Challenging the gold standard consensus: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and their pitfalls in evidence-based education

This paper seeks to raise awareness among educational researchers
and practitioners of some significant weaknesses and internal contradictions of randomised control trials (RCTs). Although critiques
throughout the years from education scholars have pointed to the
detrimental effects of this experimental approach on education
practice and values, RCTs are considered the gold standard for
assessing the impact of education policies and interventions. By
drawing on the approach of immanent critique, we elucidate substantial argumentative gaps between the assumptions and applications – that is, between the theory and reality – of RCTs in empirical
research. This kind of analytic exercise complements existing critiques from outside the experimental discourse based on moral and
epistemic principles. The present paper, in contrast, contributes to
the literature by highlighting internal limitations and contradictions
that can be seen by probing the logic espoused by those who are
proponents of RCTs. In fleshing out our argument, we seek to
encourage more informed and critical engagement by educators,
policymakers, and researchers, among other stakeholders, when
they are confronted with proposals for education programmes
and reforms supported by findings from RCTs.