循证教育改革是指教育政策制定者和教育实践者基于教育研究者循证教育研究的证据结果，尤其是利用严格实验研究方法来开展的高质量效果评估研究的证据整合结果，来决策和实施“被证据证实”的教育项目、产品、服务或实践的教育改革政策与改革实践。

它于21世纪初在美国境内的崛起，一方面是缘于医学、农业、工程、技术等领域循证改革的外部激励；另一方面也是受到教育问责实践对证据的需求、教育效能研究对证据的供应等内部动力的驱动。在历经20余年的沉淀与积累之后，因2015年《每个学生都成功法》对“证据”的明文定义、等级划分、使用规定以及经费支持，美国循证教育改革开始收获前所未有的重视与发展，成为美国教育改革新的风向标。

与美国以往的教育市场化与标准化等制度性改革不同，这场新近兴起的循证教育改革运动将变革的着眼点聚焦在学校与课堂层面上，变革的核心要素有四——项目研发、效果评估、证据整合和学校改进，它们分别构成了循证教育改革的首要前提、证据来源、直接依据和实践落地。具体而言，第一，项目研发是一个研究性过程，它通常是为了解决教育实践中的实际问题，基于既有的科学研究知识基础，设计出合理的逻辑模型，并在此基础之上进一步开发出结构化的项目。研发出面向教育教学各个领域、各个年级段、各类学生群体的众多教育项目，是美国循证教育改革的首要前提。第二，效果评估主要是利用实验、准实验等严格的实证研究方法来准确判断教育项目在现实世界情境中的实际效果。效果评估的结果是美国循证教育改革的证据来源。第三，证据整合是指运用“最佳证据整合”的研究方法与技术对高质量项目效果评估研究的证据进行客观、可信、用户友好式整合，研究程序和步骤主要是识别、筛选、审阅、元分析。证据整合的结果是美国循证教育改革的直接依据。第四，学校改进是指在证据整合之后，转化与传播教育项目的最终效果证据，帮助州、学区或学校等学校改进消费者决策和实施真正有效的改进项目以实现学校改进的目的。这是美国循证教育改革最后的实践落地环节。一言以蔽之，实验与实践的融合是美国循证教育改革的核心变革路径与本质特征。

除了详尽揭示美国循证教育改革的实质以外，本研究的学术贡献还在于：厘清循证教育改革与循证教育研究之间的需求与供给关系，以及循证教育研究与实证教育研究不在同一教育研究分类坐标系上的本质区别；或许为我国教育改革科学性和有效性的重心转向这一时代问题的解决找到了国外有效经验参考；或许为教育研究与教育实践鸿沟困境的化解、以及21世纪教育科学革命的推进找到了新的、不同的思考线索与方向路径。

Evidence-based reform in education refers to the educational reform policies and reform practices, in which educational policy makers and educational practitioners select and implement "evidence-proven" educational programs, products, services or practice, based on the evidence results of evidence-based research by educational researchers, especially the best-evidence synthesis results of high-quality impact evaluation research employing rigorous experiment research methods.

It started in the United States at the beginning of the 21st century, which was driven by the external incentives of evidence-based reform in the fields of medicine, agriculture, engineering and technology, and on the other hand, driven by the demand for evidence from educational accountability practices and the supply of evidence from educational effectiveness research. After more than 20 years’ precipitation and accumulation, the evidence-based reform in education in the United States began to reap unprecedented attention and development and become another new vane of educational reform, due to the clear definition, tiers classification, use provisions and financial support of the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act.

Different from the previous systemic reform in the United States, such as market-based reform and standard-based reform, the newly-emerging evidence-based reform in education focuses the change on the school and classroom levels, and consists of four core components of change--program design and development, impact evaluation, evidence synthesis and school improvement, which are the primary prerequisite, the source of evidence, the direct evidence and final educational practice for this reform movement, respectively. To be more specific, firstly, program design and development is a research process. In order to solve the practical problems in educational practice, developers usually design a reasonable logical model at first, and then develop a structured program, based on the existing scientific research knowledge. Many educational programs developed for all fields of education, grade stages and various groups of students are the primary prerequisite for the evidence-based reform in education in the U.S.. Secondly, impact evaluation mainly employs experiment, quasi-experiment and other rigorous empirical research methods to judge the outcome of educational programs in the real-world settings, whose results are the source of evidence for the evidence-based reform in education in the U.S.. Thirdly, evidence synthesis refers to the use of "Best Evidence Synthesis" research methods and techniques to objectively, credibly, and user-friendly integrate the evidence from high-quality program impact evaluation. And the research procedures and steps are mainly identification, screening, review, and meta-analysis. The result of evidence synthesis is the direct evidence for the evidence-based reform in education in the U.S..Fourthly, school improvement refers to transforming and disseminating final impact evidence of educational programs after the evidence synthesis, and helping school improvement consumers, such as states, school districts or schools, select and implement truly effective improvement programs to achieve the purpose of school improvement. This is the final educational practice in the whole evidence-based educational reform process in the U.S.. In a word, the integration of experiment and practice is both the core path of change and essential characteristic for the evidence-based educational reform in the U.S..

In addition to revealing the essence of the evidence-based educational reform in the U.S. in detail, the academic contribution of this study also lies in: clarifying the demand and supply relationship between evidence-based educational reform and evidence-based educational research, and the essential difference of not in the same educational research classification coordinate system between evidence-based educational research and empirically educational research; maybe finding useful foreign experience references for sloving the era problem of our country's educational reform shifting its focus to scientificity and effectiveness; maybe finding new and different thinking clues for the resolution of the gap dilemma between educational research and educational practice and the advancement of the scientific revolution in education in the 21st century.