Pub Date : 2022-02-04DOI: 10.3102/00346543211070049
Jonté A. Myers, Bradley Witzel, S. R. Powell, Hongli Li, T. Pigott, Y. Xin, Elizabeth M. Hughes
Since 1975, researchers have conducted interventions to improve the word-problem performance of elementary school students facing mathematics difficulties. The current study reports a meta-analysis of 52 studies that examined the effect of these interventions. We estimated multivariate, random-effects models (REM) with robust variance estimation (RVE) with and without outliers. Results showed a large, positive, and significant mean weighted effect size (g = 1.01 for the model with outliers; g = 0.81 for the model without outliers). Findings of meta-regression analyses showed several moderators, such as sample composition, group size, intervention dosage, group assignment approach, interventionist, year of publication, and dependent measure type, significantly explained heterogeneity in effects across studies. A sensitivity analysis showed these results were generally robust to outliers. We offer possible explanations for the findings and discuss study limitations. Finally, we propose recommendations for future research and classroom practice.
{"title":"A Meta-Analysis of Mathematics Word-Problem Solving Interventions for Elementary Students Who Evidence Mathematics Difficulties","authors":"Jonté A. Myers, Bradley Witzel, S. R. Powell, Hongli Li, T. Pigott, Y. Xin, Elizabeth M. Hughes","doi":"10.3102/00346543211070049","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211070049","url":null,"abstract":"Since 1975, researchers have conducted interventions to improve the word-problem performance of elementary school students facing mathematics difficulties. The current study reports a meta-analysis of 52 studies that examined the effect of these interventions. We estimated multivariate, random-effects models (REM) with robust variance estimation (RVE) with and without outliers. Results showed a large, positive, and significant mean weighted effect size (g = 1.01 for the model with outliers; g = 0.81 for the model without outliers). Findings of meta-regression analyses showed several moderators, such as sample composition, group size, intervention dosage, group assignment approach, interventionist, year of publication, and dependent measure type, significantly explained heterogeneity in effects across studies. A sensitivity analysis showed these results were generally robust to outliers. We offer possible explanations for the findings and discuss study limitations. Finally, we propose recommendations for future research and classroom practice.","PeriodicalId":21145,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"92 1","pages":"695 - 742"},"PeriodicalIF":11.2,"publicationDate":"2022-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43364940","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-04DOI: 10.3102/00346543211073186
S. Bratlie, Ellen Irén Brinchmann, M. Melby-Lervåg, J. V. K. Torkildsen
Knowledge about the smallest meaningful units of language, morphemes, is crucial for vocabulary and reading comprehension. This meta-analysis of 43 studies examined differences in morphological knowledge in the societal language between language-minority and language-majority children. There was a moderate to large mean group difference in morphological knowledge in favor of the language-majority children. Studies that examined inflectional knowledge (walk–walked, rose–roses) reported larger differences than studies that examined knowledge of derivations (coexist, serious) and compounds (bluebird, highlight). Studies that used oral tests and tests of expressive language reported larger differences than studies that used written tests and tests of receptive language. These findings show that morphology is an area of weakness in language-minority children. Paired with the evidence that morphological instruction improves general language ability and reading comprehension, the results suggest that morphology could be an essential component in language interventions for language-minority children.
