Scholarlink

<p>Vital to long-term academic success, student engagement is a key intervention target, especially during the early years of schooling when initial signs of disengagement may appear. The primary goal of this systematic review was to identify interventions promoting elementary student engagement and determine the best intervention approaches. We systematically searched Education Resources Information Center, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (July 2024) to identify intervention studies examining behavioral, cognitive, or affective engagement among elementary students, as compared to standard instruction, through experimental or quasi-experimental designs. Methodological bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (Hong et al., <CitationRef CitationID="CR50">2019</CitationRef>). Data were synthesized through meta-analyses and subgroup analyses using a three-level model with robust variance estimation. Forty-six interventions (38,225 students) met inclusion criteria, reporting data for behavioral (<i>k</i> = 41; <i>n</i> = 36,122), affective (<i>k</i> = 14; <i>n</i> = 5,065), and cognitive engagement (<i>k</i> = 5; <i>n</i> = 1,907). Three main types of intervention were identified and compared for behavioral engagement: teacher support (i.e., professional development; <i>g</i> = .503, 95%CI [.105, .901], <i>k</i> = 9), student-directed (<i>g</i> = .370, 95%CI [.198, .542], <i>k</i> = 27), and multimodal interventions (<i>g</i> = .385, 95%CI [.202, .569],<i> k</i> = 4). Among student-directed interventions, three strategies were compared: social-emotional skills development (<i>g</i> = .171, 95%CI [.027, .314], <i>k</i> = 12), learning strategy development (<i>g</i> = .801, 95%CI [.318, 1.285],<i> k</i> = 6), and classroom physical activity (<i>g</i> = .478, 95%CI [-.100, 1.056],<i> k</i> = 7). Methodological biases were also used as moderators. Evidence is strongest for behavioral engagement, for which teacher-focused and learning-strategy interventions appear particularly promising. Conclusions for affective and cognitive engagement remain more tentative.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Promoting Engagement in Elementary School: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Intervention Effects

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年8月3日

查看全文
  • Julie Goulet,
  • Isabelle Archambault,
  • Christine Maltais,
  • Ophélie Gilbert-Blanchard,
  • Michel Janosz

摘要

Vital to long-term academic success, student engagement is a key intervention target, especially during the early years of schooling when initial signs of disengagement may appear. The primary goal of this systematic review was to identify interventions promoting elementary student engagement and determine the best intervention approaches. We systematically searched Education Resources Information Center, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (July 2024) to identify intervention studies examining behavioral, cognitive, or affective engagement among elementary students, as compared to standard instruction, through experimental or quasi-experimental designs. Methodological bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (Hong et al., 2019). Data were synthesized through meta-analyses and subgroup analyses using a three-level model with robust variance estimation. Forty-six interventions (38,225 students) met inclusion criteria, reporting data for behavioral (k = 41; n = 36,122), affective (k = 14; n = 5,065), and cognitive engagement (k = 5; n = 1,907). Three main types of intervention were identified and compared for behavioral engagement: teacher support (i.e., professional development; g = .503, 95%CI [.105, .901], k = 9), student-directed (g = .370, 95%CI [.198, .542], k = 27), and multimodal interventions (g = .385, 95%CI [.202, .569], k = 4). Among student-directed interventions, three strategies were compared: social-emotional skills development (g = .171, 95%CI [.027, .314], k = 12), learning strategy development (g = .801, 95%CI [.318, 1.285], k = 6), and classroom physical activity (g = .478, 95%CI [-.100, 1.056], k = 7). Methodological biases were also used as moderators. Evidence is strongest for behavioral engagement, for which teacher-focused and learning-strategy interventions appear particularly promising. Conclusions for affective and cognitive engagement remain more tentative.