused with an approach aimed at "medicalising" education or leading to methodological "standardisation". Because it is nourished by ongoing scientific work and educational experiments conducted in the field, it seems desirable that it should take root over the long term, leading to a genuine 'cultural revolution' among scientists, teachers and all those involved in education. Experimentation in real-life conditions could eventually become a branch of the educational sciences in its own right.