{"title":"Morphology—A Gateway to Advanced Language: Meta-Analysis of Morphological Knowledge in Language-Minority Children","authors":"S. Bratlie, Ellen Irén Brinchmann, M. Melby-Lervåg, J. V. K. Torkildsen","doi":"10.3102/00346543211073186","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211073186","url":null,"abstract":"Knowledge about the smallest meaningful units of language, morphemes, is crucial for vocabulary and reading comprehension. This meta-analysis of 43 studies examined differences in morphological knowledge in the societal language between language-minority and language-majority children. There was a moderate to large mean group difference in morphological knowledge in favor of the language-majority children. Studies that examined inflectional knowledge (walk–walked, rose–roses) reported larger differences than studies that examined knowledge of derivations (coexist, serious) and compounds (bluebird, highlight). Studies that used oral tests and tests of expressive language reported larger differences than studies that used written tests and tests of receptive language. These findings show that morphology is an area of weakness in language-minority children. Paired with the evidence that morphological instruction improves general language ability and reading comprehension, the results suggest that morphology could be an essential component in language interventions for language-minority children.","PeriodicalId":21145,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"92 1","pages":"614 - 650"},"PeriodicalIF":11.2,"publicationDate":"2022-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45222245","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-01Epub Date: 2021-09-11DOI: 10.3102/00346543211042426
Julien S Bureau, Joshua L Howard, Jane X Y Chong, Frédéric Guay
Students' self-determined motivation (acting out of interest, curiosity, and abiding values) is associated with higher academic well-being, persistence, and achievement. Self-determination theory posits that self-determined motivation is dependent on the satisfaction of three psychological needs (relatedness, competence, and autonomy), which are in turn facilitated through need-supportive behaviors from notable others. In this meta-analysis, conducted over 144 studies and more than 79,000 students, we sought to overview pathways to student motivation in order to verify (1) how do psychological needs rank in the strength of their prediction of self-determined motivation and (2) which autonomy-support providers (parents or teachers) are the most relevant for psychological need satisfaction in students and self-determined motivation. Results show that teacher autonomy support predicts students' need satisfaction and self-determined motivation more strongly than parental autonomy support. In addition, competence is the most positive predictor of self-determined motivation, followed by autonomy and then by relatedness.
{"title":"Pathways to Student Motivation: A Meta-Analysis of Antecedents of Autonomous and Controlled Motivations.","authors":"Julien S Bureau, Joshua L Howard, Jane X Y Chong, Frédéric Guay","doi":"10.3102/00346543211042426","DOIUrl":"10.3102/00346543211042426","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Students' self-determined motivation (acting out of interest, curiosity, and abiding values) is associated with higher academic well-being, persistence, and achievement. Self-determination theory posits that self-determined motivation is dependent on the satisfaction of three psychological needs (relatedness, competence, and autonomy), which are in turn facilitated through need-supportive behaviors from notable others. In this meta-analysis, conducted over 144 studies and more than 79,000 students, we sought to overview pathways to student motivation in order to verify (1) how do psychological needs rank in the strength of their prediction of self-determined motivation and (2) which autonomy-support providers (parents or teachers) are the most relevant for psychological need satisfaction in students and self-determined motivation. Results show that teacher autonomy support predicts students' need satisfaction and self-determined motivation more strongly than parental autonomy support. In addition, competence is the most positive predictor of self-determined motivation, followed by autonomy and then by relatedness.</p>","PeriodicalId":21145,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"92 1","pages":"46-72"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8935530/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40324915","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-27DOI: 10.3102/00346543211070048
Amy Vetter, B. Faircloth, K. Hewitt, Laura M. Gonzalez, Ye He, Marcia L. Rock
Research–practice partnerships (RPPs) have grown rapidly in the last decade in the United States to challenge traditional notions of education research by emphasizing the importance of researchers and practitioners working together in a spirit of mutuality to develop research questions, collect data, implement interventions, and analyze and use findings. RPP scholarship in the United States has historically advocated for the need to pay more focused attention to issues of equity and justice. To address that need, this literature review examined how RPPs in the United States have addressed equity and justice in their work. Based on five dimensions of equity and justice that could be observed within the 149 examples of RPP work we reviewed, we identified 17 exemplar projects that explicitly and effectively forefront equity and justice in RPPs, what we call equity-focused. Implications suggest that researchers and practitioners who have initiated equity-orientated RPPs may reflect on the partnerships’ existing strengths, specifically related to the five interconnected features that characterize equity-focused RPPs, to sustain and advance equity and justice through RPPs.
