Promises and Limitations of Nudging in Education
Promises and Limitations of Nudging in Education
复制标题
教育助推的承诺和局限性
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2020
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Philip Oreopoulos
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Philip Oreopoulos
这篇文章总结了将行为科学应用于教育政策的领域似乎处于什么位置，哪些途径看起来很有希望，哪些途径似乎是死胡同。我提出了一套精心策划的研究，而不是详尽的文献综述，根据干预措施是轻推(保持选项不变)还是“推”(限制选择)，以及它们是采用高接触还是低接触(无论是否使用面对面互动)对干预措施进行分类。最近许多测试大规模低接触轻推的尝试都发现了准确估计的无效效果，这表明我们不应该指望信件、短信和在线练习成为解决教育政策关键挑战的灵丹妙药。在年轻人的日常生活中强加更多选择限制结构的项目，如强制辅导或督促父母的项目，似乎更有希望。
This article takes stock of where the field of behavioral science applied to education policy seems to be at, which avenues seem promising and which ones seem like dead ends. I present a curated set of studies rather than an exhaustive literature review, categorizing interventions by whether they nudge (keep options intact) or "shove" (restrict choice), and whether they apply a high or low touch (whether they use face-to-face interaction or not). Many recent attempts to test large-scale low touch nudges find precisely estimated null effects, suggesting we should not expect letters, text messages, and online exercises to serve as panaceas for addressing education policy's key challenges. Programs that impose more choice-limiting structure to a youth's routine, like mandated tutoring, or programs that nudge parents, appear more promising.
DOI：
10.1073/pnas.1921417117
发表时间：
2020-06-30
影响因子：
11.1
作者：
Kizilcec, Rene F.;Reich, Justin;Tingley, Dustin
通讯作者：
Tingley, Dustin
影响因子：
64.8
作者：
Yeager, David S.;Hanselman, Paul;Dweck, Carol S.
通讯作者：
Dweck, Carol S.