Review of Educational Research 86卷1期

1. Generational Differences in Academic Achievement Among Immigrant Youths: A Meta-Analytic Review

Author: Mylien T. Duong, Daryaneh Badaly, Freda F. Liu, David Schwartz, and Carolyn A. McCarty

Source: Review of Educational Research (Mar. 2016): 3-41.

Abstract:

Research on generational differences in immigrant youths’ academic achievement has yielded conflicting findings. This meta-analysis reconciles discrepant findings by testing meta-analytic moderators. Fifty-three studies provided 74 comparisons on academic outcomes. First- and second-generation youths did not significantly differ on academic achievement (Hedges’s g = .01), and second-generation students performed slightly better than third-or-later–generation peers (g = .12). Moderation tests indicated that second-generation immigrants outperformed first-generation students on standardized tests (g = .20) and earned better grades than third-or-later–generation peers (g = .20). Immigrant advantage was stronger for Asian, low-socioeconomic, and community samples. Immigrant advantage may be overestimated in studies that use self-reported rather than school-reported achievement. Together, our results suggest a small, heterogeneous second-generation immigrant advantage that varies by immigrant population and study characteristics.

2. Effectiveness of Intelligent Tutoring Systems: A Meta-Analytic Review

Author: James A. Kulik and J. D. Fletcher

Source: Review of Educational Research (Mar. 2016): 42-78.

Abstract:

This review describes a meta-analysis of findings from 50 controlled evaluations of intelligent computer tutoring systems. The median effect of intelligent tutoring in the 50 evaluations was to raise test scores 0.66 standard deviations over conventional levels, or from the 50th to the 75th percentile. However, the amount of improvement found in an evaluation depended to a great extent on whether improvement was measured on locally developed or standardized tests, suggesting that alignment of test and instructional objectives is a critical determinant of evaluation results. The review also describes findings from two groups of evaluations that did not meet all of the selection requirements for the meta-analysis: six evaluations with nonconventional control groups and four with flawed implementations of intelligent tutoring systems. Intelligent tutoring effects in these evaluations were small, suggesting that evaluation results are also affected by the nature of control treatments and the adequacy of program implementations.

3. Digital Games, Design, and Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author: Douglas B. Clark, Emily E. Tanner-Smith, and Stephen S. Killingsworth

Source: Review of Educational Research (Mar. 2016): 79-122.

Abstract:

In this meta-analysis, we systematically reviewed research on digital games and learning for K–16 students. We synthesized comparisons of game versus nongame conditions (i.e., media comparisons) and comparisons of augmented games versus standard game designs (i.e., value-added comparisons). We used random-effects meta-regression models with robust variance estimates to summarize overall effects and explore potential moderator effects. Results from media comparisons indicated that digital games significantly enhanced student learning relative to nongame conditions (Formula = 0.33, 95% confidence interval [0.19, 0.48], k = 57, n = 209). Results from value-added comparisons indicated significant learning benefits associated with augmented game designs (Formula = 0.34, 95% confidence interval [0.17, 0.51], k = 20, n = 40). Moderator analyses demonstrated that effects varied across various game mechanics characteristics, visual and narrative characteristics, and research quality characteristics. Taken together, the results highlight the affordances of games for learning as well as the key role of design beyond medium.

4. What Works, When, for Whom, and With Whom: A Meta-Analytic Review of Predictors of Postsecondary Success for Students With Disabilities

Author: Mason G. Haber, Valerie L. Mazzotti, April L. Mustian, Dawn A. Rowe, Audrey L. Bartholomew, David W. Test, and Catherine H. Fowler

Source: Review of Educational Research (Mar. 2016): 123-162.

Abstract:

Students with disabilities experience poorer post-school outcomes compared with their peers without disabilities. Existing experimental literature on “what works” for improving these outcomes is rare; however, a rapidly growing body of research investigates correlational relationships between experiences in school and post-school outcomes. A meta-analytic review provides means for assessing which experiences show the strongest relationships with long-term outcomes and variability in these relationships by outcome, research design, and population. This article presents a meta-analysis of in-school predictors of postsecondary employment, education, and independent living of youth with disabilities, examining 35 sources and 27 samples (N = 16,957) published from January of 1984 through May of 2010. Predictors showed differing relationships with education versus employment. Some of the least studied predictors, especially those involving multistakeholder collaboration, had larger effects than predictors more typically the focus of correlational research. Implications for future research and practice are considered.

