The analysis by R. Greenwald, L. Hedges, and R. Laine (1996) suffers because of its statistical methods and because it is based on a sample that biases the study toward their conclusions. Econometric evidence and the aggregate performance of U.S. schools points toward serious problems with inefficient use of resources. (SLD)

Supports the findings of a meta-analysis that demonstrates that student achievement is related to the availability of resources, disagreeing with criticisms of method and sample selection made by E. Hanushek (1996). (SLD)

Asserts that the central problem of the analysis by M. Wang, G. Haertel, and H. Walberg is that they tend to view the teacher, at least implicitly, as the compliant beneficiary of the knowledge of the educational researcher. Any knowledge base that aims to affect classroom practice should take into account and respect the teacher's world.…

Asserts that because M. Wang, G. Haertel, and H. Walberg never clarify the contours of their "knowledge base for school learning," it is difficult to know what their broad-based comparison of research studies has really yielded. Explores dilemmas posed by the methodology of the study. (SLD)

Asserts that the reductionistic methodology used by M. Wang, G. Haertel, and H. Walberg in their study does not do justice to the educational phenomena they wish to illuminate. In addition, these authors have too simple a view of the relationship between educational research and educational practice. (SLD)

Asserts that reviews like that of M. Wang, G. Haertel, and H. Walberg are stimulating and useful in thinking about educational research, but they are nearly useless in thinking about educational policy and practice. It is not clear what is meant by "knowledge base," and the finding about proximal and distal variables is simplistic. (SLD)