Pub Date : 2024-02-01DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100592
Vasiliki Kokkali, Faye Antoniou
The current meta-analysis aims at identifying the most effective interventions for students with Learning Disabilities (LD) in improving writing expression over the last 40 years. Specifically, the main purpose of this review was to evaluate the efficacy of interventions focused on writing and integrated reading and writing for students in Grades PreK-12. The review examined a total of 39 experimental and quasi-experimental studies to determine which interventions demonstrated greater effectiveness in enhancing student outcomes. An average effect size (ES) was calculated for all 44 interventions. Additionally, average effect sizes were calculated for 12 intervention categories: sentence combining instruction, pre-writing activities and strategy instruction, process writing without modeling, adding self-regulation to strategy instruction, feedback, no feedback, goal setting, no goal setting, peer tutoring, no peer tutoring, self-efficacy and no self-efficacy. The findings demonstrated that the interventions consistently improved students' writing quality, with the addition of self-regulation to strategy instruction proving highly effective. Moreover, it was found that multicomponent programs incorporating different practices demonstrated their effectiveness in enhancing written expression. Positive outcomes were obtained by implementing interventions into practice in small groups through systematically organized sessions and encouraging cooperation between researchers and educators.
{"title":"A meta-analysis of almost 40 Years of research: Unreleasing the power of written expression in students with learning disabilities","authors":"Vasiliki Kokkali, Faye Antoniou","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100592","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100592","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The current meta-analysis aims at identifying the most effective interventions for students with Learning Disabilities (LD) in improving writing expression over the last 40 years. Specifically, the main purpose of this review was to evaluate the efficacy of interventions focused on writing and integrated reading and writing for students in Grades PreK-12. The review examined a total of 39 experimental and quasi-experimental studies to determine which interventions demonstrated greater effectiveness in enhancing student outcomes. An average effect size (ES) was calculated for all 44 interventions. Additionally, average effect sizes were calculated for 12 intervention categories: sentence combining instruction, pre-writing activities and strategy instruction, process writing without modeling, adding self-regulation to strategy instruction, feedback, no feedback, goal setting, no goal setting, peer tutoring, no peer tutoring, self-efficacy and no self-efficacy. The findings demonstrated that the interventions consistently improved students' writing quality, with the addition of self-regulation to strategy instruction proving highly effective. Moreover, it was found that multicomponent programs incorporating different practices demonstrated their effectiveness in enhancing written expression. Positive outcomes were obtained by implementing interventions into practice in small groups through systematically organized sessions and encouraging cooperation between researchers and educators.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.7,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139511046","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 : 2024-02-01DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100593
Yimeng Zhang , Yinying Hu , Fanshu Ma , Haichan Cui , Xiaojun Cheng , Yafeng Pan
Education neuroscience merges insights from education, psychology, and neuroscience to understand how the brain learns, processes information, and retains knowledge. While this field entails aspects like individual cognitive development and skill acquisition, it lacks clarity on the mechanisms for true social learning and teaching. To fill this gap, our article examines how the rapidly growing area of interpersonal educational neuroscience, which shifts the focus from single learners to learning interactions between individuals, is (and could be) contributing to a refined account for learning in social settings. We conducted a literature review of interpersonal neuroscience in relation to learning and instruction, through databases including Pubmed, Scopus, and Google Scholar. We found that interpersonal brain synchronization (IBS), within a widespread fronto-temporo-parietal network, between teachers and students and among students, can predict learning performance and is biased by characteristics of teaching. The functional implications of IBS, its challenges, and future opportunities for its applications to pedagogical practices are discussed.
