A 2006 report described that many researchers perceived the WWC to be passive cataloger of available research.[1] In contrast to that view, the paper described a series of opinionated subjective decisions which the WWC made about providing some educational research and declining to index another sort.[1]
The WWC recommendations for interpreting the results of single-case educational studies is the subject of discussion.[3][4][5]
The WWC has systems for evaluating the effectiveness of educational research in general[6] and curricula.[7]
Various researchers use WWC itself as the platform through which they access other research.[8]
Some of the concerns expressed about WWC are that it appears to have difficulty keeping up with the research so it may not be current; and when a program is not listed on their database, it may be that it did not meet their criteria or they have not yet reviewed it, but it's not clear which.[9] In additionStraight Talk on Evidence, authored by theArnold Ventures LLC’ Evidence-Based Policy team , on January 16, 2018 expressed concerns about the validity of the ratings provided by WWC. It says WWC in some cases reported a "preliminary outcome when high-quality RCTs found no significant effects on more important and final educational outcomes".[10]
^Maggin, Daniel M.; Briesch, Amy M.; Chafouleas, Sandra M. (January 2013). "An Application of the What Works Clearinghouse Standards for Evaluating Single-Subject Research: Synthesis of the Self-Management Literature Base".Remedial and Special Education.34 (1):44–58.doi:10.1177/0741932511435176.S2CID145449670.
^Wolery, Mark (January 2013). "A Commentary: Single-Case Design Technical Document of the What Works Clearinghouse".Remedial and Special Education.34 (1):39–43.doi:10.1177/0741932512468038.S2CID145174228.
^Hitchcock, John H.; Horner, Robert H.; Kratochwill, Thomas R.; Levin, Joel R.; Odom, Samuel L.; Rindskopf, David M.; Shadish, William R. (May 2014). "The What Works Clearinghouse Single-Case Design Pilot Standards: Who Will Guard the Guards?".Remedial and Special Education.35 (3):145–152.doi:10.1177/0741932513518979.S2CID146223804.
^Song, Mengli; Herman, Rebecca (September 2010). "Critical Issues and Common Pitfalls in Designing and Conducting Impact Studies in Education: Lessons Learned From the What Works Clearinghouse (Phase I)".Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis.32 (3):351–371.doi:10.3102/0162373710373389.S2CID145680409.
^Confrey, Jere (January 2006). "Comparing and Contrasting the National Research Council Report On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness With the What Works Clearinghouse Approach".Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis.28 (3):195–213.doi:10.3102/01623737028003195.S2CID144849490.
^Kim, Min Kyung; McKenna, John William; Park, Yujeong (July 2017). "The Use of Computer-Assisted Instruction to Improve the Reading Comprehension of Students With Learning Disabilities: An Evaluation of the Evidence Base According to the What Works Clearinghouse Standards".Remedial and Special Education.38 (4):233–245.doi:10.1177/0741932517693396.S2CID151562892.
