This study was designed to investigate the applicability of the IES/NSF pipeline-of-evidence protocol in ascertaining why two notable educational initiatives spearheaded and financially supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation achieved or not the goal of improved academic outcomes for K-12 public school students. Our interest was not whether there is a sufficient body of high quality research evidence to support the two initiatives but whether the research considered by the Gates Foundation established the likelihood that the initiatives would be successful and worth the decision to dedicate substantial funding, time, and effort required for each versus the many competing programs seeking sponsorship. We found that in the case of Intensive Partnerships for Effective Teaching, efficacy and effectiveness research were absent and the Gates foundation discontinued grant support because the initiative had not achieved the goal of improved high school graduation and college attendance among low-income minority students. In the case of Early College High School, we found empirical evidence was manifest at all but the effectiveness stage of the pipeline and the initiative continued to receive funding. Our findings support the importance of widening the net of methodologies that constitute a framework for elements needed to make predictions of effectiveness for any given intervention before investing in scale-up initiatives and the need for private foundations to be transparent in their decision-making process to enable others to scrutinize the research that informs the design of initiatives.

The research on the pedagogical knowledge of teachers in technological education arises from the need to address the problem of pedagogical practices, which are traditional. The classes are at the graduate level, focusing on lecturing the student while the student remains with a passive attitude. It is believed that making explicit that teachers' pedagogical knowledge will allow reflection and awareness, thereby transforming pedagogical practices. Therefore, the objective is to understand the teachers’ constructions on pedagogical knowledge in technology programs in Plant Operations and Industrial Instrumentation of the Faculty of Engineering in order to reconstruct it theoretically, as well as identify its characteristics and trace action routes for teacher training. In this way, it allows education to be accessible to low-income and resource-poor populations, whose purpose is to strengthen the productivity and competitiveness of the economy through the training of human talent according to the needs of the working sector in a unique context. This research uses grounded theory as a methodological tool for data processing. In this sense, data collection procedures such as in-depth interviews were conducted with 16 teachers and seven of them were related to the industry. Whereas, 9 were linked to the teaching(educational) sector including elementary, high school and college level. The results showed differentiated, and socially constructed pedagogical knowledge that responds to teachers’ nature in a particular context. These results contribute to consolidate a broad vision about the pedagogical knowledge’s characteristics that the teacher builds.

Dimensionalizing has been discussed in the Grounded Theory Methodology (GTM) literature primarily as a component that informs the later stages of GTM coding (Strauss) or as a property and variety of human thinking (Schatzman). In this context, dimensional analysis is understood as an approach to concept formation, focusing on identifying the properties and empirical instances of a concept. Through this process, the scope conditions of a theory are clarified and explicitly defined. However, this perspective often overlooks how dimensionalizing contributes not only to concept formation but also to theory building. Specifically, the transition from dimensional analysis to theory development is seldom articulated. This article addresses this gap by using interview data from the substantive field of disability studies — specifically, parents raising a person with a disability (PwD). We demonstrate how dimensional analysis can be effectively applied at the conclusion of open coding, rather than solely at the final stages of GTM analysis, and how it can serve as a methodological tool for connecting categories, rather than for identifying the core category.

Binary classifications of teaching as transmission or constructivism obscure how participation, authority, knowledge practices, and conceptual work can vary within one lesson. This article introduces the social, procedural, epistemic, and conceptual (SPEC) framework for episode-level lesson analysis. SPEC was developed through a structured purposive theory synthesis rather than an exhaustive systematic review. A documented corpus of foundational traditions, observation systems, and targeted verification sources was compared using explicit inclusion, boundary, and disposition rules. Candidate constructs were assigned by observable target; three indicators per dimension were retained as a parsimonious authorial proposal; and qualitative descriptors were generated from theoretically warranted adjacent distinctions checked against cross-dimensional counterexamples. The dimensions are analytically distinguishable but potentially related. Their descriptor codes form non-additive, non-normative profiles rather than composite scores or judgments of teaching quality. An instructional episode is the primary unit; a hypothetical transcript illustrates indicator coding, opportunity/evidence flags, and rejection of nearby alternatives. SPEC is an initial conceptual proposal requiring operationalization, reliability examination, and validity testing. Ordering, thresholds, and cross-domain use require study before evaluative application.