教育神经科学融合了教育学、心理学和神经科学的见解,以了解大脑如何学习、处理信息和保留知识。虽然这一领域涉及个人认知发展和技能习得等方面,但对真正的社会学习和教学机制却缺乏清晰的认识。为了填补这一空白,我们的文章探讨了快速发展的人际教育神经科学领域是如何(以及可能如何)促进完善社会环境下的学习解释的,该领域将重点从单个学习者转移到个人之间的学习互动。我们通过 Pubmed、Scopus 和 Google Scholar 等数据库,对与学习和教学相关的人际神经科学进行了文献综述。我们发现,在广泛的前额颞顶网络中,教师与学生之间以及学生与学生之间的人际大脑同步(IBS)可以预测学习成绩,并受到教学特点的影响。本文讨论了人际脑同步的功能意义、挑战以及未来应用于教学实践的机会。
{"title":"Interpersonal educational neuroscience: A scoping review of the literature","authors":"Yimeng Zhang , Yinying Hu , Fanshu Ma , Haichan Cui , Xiaojun Cheng , Yafeng Pan","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100593","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100593","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Education neuroscience merges insights from education, psychology, and neuroscience to understand how the brain learns, processes information, and retains knowledge. While this field entails aspects like individual cognitive development and skill acquisition, it lacks clarity on the mechanisms for true social learning and teaching. To fill this gap, our article examines how the rapidly growing area of </span><em>interpersonal educational neuroscience</em><span>, which shifts the focus from single learners to learning interactions between individuals, is (and could be) contributing to a refined account for learning in social settings. We conducted a literature review of interpersonal neuroscience in relation to learning and instruction, through databases including Pubmed, Scopus, and Google Scholar. We found that interpersonal brain synchronization (IBS), within a widespread fronto-temporo-parietal network, between teachers and students and among students, can predict learning performance and is biased by characteristics of teaching. The functional implications of IBS, its challenges, and future opportunities for its applications to pedagogical practices are discussed.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.7,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139573854","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 : 2024-02-01DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100584
John Sweller , Lin Zhang , Greg Ashman , William Cobern , Paul A. Kirschner
De Jong et al. (2023) objected to the evidence presented by Zhang et al. (2022) to support their concerns about the unreserved acceptance and promotion of inquiry-based learning and problem solving in current policy documents related to the teaching of science. In their response, De Jong et al. (2023) reiterated their advocacy for inquiry approaches, arguing that an emphasis on a mixture of inquiry learning and explicit instruction is needed. The present article rebuts De Jong et al. (2023), in which we: 1) challenge their view of and approach to scientific methods in establishing the efficacy of different instructional approaches; 2) indicate that an underpinning theory to explain the cognitive machinery that drives inquiry-based instructional approaches is missing from their argument; and 3) address the empirical issues arising in their argument. We also highlight potential agreement with De Jong et al. (2023) on the essential role of explicit instruction and thus raise a call to the field to revise current science educational policies and standards to reflect such a role. Our agreements and disagreements advance the debate to a new focus concerning when and how inquiry-based learning and explicit instruction should be used and combined. While De Jong et al. (2023), in their theory-free paper, provided no answer to how explicit instruction and inquiry learning should be combined, we offer our suggestions based on evolutionary psychology and the expertise reversal effect from cognitive load theory.
De Jong等人(2023)反对Zhang等人(2022)提出的证据,这些证据支持他们对当前与科学教学相关的政策文件中毫无保留地接受和促进研究性学习和问题解决的担忧。在他们的回应中,De Jong等人(2023)重申了他们对研究性方法的支持,认为需要强调研究性学习和明确教学的结合。本文反驳了De Jong等人(2023)的观点,其中我们:1)挑战他们对科学方法的看法和方法,以确定不同教学方法的有效性;2)表明在他们的论证中缺少解释驱动探究性教学方法的认知机制的基础理论;3)解决他们争论中出现的经验问题。我们还强调了与De Jong等人(2023)关于明确教学的重要作用的潜在共识,从而呼吁该领域修改当前的科学教育政策和标准,以反映这种作用。我们的共识和分歧将辩论推进到一个新的焦点,即探究性学习和显性教学应该何时以及如何使用和结合。虽然De Jong等人(2023)在他们没有理论的论文中没有回答明确的教学和探究性学习应该如何结合,但我们基于进化心理学和认知负荷理论的专业知识逆转效应提出了我们的建议。
{"title":"Response to De Jong et al.’s (2023) paper “Let's talk evidence – The case for combining inquiry-based and direct instruction”","authors":"John Sweller , Lin Zhang , Greg Ashman , William Cobern , Paul A. Kirschner","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100584","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100584","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>De Jong et al. (2023) objected to the evidence presented by Zhang et al. (2022) to support their concerns about the unreserved acceptance and promotion of inquiry-based learning and problem solving in current policy documents related to the teaching of science. In their response, De Jong et al. (2023) reiterated their advocacy for inquiry approaches, arguing that an emphasis on a mixture of inquiry learning and explicit instruction is needed. The present article rebuts De Jong et al. (2023), in which we: 1) challenge their view of and approach to scientific methods in establishing the efficacy of different instructional approaches; 2) indicate that an underpinning theory to explain the cognitive machinery that drives