{"title":"Equity and Social Justice in Research Practice Partnerships in the United States","authors":"Amy Vetter, B. Faircloth, K. Hewitt, Laura M. Gonzalez, Ye He, Marcia L. Rock","doi":"10.3102/00346543211070048","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211070048","url":null,"abstract":"Research–practice partnerships (RPPs) have grown rapidly in the last decade in the United States to challenge traditional notions of education research by emphasizing the importance of researchers and practitioners working together in a spirit of mutuality to develop research questions, collect data, implement interventions, and analyze and use findings. RPP scholarship in the United States has historically advocated for the need to pay more focused attention to issues of equity and justice. To address that need, this literature review examined how RPPs in the United States have addressed equity and justice in their work. Based on five dimensions of equity and justice that could be observed within the 149 examples of RPP work we reviewed, we identified 17 exemplar projects that explicitly and effectively forefront equity and justice in RPPs, what we call equity-focused. Implications suggest that researchers and practitioners who have initiated equity-orientated RPPs may reflect on the partnerships’ existing strengths, specifically related to the five interconnected features that characterize equity-focused RPPs, to sustain and advance equity and justice through RPPs.","PeriodicalId":21145,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"92 1","pages":"829 - 866"},"PeriodicalIF":11.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42145857","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-26DOI: 10.3102/00346543211070047
Katherine M. Zinsser, H. C. Silver, Elyse R. Shenberger, Velisha M. Jackson
Young children (birth to age 5) are more likely to be expelled or suspended than school-aged children, but we know comparatively little about the precursors to and prevention of exclusion in early childhood settings. Furthermore, what research has been conducted has not been systematically synthesized to inform policy and funding decisions. The present review seeks to determine how early childhood exclusion is defined and assessed in the academic literature. Studies measuring early childhood suspension or expulsion were systematically gathered and coded for study characteristics, definitions, and measures of exclusionary discipline and disparity, and factors associated with exclusion rates. Results (n = 20) show an accelerating pace of inquiry that attends to multiple levels of the ecological system (children, teachers, and programs) across diverse settings (home-, center-, and school-based care). Additional research that draws on data spanning multiple types of early care and education settings is needed to inform legislation and intervention funding decisions.
{"title":"A Systematic Review of Early Childhood Exclusionary Discipline","authors":"Katherine M. Zinsser, H. C. Silver, Elyse R. Shenberger, Velisha M. Jackson","doi":"10.3102/00346543211070047","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211070047","url":null,"abstract":"Young children (birth to age 5) are more likely to be expelled or suspended than school-aged children, but we know comparatively little about the precursors to and prevention of exclusion in early childhood settings. Furthermore, what research has been conducted has not been systematically synthesized to inform policy and funding decisions. The present review seeks to determine how early childhood exclusion is defined and assessed in the academic literature. Studies measuring early childhood suspension or expulsion were systematically gathered and coded for study characteristics, definitions, and measures of exclusionary discipline and disparity, and factors associated with exclusion rates. Results (n = 20) show an accelerating pace of inquiry that attends to multiple levels of the ecological system (children, teachers, and programs) across diverse settings (home-, center-, and school-based care). Additional research that draws on data spanning multiple types of early care and education settings is needed to inform legislation and intervention funding decisions.","PeriodicalId":21145,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"92 1","pages":"743 - 785"},"PeriodicalIF":11.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42433583","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-17DOI: 10.3102/00346543211070050
Grace A. Chen, I. Horn
Education researchers have long wrestled with the interplay of oppressive structures and individual agency in reproducing, sustaining, and contesting marginalization. In this article, we suggest that Weis and Fine’s construct of critical bifocality may assist researchers in understanding and addressing marginalization in mathematics education. We conduct a conceptual review of existing mathematics education literature that accounts for both structure and agency in theorizing marginalization. By reading this literature alongside Weis and Fine’s 2012 article, we develop four criteria for operationalizing critical bifocality in mathematics education research. The findings from this review highlight the interconnectedness of structures and individual lives, of the material and ideological elements of marginalization, of intersectionality and within-group heterogeneity, and of histories and institutions. Additionally, they offer theoretical and methodological recommendations for researchers studying marginalization in mathematics education.
