Oh what a shame! Really glad you got to meet Sally, though, and have a quick insight into RB. Would be a pleasure to jump online and give you a fuller demo one day.

I would have the same criticism of any overselling - and also made the point that this is becoming increasingly common. I referenced this article, specifically, as it was something I had just read and illustrated the issue I was highlighting.

I completely agree that the focus is excellent, and findings are insightful and certainly align with wider research, but that isn't actually what the abstract says.

I'm not sure what you mean? I meant that the abstract claims that *the study findings* suggest autistic students (generally) experience those difficulties in m/s schools (generally) is an overreach from a small study in 1 school...

The authors touch on sample size, and generally relate interpretations to the study participants within their conclusion, but I just don't think the abstract framing (and claims) reflect this.

I'm not sure why this wasn't challenged by review/editors as appropriately summarising the (insightful & valuable) results to "findings suggest the students in this study were..." and/or "findings align with previous research which has suggested"... would ensure credible framing.

This kind of misleading and unfounded headline generalisation is creeping into more and more small scale qual work, and it really undermines its value...

We are on exactly the same page - action research is a powerful tool for self-directed professional development and school improvement. It's why a colleague & I have founded Research Box to make this manageable for schools and teachers.

www.myresearchbox.com

Would love to chat on this one day?