inquiry-based instructional approaches is missing from their argument; and 3) address the empirical issues arising in their argument. We also highlight potential agreement with De Jong et al. (2023) on the essential role of explicit instruction and thus raise a call to the field to revise current science educational policies and standards to reflect such a role. Our agreements and disagreements advance the debate to a new focus concerning when and how inquiry-based learning and explicit instruction should be used and combined. While De Jong et al. (2023), in their theory-free paper, provided no answer to how explicit instruction and inquiry learning should be combined, we offer our suggestions based on evolutionary psychology and the expertise reversal effect from cognitive load theory.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.7,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X23000775/pdfft?md5=c58809fd5ab1ab4dac376031279ab6f8&pid=1-s2.0-S1747938X23000775-main.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138679119","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 : 2023-12-30DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100591
Huanyou Chai , Tianhui Hu , Li Wu
Given the widespread concern on collaborative problem solving (CPS) skills, there has been an increasing interest in the last few years to explore how to assess them with digital technologies. This study systematically reviewed how CPS skills have been assessed with digital technologies in the literature. A total of 40 articles were reviewed to analyze specific computer-based assessment instruments of CPS skills from four perspectives: research context, theoretical model for assessment, assessment type, and reliability and validity evidence. The results indicate that most tests target a sample of less than 500 junior students. Nine theoretical models are employed for assessing CPS skills, most of which treat these skills as an explicit combination of social and cognitive skills and are applied to a limited range of participants' age levels, collaboration features, and team compositions. A total of 22 tests have been employed and fallen into four types, i.e., the ones with specific predefined messages in human-agent mode, and those with online chat box, videoconferencing, and face-to-face collaboration in human-human mode. Each type of these tests demonstrates great diversities in participants’ age levels, types of CPS task(s), team compositions, types of assessment data, and methods of data recording and scoring. A certain number of tests lack reliability and validity evidence. Our findings are expected to benefit relevant researchers and test developers in terms of providing suggestions for future research which include testing the applicability of theoretical models for assessing CPS skills across a wide range of assessment contexts. In addition, future researchers should improve the development, data processing, and report of those four types of computer-based assessment instruments of CPS skills through different approaches, respectively.
{"title":"Computer-based assessment of collaborative problem solving skills: A systematic review of empirical research","authors":"Huanyou Chai , Tianhui Hu , Li Wu","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100591","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100591","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Given the widespread concern on collaborative problem solving (CPS) skills, there has been an increasing interest in the last few years to explore how to assess them with digital technologies. This study systematically reviewed how CPS skills have been assessed with digital technologies in the literature. A total of 40 articles were reviewed to analyze specific computer-based assessment instruments of CPS skills from four perspectives: research context, theoretical model for assessment, assessment type, and reliability and validity evidence. The results indicate that most tests target a sample of less than 500 junior students. Nine theoretical models are employed for assessing CPS skills, most of which treat these skills as an explicit combination of social and cognitive skills and are applied to a limited range of participants' age levels, collaboration features, and team compositions. A total of 22 tests have been employed and fallen into four types, i.e., the ones with specific predefined messages in human-agent mode, and those with online chat box, videoconferencing, and face-to-face collaboration in human-human mode. Each type of these tests demonstrates great diversities in participants’ age levels, types of CPS task(s), team compositions, types of assessment data, and methods of data recording and scoring. A certain number of tests lack reliability and validity evidence. Our findings are expected to benefit relevant researchers and test developers in terms of providing suggestions for future research which include testing the applicability of theoretical models for assessing CPS skills across a wide range of assessment contexts. In addition, future researchers should improve the development, data processing, and report of those four types of computer-based assessment instruments of CPS skills through different approaches, respectively.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.7,"publicationDate":"2023-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139061362","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 : 2023-12-27DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100589