{"title":"A Call for Critical Bifocality: Research on Marginalization in Mathematics Education","authors":"Grace A. Chen, I. Horn","doi":"10.3102/00346543211070050","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211070050","url":null,"abstract":"Education researchers have long wrestled with the interplay of oppressive structures and individual agency in reproducing, sustaining, and contesting marginalization. In this article, we suggest that Weis and Fine’s construct of critical bifocality may assist researchers in understanding and addressing marginalization in mathematics education. We conduct a conceptual review of existing mathematics education literature that accounts for both structure and agency in theorizing marginalization. By reading this literature alongside Weis and Fine’s 2012 article, we develop four criteria for operationalizing critical bifocality in mathematics education research. The findings from this review highlight the interconnectedness of structures and individual lives, of the material and ideological elements of marginalization, of intersectionality and within-group heterogeneity, and of histories and institutions. Additionally, they offer theoretical and methodological recommendations for researchers studying marginalization in mathematics education.","PeriodicalId":21145,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"85 1","pages":"786 - 828"},"PeriodicalIF":11.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69377757","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.3102/00346543221137330
Ehaab D. Abdou, W. Laurier, Sohyun An, Molly W. Andolina, B. Barrow, C. Busey, Kyle Chong, Lauren Colley, A. Crowe, Tadashi Dozono, Kristen Duncan, Kimberly Edmondson, Jason L. Endacott, Tommy Ender, A. Falkner, A. Halvorsen, A. Hostetler, P. Keegan, Jongsung Kim, M. Kissling, R. Knowles, Jada Kohlmeier, Daniel G. Krutka, Ji Soo Lee, John Lee, M. McCoy, A. McCully, Ellen Middaugh
Rachel Abbott (4) Laura Adamovicz (3) Amer Alic (3) Laurie Baeten (4) Ana Balseiro (4) Puja Basu (3) Kimberlee Beckmen (5) Lineke Begeman (3) Larua Benitez (3) Rob Bildfell (5) Patrick Blackall (4) Trent Bollinger (4) Jesse Boulerice (3) Justin Brown (7) Davis Carter (3) Christopher Cleveland (5) Walt Cook (4) Galaxia Cortes-Hinojosa (4) Katrina Couniha (3) Charles Cummings (3) Kiril Dimitrov (3) Andrew Di Salvo (3) Mark Drew (5) Jitender Dubey (6) Amanda Duffus (4) Barbara Ellis (4) Marı́a Forzán (3) Karen Fox (6) Mariana Furtado (3) Livio Galosi (3) Joseph Gaydos (5) Paul Gibbons (3) Amy Gilbert (6) Nicole Gottdenker (4) Rebecca Hardman (4) Scott Henke (3) Karsten Hueffer (4) Marja Isomursu (3) Anne Justice-Allen (6) Michael Keel (7) Ivan Kuzmin (3) Terry Kreeger (3) Julia Lankton (6) Jeffrey Lorch (4) Brittany McHale (3) Michael Miller (3) Rafael Molina-Lopez (4) Jennifer Mullinax (3) Nicole Nemeth (4) Kevin Niedringhaus (6) Jennifer Niemuth (4) Pauline Nol (4) Daniel O’Brien (4) Robert Ossiboff (3) Andrew Peters (4) Timothy Portas (4) Margo Pybus (3) Tatjana Pustahija (3) Shane Raidal (6) Tonie Rocke (5) Eduard Roos (4) Annette Roug (7) Mauricio Seguel (4) Richard Sim (3) Julia Speten (3) Brian Stacy (6) Chloe Steventon (3) Maggie Watson (3) Margaret Wild (4) Lisa Wolfe (6) Grzegorz Woźniakowski (3) Scott Wright (3) Carlos Sacristan Yague (4) * We apologize for misspellings of names and to anyone whose name may have been omitted.