4. The Theory and Practice of Culturally Relevant Education: A Synthesis of Research Across Content Areas

Author: Brittany Aronson and Judson Laughter

Source: Review of Educational Research (Mar. 2016): 163-206.

Abstract:

Many teachers and educational researchers have claimed to adopt tenets of culturally relevant education (CRE). However, recent work describes how standardized curricula and testing have marginalized CRE in educational reform discourses. In this synthesis of research, we sought examples of research connecting CRE to positive student outcomes across content areas. It is our hope that this synthesis will be a reference useful to educational researchers, parents, teachers, and education leaders wanting to reframe public debates in education away from neoliberal individualism, whether in a specific content classroom or in a broader educational community.

4. Estimating the Difference Between Published and Unpublished Effect Sizes: A Meta-Review

Author: Joshua R. Polanin, Emily E. Tanner-Smith, and Emily A. Hennessy

Source: Review of Educational Research (Mar. 2016): 207-236.

Abstract:

Practitioners and policymakers rely on meta-analyses to inform decision making around the allocation of resources to individuals and organizations. It is therefore paramount to consider the validity of these results. A well-documented threat to the validity of research synthesis results is the presence of publication bias, a phenomenon where studies with large and/or statistically significant effects, relative to studies with small or null effects, are more likely to be published. We investigated this phenomenon empirically by reviewing meta-analyses published in top-tier journals between 1986 and 2013 that quantified the difference between effect sizes from published and unpublished research. We reviewed 383 meta-analyses of which 81 had sufficient information to calculate an effect size. Results indicated that published studies yielded larger effect sizes than those from unpublished studies (Formula = 0.18, 95% confidence interval [0.10, 0.25]). Moderator analyses revealed that the difference was larger in meta-analyses that included a wide range of unpublished literature. We conclude that intervention researchers require continued support to publish null findings and that meta-analyses should include unpublished studies to mitigate the potential bias from publication status.

4. Within- and Cross-Language Relations Between Oral Language Proficiency and School Outcomes in Bilingual Children With an Immigrant Background: A Meta-Analytical Study

Author: Mariëlle J. L. Prevoo, Maike Malda, Judi Mesman, and Marinus H. van IJzendoorn

Source: Review of Educational Research (Mar. 2016): 237-276.

Abstract:

Sixteen meta-analyses were conducted to examine relations of typically developing bilingual immigrant-background children’s oral language proficiency in their first and second language with the school outcomes of early literacy (k = 41), reading (k = 61), spelling (k = 9), mathematics (k = 9), and academic achievement (k = 9). Moderate to strong within-language relations were found for all school outcomes (.22 < r < .43), and cross-language relations for early literacy and reading (.12 < r < .22). Within-language relations were stronger than cross-language relations (.14 < d < .35). Only 6 out of 96 moderator effects tested were significant. Based on our findings, we propose a task-dependent bidirectional transfer hypothesis: The strength of cross-language transfer depends on the type of language proficiency task and the type of school outcome. Stimulating oral language proficiency in both languages can be a key factor in improving school outcomes of bilingual immigrant background children.

4. Do First-Year Seminars Improve College Grades and Retention? A Quantitative Review of Their Overall Effectiveness and an Examination of Moderators of Effectiveness

Author: Vahe Permzadian and Marcus Credé

Source: Review of Educational Research (Mar. 2016): 277-316.

Abstract:

We review the effectiveness of first-year seminars based on the widely used criteria of first-year grades and the 1-year retention rate. Meta-analytic results indicate that first-year seminars have a small average effect on both first-year grades (k = 89, N = 52,406, δ = 0.02) and the 1-year retention rate (k = 195, N = 169,666, δ = 0.11). We discuss the implications of these small effects and show that they are meaningful and have important consequences. Results also indicate that the effectiveness of first-year seminars for both criteria is substantially moderated by first-year seminar characteristics (e.g., type of seminar), institutional characteristics (e.g., 2-year or 4-year institution), and study characteristics (e.g., study design). We use these results to make recommendations about the design of first-year seminars that can maximize the positive effect on both the grades and retention of participants.