Therese Grohnert , Lena Gromotka , Inken Gast , Laurie Delnoij , Simon Beausaert
Each year, more students worldwide enter graduate school to complete their master's degree. A cornerstone of their education is the master's thesis. Respectively, master's thesis supervisors hold a key role in higher education teaching, yet no evidence-based overview currently exists of elements that make thesis supervision effective. Based on a systematic literature review, this study presents a summative framework of what is currently known about elements and their relationships that constitute effective master's thesis supervision, focusing on the interactions between individual students and supervisors. We develop an input-process-outcome framework based on 36 existing studies, identifying student and supervisor outcomes, characteristics of an effective student-supervisor relationship along with actions that students and supervisors can take to create and maintain it, along with student and supervisor characteristics that serve as critical inputs for an effective supervision process. We find that current research emphasizes the role of supervisor attitudes and actions in relation to the student-supervisor relationship, while future research is needed on student actions, supervisor learning over time, and contextual characteristics. Following our framework, we generate avenues for future research and summarize effective supervision practices in the dynamic and complex context of master's thesis supervision.
{"title":"Effective master's thesis supervision – A summative framework for research and practice","authors":"Therese Grohnert , Lena Gromotka , Inken Gast , Laurie Delnoij , Simon Beausaert","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100589","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100589","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Each year, more students worldwide enter graduate school to complete their master's degree. A cornerstone of their education is the master's thesis. Respectively, master's thesis supervisors hold a key role in higher education teaching, yet no evidence-based overview currently exists of elements that make thesis supervision effective. Based on a systematic literature review, this study presents a summative framework of what is currently known about elements and their relationships that constitute effective master's thesis supervision, focusing on the interactions between individual students and supervisors. We develop an input-process-outcome framework based on 36 existing studies, identifying student and supervisor outcomes, characteristics of an effective student-supervisor relationship along with actions that students and supervisors can take to create and maintain it, along with student and supervisor characteristics that serve as critical inputs for an effective supervision process. We find that current research emphasizes the role of supervisor attitudes and actions in relation to the student-supervisor relationship, while future research is needed on student actions, supervisor learning over time, and contextual characteristics. Following our framework, we generate avenues for future research and summarize effective supervision practices in the dynamic and complex context of master's thesis supervision.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.7,"publicationDate":"2023-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X23000829/pdfft?md5=5f7915e11414fafc950649e7cb83f463&pid=1-s2.0-S1747938X23000829-main.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139041673","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 : 2023-12-27DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100590
Peter A. Edelsbrunner , Christian M. Thurn
When used appropriately, non-significant p-values have the potential to further our understanding of what does not work in education, and why. When misinterpreted, they can trigger misguided conclusions, for example about the absence of an effect of an educational intervention, or about a difference in the efficacy of different interventions. We examined the frequency of non-significant p-values in recent volumes of peer-reviewed educational research journals. We also examined how frequently researchers misinterpret non-significance to imply the absence of an effect, or a difference to another significant effect. Within a random sample of 50 peer-reviewed articles, we found that of 528 statistically tested hypotheses, 253 (48%) were non-significant. Of these, 142 (56%) were erroneously interpreted to indicate the absence of an effect, and 59 (23%) to indicate a difference to another significant effect. For 97 (38%) of non-significant results, such misinterpretations were linked to potentially misguided implications for educational theory, practice, or policy. We outline valid ways for dealing with non-significant p-values to improve their utility for education, discussing potential reasons for these misinterpretations and implications for research.
