成人功能性读写干预有效性的荟萃分析

IF 9.6 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Research Review Pub Date : 2023-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100569
Juliane Kindl, Wolfgang Lenhard
{"title":"成人功能性读写干预有效性的荟萃分析","authors":"Juliane Kindl,&nbsp;Wolfgang Lenhard","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>A significant portion of the working-age population has only rudimentary literacy skills. Many people who are functionally illiterate have problems to perform basic daily tasks and to participate in society. Given the paucity of research, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of adult literacy interventions using a three-level meta-regression analysis, controlling for potential moderators of effectiveness. The literature search included empirical studies with a control group design in English, French, German, Portuguese, and Spanish. 39 controlled primary studies met the inclusion criteria, including 236 effect sizes. There was a small but significant main effect on participants' literacy level (</span><em>g</em><span> = 0.22). Interventions with a lower frequency of weekly sessions were more effective than more intensive approaches. No significant effect on effectiveness was found for total duration, context, language of instruction, teacher-student ratio, computer use, or initial literacy level of participants. As a large proportion of the primary studies were found to be at high risk of bias, more reliable primary studies are needed to support the findings and provide a more nuanced view of the effectiveness of interventions. Nevertheless, this review provides promising evidence that adults with low literacy skills can benefit from literacy interventions.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"41 ","pages":"Article 100569"},"PeriodicalIF":9.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A meta-analysis on the effectiveness of functional literacy interventions for adults\",\"authors\":\"Juliane Kindl,&nbsp;Wolfgang Lenhard\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100569\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span>A significant portion of the working-age population has only rudimentary literacy skills. Many people who are functionally illiterate have problems to perform basic daily tasks and to participate in society. Given the paucity of research, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of adult literacy interventions using a three-level meta-regression analysis, controlling for potential moderators of effectiveness. The literature search included empirical studies with a control group design in English, French, German, Portuguese, and Spanish. 39 controlled primary studies met the inclusion criteria, including 236 effect sizes. There was a small but significant main effect on participants' literacy level (</span><em>g</em><span> = 0.22). Interventions with a lower frequency of weekly sessions were more effective than more intensive approaches. No significant effect on effectiveness was found for total duration, context, language of instruction, teacher-student ratio, computer use, or initial literacy level of participants. As a large proportion of the primary studies were found to be at high risk of bias, more reliable primary studies are needed to support the findings and provide a more nuanced view of the effectiveness of interventions. Nevertheless, this review provides promising evidence that adults with low literacy skills can benefit from literacy interventions.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48125,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Research Review\",\"volume\":\"41 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100569\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Research Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X23000623\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Research Review","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X23000623","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

相当一部分适龄劳动人口只有基本的识字能力。许多功能性文盲在执行基本的日常任务和参与社会方面存在问题。鉴于研究的缺乏,本研究的目的是利用三水平元回归分析来评估成人识字干预的效果,控制潜在的效果调节因子。文献检索包括以英语、法语、德语、葡萄牙语和西班牙语为对照设计的实证研究。39项对照初级研究符合纳入标准,包括236个效应量。受试者的识字水平有小而显著的主效应(g = 0.22)。每周治疗频率较低的干预措施比更密集的方法更有效。总体持续时间、教学环境、教学语言、师生比例、计算机使用情况或参与者的初始识字水平对有效性没有显著影响。由于大部分初步研究被发现存在高偏倚风险,因此需要更可靠的初步研究来支持这些发现,并对干预措施的有效性提供更细致入微的看法。然而,这篇综述提供了有希望的证据,表明读写能力低的成年人可以从读写干预中受益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A meta-analysis on the effectiveness of functional literacy interventions for adults

A significant portion of the working-age population has only rudimentary literacy skills. Many people who are functionally illiterate have problems to perform basic daily tasks and to participate in society. Given the paucity of research, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of adult literacy interventions using a three-level meta-regression analysis, controlling for potential moderators of effectiveness. The literature search included empirical studies with a control group design in English, French, German, Portuguese, and Spanish. 39 controlled primary studies met the inclusion criteria, including 236 effect sizes. There was a small but significant main effect on participants' literacy level (g = 0.22). Interventions with a lower frequency of weekly sessions were more effective than more intensive approaches. No significant effect on effectiveness was found for total duration, context, language of instruction, teacher-student ratio, computer use, or initial literacy level of participants. As a large proportion of the primary studies were found to be at high risk of bias, more reliable primary studies are needed to support the findings and provide a more nuanced view of the effectiveness of interventions. Nevertheless, this review provides promising evidence that adults with low literacy skills can benefit from literacy interventions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Research Review
Educational Research Review EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
19.40
自引率
0.90%
发文量
53
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Educational Research Review is an international journal catering to researchers and diverse agencies keen on reviewing studies and theoretical papers in education at any level. The journal welcomes high-quality articles that address educational research problems through a review approach, encompassing thematic or methodological reviews and meta-analyses. With an inclusive scope, the journal does not limit itself to any specific age range and invites articles across various settings where learning and education take place, such as schools, corporate training, and both formal and informal educational environments.
期刊最新文献
A meta-analysis of the correlation between teacher self-efficacy and teacher resilience: Concerted growth and contextual variance Unveiling the competencies at the core of lifelong learning: A systematic literature review A systematic review on how educators teach AI in K-12 education Translating neuroscience to early childhood education: A scoping review of neuroscience-based professional learning for early childhood educators What is next in mobile-assisted reading? Insights from a decade of eye tracking research into cognitive processes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1