A revolution has surely occurred in physical therapist education in past decade. Complete with an easily recognizable acronym, evidence-based medicine (EBM), quickly adapted for nonphysician practitioners to evidence-based practice (EBP). This revolution has touched students, academic faculty, and clinicians throughout our profession. As with many revolutions, seeds of discontent were scattered many years earlier, decades before revolution had an acronym, by leaders who encouraged us to do better. Michels, in his 1969 APTA presidential address, challenged educational community, which desired independent accreditation of its educational programs, to accept responsibility of intellectual honesty.1 In commenting on ability of physical therapists to read and understand clinical research at that time, he argued that the general level of our knowledge of method and logic of experimental design and statistical analysis of data indicates that we should have started including those disciplines in basic curriculum ten years ago.1(p1197) As Rothstein pointed out, Michels believed in evidence-based practice long before term was widely used.2(p7) There has been a spirited debate about meaning of EBP in our profession,2-4 and within each faculty, about changes required to educate evidence-based practitioners. Physical therapist educators understand magnitude of challenge before them: Nothing less than changing way physical therapy is practiced through education of students, and education of clinical faculty and practitioners, in knowledge and values of evidence-based practice. This goal requires creative and effective instructional and assessment strategies to be implemented in professional curricula, didactic and clinical, and in continuing education. This issue of Journal of Physical Therapy Education contains reports of both curricular content changes and instructional processes that have been used by faculty to change their curricula to ones that reflect principles of evidence-based practice. First, Slavin provides an overview of necessary competencies for evidence-based practice, including a tool for learner self-assessment of performance of processes of EBP. Slavin continues by offering suggestions for educational program structure, clinical instructor training, and learner attitudes that can facilitate teaching of EBP. Fell and Burnham draw from their expertise in medicine, physical therapy, and medical library science to focus on curricular content and teaching strategies to develop crucial skills of accessing evidence for practice. Lobach, in first paper to be published on discipline of clinical informatics in a physical therapy journal, provides both an introduction to this component of biomedical informatics, and a proposed set of competencies for physical therapist students in areas such as computer literacy, information retrieval and management, and clinical decision support systems. Evidence for practice comes in different formats, requiring different assessment skills. Henderson and Rheault address absence of a sound methodology for assessing and including evidence from qualitative research in EBP theory. They offer reader an appraisal instrument to evaluate methodological rigor of qualitative research and a set of decision rules that can be used to include qualitative research data in collection of evidence for practice decisions. …