如果使用得当,非显著性 p 值有可能加深我们对教育中哪些措施不起作用及其原因的理解。如果误读,则可能引发错误的结论,例如认为教育干预措施没有效果,或认为不同干预措施的效果存在差异。我们研究了最近几期同行评审的教育研究期刊中出现非显著 p 值的频率。我们还考察了研究人员将非显著性误解为没有效果或与另一种显著效果存在差异的频率。在随机抽取的 50 篇同行评审文章中,我们发现在 528 个经过统计检验的假设中,有 253 个(48%)不显著。其中,142 项(56%)被错误地解释为不存在效应,59 项(23%)被错误地解释为与另一项显著效应存在差异。在 97 项(38%)不显著的结果中,这种错误解释可能会对教育理论、实践或政策产生误导。我们概述了处理非显著 p 值的有效方法,以提高其对教育的实用性,并讨论了这些误读的潜在原因和对研究的影响。
{"title":"Improving the utility of non-significant results for educational research: A review and recommendations","authors":"Peter A. Edelsbrunner , Christian M. Thurn","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100590","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100590","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>When used appropriately, non-significant <em>p</em>-values have the potential to further our understanding of what does not work in education, and why. When misinterpreted, they can trigger misguided conclusions, for example about the absence of an effect of an educational intervention, or about a difference in the efficacy of different interventions. We examined the frequency of non-significant <em>p</em>-values in recent volumes of peer-reviewed educational research journals. We also examined how frequently researchers misinterpret non-significance to imply the absence of an effect, or a difference to another significant effect. Within a random sample of 50 peer-reviewed articles, we found that of 528 statistically tested hypotheses, 253 (48%) were non-significant. Of these, 142 (56%) were erroneously interpreted to indicate the absence of an effect, and 59 (23%) to indicate a difference to another significant effect. For 97 (38%) of non-significant results, such misinterpretations were linked to potentially misguided implications for educational theory, practice, or policy. We outline valid ways for dealing with non-significant <em>p</em>-values to improve their utility for education, discussing potential reasons for these misinterpretations and implications for research.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.7,"publicationDate":"2023-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X23000830/pdfft?md5=063747efd81d8e3476507e46e203cf79&pid=1-s2.0-S1747938X23000830-main.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139041670","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}
There is a growing body of literature acknowledging peer feedback as a crucial learning practice in online settings. However, the literature is sparse and lacks an overall picture of the variety of key components for the successful implementation of peer feedback practices in online settings. To address this gap, we built our systematic literature review on the MISCA model, which is a well-known theoretical framework for evaluating feedback practices. This model outlines five components to evaluate feedback practices, including content, function, student characteristics, presentation, and source. Based on this model, we aim to present a comprehensive overview of the current state of research on online peer feedback practices in higher education, with a focus on the role of content, function, student characteristics, presentation, and source. A thorough search was conducted across three databases (Scopus, ERIC, and Web of Science), resulting in the analysis of 73 articles published between 2000 and 2022. The main results of this review indicate that cognitive feedback comments were the most frequently identified content in online peer feedback studies. Regarding function, most studies used peer feedback in function to improve students' task performance. Less than a quarter of the reviewed studies evaluated the role of individual student characteristics, while students’ ability level and gender were the most explored factors. Rubrics and training were the most frequently implemented presentation modes of the online peer feedback studies. Only six studies combined feedback from peers with feedback from other sources. Overall, our findings make a valuable contribution to the literature by offering a comprehensive overview of the recent research on key components that impact online peer feedback practices in higher education. They also illuminate several potential interrelations that influence the implementation and effectiveness of online peer feedback practices. These findings can inspire instructors, practitioners, and scholars to gain a deeper understanding of the nature of peer feedback and how to make better use of it, thus fostering the effectiveness of their educational practices.
