LEARN Deliverable D2.5: Report on Evidence-Based Education

Abstract

This report constitutes Deliverable D2.5 of Work Package 2 under the Horizon Europe-funded project Longitudinal Educational Achievements: Reducing Inequalities (LEARN; Grant Agreement No. 101132531). Focusing on Task 2.5, the report systematically examines the adoption, adaptation, and structural resistance to Evidence-Based Education (EBE) across European educational systems. Using mature institutional models from the Anglosphere (specifically the Education Endowment Foundation in England and the Institute of Education Sciences in the United States) as comparative benchmarks, the study investigates how varying governance structures, pedagogical traditions, and research cultures shape the translation of empirical evidence into classroom practice. Methodologically, the report synthesises four distinct analytical strands: an extensive theoretical scoping review defining the core principles and epistemological boundaries of EBE; semi-structured scoping interviews with leading international EBE academics and policymakers; a multi-national survey administered across eight LEARN consortium countries; and qualitative, thematic deep-dive case studies into the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Finland. Both qualitative interview phases were conducted using a structured, Large Language Model (LLM)-assisted thematic analysis framework coupled with rigorous human oversight and refinement. The findings demonstrate a highly fragmented European EBE landscape characterised by marked regional divergence. While state-led ecosystems such as the Netherlands exhibit high conceptual alignment, other jurisdictions display partial alignment—frequently utilising empirical data for system-level monitoring and accountability rather than pedagogical improvement—or remain underdeveloped. Cross-nationally, the report identifies widespread European preference for "evidence-informed" over "evidence-based" terminology to protect professional autonomy, an ongoing commitment to methodological pluralism that combines causal inference designs with implementation process evaluations, and severe structural bottlenecks. These systemic barriers include a lack of protected time for teachers, deficits in research literacy, fragmented translation platforms, and friction arising from decentralised or autonomous governance structures. The report concludes with strategic considerations for designing sustainable, context-sensitive knowledge mobilisation and brokerage infrastructures across Europe.