Those who have been around research for a while may feel a sense of déjà vu when reading this. In recent years, the so-called replication crisis swept through psychology, leaving quite a mark. Classic findings proved difficult to reproduce, methodological weaknesses were exposed, and some of the field’s “big names” turned out to be better storytellers than scientists. Stuart Ritchie captured this brilliantly in Science Fictions: science is a human enterprise, and therefore as fallible as the people who conduct it.

A Crisis in the Making?

Now, one or two swallows do not make a summer—or in this case, a crisis—but perhaps educational research is next in line. It came up in several conversations I had over the past week, both at home and abroad. The replication study by my Utrecht colleagues on scaffolding showed that one of the more frequently cited experiments in educational science, that of Wood et al. (1978), is not so easy to reproduce. Their conclusion, for the record, was not that scaffolding “does not work.” Instead, the researchers found that the original evidence is shakier than we might have assumed. That matters because the concept has become a cornerstone in teacher education, textbooks, and policy documents.

Of course, a single replication study does not constitute a crisis. Replication in education is also far more complex than in a laboratory context. But it does force us to look more critically at what we take for granted.

When Even the Strongest Principles Raise Questions

It reminded me of an earlier post I wrote about research on spaced repetition and retrieval practice. These are among the most robust learning principles we know, yet even there, classroom-based studies often raise more questions than they answer. This connects with what I have written before about the state of replication in educational science: we are doing slightly better than we used to, but the foundations remain fragile.

Why a Small Crisis Might Be a Good Thing

Still, I do not think this is a reason for despair. Perhaps a small crisis is exactly what we need, even if it would make my various jobs considerably more difficult. Psychology has learned over the past decade that a crisis can also be an opportunity: for better data, more transparent methods, preregistration, open datasets, and slower, more careful claims. Educational research could benefit from the same shift. Although I do notice that, thankfully, we are already adopting some of these practices, gradually and without the drama.

The Paradox We Face

We face a paradox. On the one hand, policymakers and teachers expect clear answers to the question “What works?” On the other, we know that most effects are context-dependent, small in size, and often unreplicated. A more rigorous science will produce fewer catchy slogans but more reliable knowledge in the long run.