越来越多的文献承认,同伴反馈是在线环境下的一种重要学习实践。然而,这些文献数量稀少,缺乏对在线环境中成功实施同伴反馈实践的各种关键要素的整体描述。为了弥补这一不足,我们在 MISCA 模型的基础上进行了系统的文献综述,该模型是评估反馈实践的著名理论框架。该模型概述了评估反馈实践的五个组成部分,包括内容、功能、学生特点、表现形式和来源。基于该模型,我们旨在全面概述高等教育中在线同伴反馈实践的研究现状,重点关注内容、功能、学生特征、表现形式和来源的作用。我们对三个数据库(Scopus、ERIC 和 Web of Science)进行了全面检索,分析了 2000 年至 2022 年间发表的 73 篇文章。综述的主要结果表明,认知反馈评论是在线同伴反馈研究中最常见的内容。在功能方面,大多数研究利用同伴反馈来提高学生的任务绩效。不到四分之一的综述研究评估了学生个体特征的作用,而学生的能力水平和性别是探讨最多的因素。评分标准和培训是在线同伴反馈研究中最常采用的呈现模式。只有六项研究将同伴反馈与其他来源的反馈相结合。总之,我们的研究结果为相关文献做出了宝贵的贡献,全面概述了近期关于影响高等教育中在线同伴反馈实践的关键因素的研究。这些发现还揭示了影响在线同伴反馈实践的实施和有效性的几种潜在的相互关系。这些发现可以启发教师、从业人员和学者更深入地了解同伴反馈的本质以及如何更好地利用同伴反馈,从而提高教育实践的有效性。
{"title":"A systematic review of the key components of online peer feedback practices in higher education","authors":"Xingshi Gao , Omid Noroozi , Judith Gulikers , Harm J.A. Biemans , Seyyed Kazem Banihashem","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100588","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100588","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>There is a growing body of literature acknowledging peer feedback as a crucial learning practice in online settings. However, the literature is sparse and lacks an overall picture of the variety of key components for the successful implementation of peer feedback practices in online settings. To address this gap, we built our systematic literature review on the MISCA model, which is a well-known theoretical framework for evaluating feedback practices. This model outlines five components to evaluate feedback practices, including content, function, student characteristics, presentation, and source. Based on this model, we aim to present a comprehensive overview of the current state of research on online peer feedback practices in higher education, with a focus on the role of content, function, student characteristics, presentation, and source. A thorough search was conducted across three databases (Scopus, ERIC, and Web of Science), resulting in the analysis of 73 articles published between 2000 and 2022. The main results of this review indicate that cognitive feedback comments were the most frequently identified content in online peer feedback studies. Regarding function, most studies used peer feedback in function to improve students' task performance. Less than a quarter of the reviewed studies evaluated the role of individual student characteristics, while students’ ability level and gender were the most explored factors. Rubrics and training were the most frequently implemented presentation modes of the online peer feedback studies. Only six studies combined feedback from peers with feedback from other sources. Overall, our findings make a valuable contribution to the literature by offering a comprehensive overview of the recent research on key components that impact online peer feedback practices in higher education. They also illuminate several potential interrelations that influence the implementation and effectiveness of online peer feedback practices. These findings can inspire instructors, practitioners, and scholars to gain a deeper understanding of the nature of peer feedback and how to make better use of it, thus fostering the effectiveness of their educational practices.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.7,"publicationDate":"2023-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X23000817/pdfft?md5=b301ccefb43851815cb835521cf0274b&pid=1-s2.0-S1747938X23000817-main.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139034821","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 : 2023-12-23DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100587
Ghaida S. Alrawashdeh , Shea Fyffe , Renato F.L. Azevedo , Nathan M. Castillo
Fostering proficient reading literacy among students has long been a central educational pursuit, considering that it is one of the most cognitively demanding skills to acquire. Technology that tailors learning experiences to fit students’ strengths and needs (i.e., personalized and adaptive learning; PAL) can be more effective than the traditional curricular approaches. However, the literature on PAL effectiveness presents an inconclusive assessment of its impact on student reading achievement, and a global synthesis has not been conducted. This meta-analysis sought to assess the degree for differences in effect estimates, and to explore reasons for the differences across a wider range of populations and interventions. Twenty-seven studies were reviewed and an effect size of g = 0.29 was found. Implications for future policy and practice are presented.
