In this article, we review research on the outcomes of diverse reading programs on the achievement of struggling readers in elementary schools. Sixty‐five studies of 51 different programs met rigorous standards. Eighty‐three percent were randomized experiments and 17% quasi‐experiments. Outcomes were positive for one‐to‐one tutoring and were positive but not as large for one‐to‐small group tutoring. There were no differences in outcomes between teachers and teaching assistants as tutors. Whole‐class approaches (mostly cooperative learning) and whole‐class/whole‐school approaches incorporating tutoring for struggling readers obtained outcomes for struggling readers as large as those found for all forms of tutoring, on average, and benefited many more students. Technology‐supported adaptive instruction did not have statistically significant positive outcomes for struggling readers, however. In agreement with findings of previous reviews, in this synthesis, we found that substantial impacts can be obtained for struggling readers, with interventions aligned within a Response to Intervention network.
IMPORTANCE Uncorrected refractive error in school-aged children may affect learning. OBJECTIVE To assess the effect of a school-based vision program on academic achievement among students in grades 3 to 7. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted in Baltimore City Public Schools during school years from 2016 to 2019 among 2304 students in grades 3 to 7 who received eye examinations and eyeglasses.
This article reviews research on the achievement outcomes of elementary mathematics programs; 87 rigorous experimental studies evaluated 66 programs in grades K–5. Programs were organized in six categories. Particularly positive outcomes were found for tutoring programs (effect size [ES] = +0.20, k = 22). Positive outcomes were also seen in studies focused on professional development for classroom organization and management (e.g., cooperative learning; ES = +0.19, k = 7). Professional development approaches focused on helping teachers gain in understanding of mathematics content and pedagogy had little impact on student achievement. Professional development intended to help in the adoption of new curricula had a small but significant impact for traditional (nondigital) curricula (ES = +0.12, k = 7), but not for digital curricula. Traditional and digital curricula with limited professional development, as well as benchmark assessment programs, found few positive effects.
Past meta-analyses in mental health interventions failed to use stringent inclusion criteria and diverse moderators, therefore, there is a need to employ more rigorous methods to provide evidence-based and updated results on this topic. This study presents an updated meta-analysis of interventions targeting anxiety or depression using more stringent inclusion criteria (e.g., baseline equivalence, no significant differential attrition) and additional moderators (e.g., sample size and program duration) than previous reviews. This meta-analysis includes 29 studies of 32 programs and 22,420 students (52% female, 79% White). Among these studies, 22 include anxiety outcomes and 24 include depression outcomes. Overall, school-based mental health interventions in grades K-12 are effective at reducing depression and anxiety (ES = 0.24, p = 0.002). Moderator analysis shows that improved outcomes for studies with anxiety outcomes, cognitive behavioral therapy, interventions delivered by clinicians, and secondary school populations. Selection modeling reveals significant publication and outcome selection bias. This meta-analysis suggests school-based mental health programs should strive to adopt cognitive behavioral therapy and deliver through clinicians at the secondary school level where possible.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.