"Culture of Evidence" (?!)

[Stephen C. Ehrmann]

"Culture of evidence" is a controversial phrase within the TLT Group. For me, it's the best way I've heard to describe whether an institution informally and formally supports the intentional gathering and use of information before making choices, whether that choice is "How do I teach tomorrow?" or "How do we get more value from what we spend on a learning management system?" Steve Gilbert objects to the phrase. To his ears, it sounds reductionistic, simplistic, divisive, and unintentionally insulting. Otherwise, he thinks, the label is fine. Perhaps he'll elaborate below.

One of the hidden resources lying deep in the TLT Group web site is this page on how to strengthen an institution's "culture of evidence.' It includes thoughts on providing tools, training, rewards, budget, communications channels, and more.

So what do you think of a) the label "culture of evidence" (good idea and good name? poor idea? good idea but needs a new name?), b) the ideas and resources on the page - do you like any of them? any suggestions or additions?

[Steve Gilbert]

There are so many kinds of evidence.. The phrase "culture of evidence", used as a name for a NEW goal for a college or university, seems to imply that there must be many people who are now part of that institution who prefer NOT to gather, review, and analyze information before making decisions. Or, I suspect, that some will hear the proposal to set achieving a "culture of evidence" as implication that the KINDS of evidence already being used by many people to make decisions is inferior or doesn't count. Am I wrong in thinking that some faculty hear some of the reasons for advocating the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning as criticism of the ways in which they have already been perceiving and responding to learners.