长期以来,培养学生熟练的阅读能力一直是教育的核心追求,因为阅读能力是对认知要求最高的技能之一。根据学生的长处和需要定制学习经验的技术(即个性化和适应性学习;PAL)可能比传统的课程方法更有效。然而,有关 PAL 效果的文献并未就其对学生阅读成绩的影响做出定论,也未进行过全球性的综合分析。本荟萃分析试图评估效果估计值的差异程度,并探讨在更广泛的人群和干预措施中出现差异的原因。共审查了 27 项研究,发现效应大小为 g = 0.29。本文介绍了对未来政策和实践的影响。
{"title":"Exploring the impact of personalized and adaptive learning technologies on reading literacy: A global meta-analysis","authors":"Ghaida S. Alrawashdeh , Shea Fyffe , Renato F.L. Azevedo , Nathan M. Castillo","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100587","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100587","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Fostering proficient reading literacy among students has long been a central educational pursuit, considering that it is one of the most cognitively demanding skills to acquire. Technology that tailors learning experiences<span> to fit students’ strengths and needs (i.e., personalized and adaptive learning; PAL) can be more effective than the traditional curricular approaches. However, the literature on PAL effectiveness presents an inconclusive assessment of its impact on student reading achievement, and a global synthesis has not been conducted. This meta-analysis sought to assess the degree for differences in effect estimates, and to explore reasons for the differences across a wider range of populations and interventions. Twenty-seven studies were reviewed and an effect size of </span></span><em>g</em> = 0.29 was found. Implications for future policy and practice are presented.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.7,"publicationDate":"2023-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138943543","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 : 2023-12-23DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100586
Özün Keskin , Tina Seidel , Kathleen Stürmer , Andreas Gegenfurtner
An increasing number of research groups worldwide use eye tracking to study the professional vision and visual expertise of pre-service and in-service teachers. These studies offer evidence about how teachers process complex visual information in classrooms. Focusing on this growing evidence, the present meta-analytic review (k = 98 studies) aims to systematically aggregate and integrate past eye-tracking research on teacher professional vision and teacher noticing. Four goals are addressed. First, we review the methodological characteristics of past eye-tracking studies in terms of their sample, stimulus, and eye movement characteristics. The results show that most studies use mobile eye-tracking devices in action or remote eye trackers with classroom videos on action; less frequently used are photographs and virtual classroom simulations. The average sample size of the reviewed studies is 13 in-service and 13 pre-service teachers per study, indicating the benefit of meta-analytic synthesis. Second, we meta-analyze expertise-related differences between experienced and inexperienced teachers in two frequently used eye movement measures—teacher gaze proportions and the Gini coefficient as a measure of teachers’ equal gaze distribution in the classroom. Results suggest that experienced teachers had higher gaze proportions on the students in the classroom than inexperienced teachers (g = 0.926) who, in turn, gazed more often on instructional material and other objects in the classroom. Experienced teachers distributed their gaze more evenly than inexperienced teachers between students in the classroom (g = 0.501). Third, we synthesize the results reported in eye-tracking research on the processes of teacher professional vision using the cognitive theory of visual expertise as an organizing framework; the review also discusses boundary conditions of eye-tracking research with regard to student, teacher, and instructional characteristics. Fourth, we review studies exploring the use of gaze replays and eye movement modeling examples as an instructional tool to support reflection in teacher education and teacher professional development.
