Beyond Proposals: Scientific Evidence and Policy Replication of Effective Strategies in Reducing Educational Inequality
Beyond Proposals: Scientific Evidence and Policy Replication of Effective Strategies in Reducing Educational Inequality
125
Total downloads
5,011
Total views and downloads
About this Research Topic
This Research Topic is closed for submissions.
Background
In the last decades much scientific literature on the analysis of educational inequalities has been published (Breen et al., 2009; Brinbaum & Lutz, 2017; Hextrum et al., 2024). The current priority of social impact has moved the social and scientific demand to the analysis of those actions that achieve success in reversing inequalities . There is now increasing scientific literature about those actions, with some researchers providing evidence of the social impact such actions promote in different contexts both regarding instrumental learning and values, emotions and sentiments (Valls et al., 2022; Galar et al., 2025). However, many publications today still provide proposals made by researchers themselves, without demonstrating that they have been successful even in one school (Martin & Bolliger, 2022), far from the social impact citizens and science demand (Soler & Flecha, 2022). This Research Topic will present studies in different parts of the world that are already contributing to filling this gap. First we encourage the submission of articles to those researchers who are conducting studies which present successful actions in reversing inequalities that have been successful already in one or several schools and that have been replicated in different contexts and have generated political impact in legislation and policies oriented to promote this replicability. We also encourage the submission of articles to those researchers that have analyzed actions that have been successful in several schools from different contexts on which the researchers have found the potential for achieving political impact in the development of legislations and policies in reversing inequalities. Special emphasis will be given to those articles that provide longitudinal evidence that guide the implementation of effective interventions that compensate and/or reverse educational inequalities. We are interested in submissions that that address, but are not limited to: - Empirical Studies Documenting Successful Actions: Research reporting interventions or strategies that have demonstrably reversed educational inequalities in one or multiple schools. - Replication Across Contexts: Studies showing successful actions replicated in diverse educational settings (e.g., urban/rural, different countries/regions) with consistent results. - Longitudinal Analyses: Research providing evidence on the long-term effectiveness and sustainability of actions/interventions aimed at reducing inequalities. - Policy Impact Studies: Analyses of educational actions that have influenced or informed legislative and policy changes to address educational inequalities. - Comparative Case Studies: Comparative research highlighting similarities and differences in the successful implementation of actions across varying social, economic, or cultural contexts. - Meta-Analyses or Systematic Reviews: Reviews synthesizing evidence from multiple studies about effective practices, especially those verifying the replication and success of interventions. - Mixed Methods Research: Studies utilizing both qualitative and quantitative data to provide comprehensive evidence of successful action and its impacts. - Studies with Direct Community or Stakeholder Involvement: Research incorporating feedback or active participation from educators, students, families, or policymakers, particularly in implementation and evaluation phases.
Keywords: educational inequalities, social impact, successful actions, longitudinal evidence, political impact
Important note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.