{"title":"Reviewer Acknowledgments","authors":"Ehaab D. Abdou, W. Laurier, Sohyun An, Molly W. Andolina, B. Barrow, C. Busey, Kyle Chong, Lauren Colley, A. Crowe, Tadashi Dozono, Kristen Duncan, Kimberly Edmondson, Jason L. Endacott, Tommy Ender, A. Falkner, A. Halvorsen, A. Hostetler, P. Keegan, Jongsung Kim, M. Kissling, R. Knowles, Jada Kohlmeier, Daniel G. Krutka, Ji Soo Lee, John Lee, M. McCoy, A. McCully, Ellen Middaugh","doi":"10.3102/00346543221137330","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221137330","url":null,"abstract":"Rachel Abbott (4) Laura Adamovicz (3) Amer Alic (3) Laurie Baeten (4) Ana Balseiro (4) Puja Basu (3) Kimberlee Beckmen (5) Lineke Begeman (3) Larua Benitez (3) Rob Bildfell (5) Patrick Blackall (4) Trent Bollinger (4) Jesse Boulerice (3) Justin Brown (7) Davis Carter (3) Christopher Cleveland (5) Walt Cook (4) Galaxia Cortes-Hinojosa (4) Katrina Couniha (3) Charles Cummings (3) Kiril Dimitrov (3) Andrew Di Salvo (3) Mark Drew (5) Jitender Dubey (6) Amanda Duffus (4) Barbara Ellis (4) Marı́a Forzán (3) Karen Fox (6) Mariana Furtado (3) Livio Galosi (3) Joseph Gaydos (5) Paul Gibbons (3) Amy Gilbert (6) Nicole Gottdenker (4) Rebecca Hardman (4) Scott Henke (3) Karsten Hueffer (4) Marja Isomursu (3) Anne Justice-Allen (6) Michael Keel (7) Ivan Kuzmin (3) Terry Kreeger (3) Julia Lankton (6) Jeffrey Lorch (4) Brittany McHale (3) Michael Miller (3) Rafael Molina-Lopez (4) Jennifer Mullinax (3) Nicole Nemeth (4) Kevin Niedringhaus (6) Jennifer Niemuth (4) Pauline Nol (4) Daniel O’Brien (4) Robert Ossiboff (3) Andrew Peters (4) Timothy Portas (4) Margo Pybus (3) Tatjana Pustahija (3) Shane Raidal (6) Tonie Rocke (5) Eduard Roos (4) Annette Roug (7) Mauricio Seguel (4) Richard Sim (3) Julia Speten (3) Brian Stacy (6) Chloe Steventon (3) Maggie Watson (3) Margaret Wild (4) Lisa Wolfe (6) Grzegorz Woźniakowski (3) Scott Wright (3) Carlos Sacristan Yague (4) * We apologize for misspellings of names and to anyone whose name may have been omitted.","PeriodicalId":21145,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"92 1","pages":"1041 - 1050"},"PeriodicalIF":11.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47009536","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-29DOI: 10.3102/00346543211060871
Virginia Clinton-Lisell
In this study, a meta-analysis of reading and listening comprehension comparisons across age groups was conducted. Based on robust variance estimation (46 studies; N = 4,687), the overall difference between reading and listening comprehension was not reliably different (g = 0.07, p = .23). Reading was beneficial over listening when the reading condition was self-paced (g = 0.13, p = .049) rather than experimenter-paced (g = −0.32, p = .16). Reading also had a benefit when inferential and general comprehension rather than literal comprehension was assessed (g = 0.36, p = .02; g = .15, p = .05; g = −0.01, p = .93, respectively). There was some indication that reading and listening were more similar in languages with transparent orthographies than opaque orthographies (g = 0.001, p = .99; g = 0.10, p = .19, respectively). The findings may be used to inform theories of comprehension about modality influences in that both lower-level skill and affordances vary comparisons of reading and listening comprehension. Moreover, the findings may guide choices of modality; however, both audio and written options are needed for accessible instruction.