{"title":"Eye-tracking research on teacher professional vision: A meta-analytic review","authors":"Özün Keskin , Tina Seidel , Kathleen Stürmer , Andreas Gegenfurtner","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100586","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100586","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>An increasing number of research groups worldwide use eye tracking to study the professional vision and visual expertise of pre-service and in-service teachers. These studies offer evidence about how teachers process complex visual information in classrooms. Focusing on this growing evidence, the present meta-analytic review (<em>k</em><span> = 98 studies) aims to systematically aggregate and integrate past eye-tracking research on teacher professional vision and teacher noticing. Four goals are addressed. First, we review the methodological characteristics of past eye-tracking studies in terms of their sample, stimulus, and eye movement characteristics. The results show that most studies use mobile eye-tracking devices in action or remote eye trackers with classroom videos on action; less frequently used are photographs and virtual classroom simulations. The average sample size of the reviewed studies is 13 in-service and 13 pre-service teachers per study, indicating the benefit of meta-analytic synthesis. Second, we meta-analyze expertise-related differences between experienced and inexperienced teachers in two frequently used eye movement measures—teacher gaze proportions and the Gini coefficient as a measure of teachers’ equal gaze distribution in the classroom. Results suggest that experienced teachers had higher gaze proportions on the students in the classroom than inexperienced teachers (</span><em>g</em> = 0.926) who, in turn, gazed more often on instructional material and other objects in the classroom. Experienced teachers distributed their gaze more evenly than inexperienced teachers between students in the classroom (<em>g</em><span> = 0.501). Third, we synthesize the results reported in eye-tracking research on the processes of teacher professional vision using the cognitive theory<span> of visual expertise as an organizing framework; the review also discusses boundary conditions of eye-tracking research with regard to student, teacher, and instructional characteristics. Fourth, we review studies exploring the use of gaze replays and eye movement modeling examples as an instructional tool to support reflection in teacher education and teacher professional development.</span></span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.7,"publicationDate":"2023-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138943528","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 : 2023-12-12DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100582
Juuso Henrik Nieminen , Anabel Moriña , Gilda Biagiotti
Assessment plays a crucial role in student learning in higher education. Until rather recently, the role of assessment in relation to inclusion has been unexplored. In this study, we conduct a research synthesis of 42 studies published between 2010 and 2022, including 868 student participants, to map the assessment experiences of students with disabilities in higher education. Specifically, we conduct a meta-ethnographic review to synthesise qualitative studies and capture the participants' lived experiences of assessment. Our analysis considers how these experiences reflect both inclusion and exclusion. We theorise these elusive terms through the ideas of access and participation. Most of the studies considered the students' imminent physical, perceptual and social access to assessment, such as in the cases of inaccessible examination halls or digital assessment systems. A smaller subset of the studies considered inclusion/exclusion as a matter of students’ social participation as fully accepted members of academia. In these studies, assessment was described as providing the students with opportunities to belong to academia, whereas experiences of exclusion portrayed assessment as a mechanism for social segregation and discrimination. Overall, our review shows that assessment is a primary barrier to the inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education. We propose that the predominant discourse of inclusion in assessment needs to widen from considering immediate access to assessment into considering how assessment regulates the full participation of diverse students in higher education. We discuss the implications of inaccessible assessment for all students and suggest that, ultimately, both access and participation are matters of student identity. Our review has important practical implications for the design of inclusive assessment in the current higher education contexts in which student cohorts are becoming increasingly diverse.
{"title":"Assessment as a matter of inclusion: A meta-ethnographic review of the assessment experiences of students with disabilities in higher education","authors":"Juuso Henrik Nieminen , Anabel Moriña , Gilda Biagiotti","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100582","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100582","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Assessment plays a crucial role in student learning in higher education. Until rather recently, the role of assessment in relation to inclusion has been unexplored. In this study, we conduct a research synthesis of 42 studies published between 2010 and 2022, including 868 student participants, to map the assessment experiences of students with disabilities<span> in higher education. Specifically, we conduct a meta-ethnographic review to synthesise qualitative studies<span><span> and capture the participants' lived experiences of assessment. Our analysis considers how these experiences reflect both inclusion and exclusion. We theorise these elusive terms through the ideas of access and participation. Most of the studies considered the students' imminent physical, perceptual and social access to assessment, such as in the cases of inaccessible examination halls or digital assessment systems. A smaller subset of the studies considered inclusion/exclusion as a matter of students’ social participation as fully accepted members of academia. In these studies, assessment was described as providing the students with opportunities to belong to academia, whereas experiences of exclusion portrayed assessment as a mechanism for </span>social segregation and discrimination. Overall, our review shows that assessment is a primary barrier to the inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education. We propose that the predominant discourse of inclusion in assessment needs to widen from considering immediate access to assessment into considering how assessment regulates the full participation of diverse students in higher education. We discuss the implications of inaccessible assessment for all students and suggest that, ultimately, both access and participation are matters of student identity. Our review has important practical implications for the design of inclusive assessment in the current higher education contexts in which student cohorts are becoming increasingly diverse.</span></span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.7,"publicationDate":"2023-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138571538","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}