Skidmore and Thompson (this issue of "Educational Researcher") imply that a graph was changed with the intent to promote more experimental research in education. In this response, the author presents evidence that challenges this implication and concludes that the changed graph does not accurately capture the "declining" trend of experimental…

This article responds to arguments by Skidmore and Thompson (this issue of "Educational Researcher") that a graph published more than 10 years ago was erroneously reproduced and "gratuitously damaged" perceptions of the quality of education research. After describing the purpose of the original graph, the author counters assertions that the graph…