{"title":"Listening Ears or Reading Eyes: A Meta-Analysis of Reading and Listening Comprehension Comparisons","authors":"Virginia Clinton-Lisell","doi":"10.3102/00346543211060871","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211060871","url":null,"abstract":"In this study, a meta-analysis of reading and listening comprehension comparisons across age groups was conducted. Based on robust variance estimation (46 studies; N = 4,687), the overall difference between reading and listening comprehension was not reliably different (g = 0.07, p = .23). Reading was beneficial over listening when the reading condition was self-paced (g = 0.13, p = .049) rather than experimenter-paced (g = −0.32, p = .16). Reading also had a benefit when inferential and general comprehension rather than literal comprehension was assessed (g = 0.36, p = .02; g = .15, p = .05; g = −0.01, p = .93, respectively). There was some indication that reading and listening were more similar in languages with transparent orthographies than opaque orthographies (g = 0.001, p = .99; g = 0.10, p = .19, respectively). The findings may be used to inform theories of comprehension about modality influences in that both lower-level skill and affordances vary comparisons of reading and listening comprehension. Moreover, the findings may guide choices of modality; however, both audio and written options are needed for accessible instruction.","PeriodicalId":21145,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"92 1","pages":"543 - 582"},"PeriodicalIF":11.2,"publicationDate":"2021-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46990000","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-29DOI: 10.3102/00346543211060876
Dina C. Maramba, Edward R. Curammeng, Xavier J. Hernandez
There is a paucity of research on the educational experiences of Filipinx Americans, the second-largest Asian American group in the United States. Studies that do exist often lump Filipinxs with other Asian Americans or present them devoid of critical contexts that shape their experience, namely, colonialism and racialization. Using a desire-based framework and empire as an analytic, we conducted a semi-systematic review of 74 journal articles to better understand how Filipinx Americans are presented in the research. Our analysis suggests that researchers often position Filipinx Americans relative to whiteness or utilize critical educational framings to interrogate the complex ways they are racialized. We offer implications for research focused on Filipinx Americans and minoritized groups. We conclude by discussing the utility of interdisciplinary research as well as the necessity for desirability and empire as a lens for future education research.
{"title":"Critiquing Empire Through Desirability: A Review of 40 Years of Filipinx Americans in Education Research, 1980 to 2020","authors":"Dina C. Maramba, Edward R. Curammeng, Xavier J. Hernandez","doi":"10.3102/00346543211060876","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211060876","url":null,"abstract":"There is a paucity of research on the educational experiences of Filipinx Americans, the second-largest Asian American group in the United States. Studies that do exist often lump Filipinxs with other Asian Americans or present them devoid of critical contexts that shape their experience, namely, colonialism and racialization. Using a desire-based framework and empire as an analytic, we conducted a semi-systematic review of 74 journal articles to better understand how Filipinx Americans are presented in the research. Our analysis suggests that researchers often position Filipinx Americans relative to whiteness or utilize critical educational framings to interrogate the complex ways they are racialized. We offer implications for research focused on Filipinx Americans and minoritized groups. We conclude by discussing the utility of interdisciplinary research as well as the necessity for desirability and empire as a lens for future education research.","PeriodicalId":21145,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"92 1","pages":"583 - 613"},"PeriodicalIF":11.2,"publicationDate":"2021-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45245972","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-28DOI: 10.3102/00346543211063930
Dan Silver
The vast majority of U.S. teachers supplement their officially adopted curriculum materials with unofficial materials. Despite this, the body of supplementation-relevant literature tends not to focus on supplementation specifically, so lacks cohesion, and sometimes fails to capture all aspects the phenomenon. I systematically review supplementation-relevant literature from 2015 to 2020 and report seven areas of consensus in the literature around (1) who is involved in teacher-level curriculum supplementation, (2) important dimensions of supplementation, and (3) the educational value of supplementation. To provide future researchers a common starting point for studying teacher curriculum supplementation, I propose the Teacher Curriculum Supplementation Framework, a flexible yet testable analytical tool for systematizing scholarly inquiry around teacher curriculum supplementation and its effects on teachers and students.
{"title":"A Theoretical Framework for Studying Teachers’ Curriculum Supplementation","authors":"Dan Silver","doi":"10.3102/00346543211063930","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211063930","url":null,"abstract":"The vast majority of U.S. teachers supplement their officially adopted curriculum materials with unofficial materials. Despite this, the body of supplementation-relevant literature tends not to focus on supplementation specifically, so lacks cohesion, and sometimes fails to capture all aspects the phenomenon. I systematically review supplementation-relevant literature from 2015 to 2020 and report seven areas of consensus in the literature around (1) who is involved in teacher-level curriculum supplementation, (2) important dimensions of supplementation, and (3) the educational value of supplementation. To provide future researchers a common starting point for studying teacher curriculum supplementation, I propose the Teacher Curriculum Supplementation Framework, a flexible yet testable analytical tool for systematizing scholarly inquiry around teacher curriculum supplementation and its effects on teachers and students.","PeriodicalId":21145,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"92 1","pages":"455 - 489"},"PeriodicalIF":11.2,"publicationDate":"2021-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43924517","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：