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

IF 11.9 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL

Educational Psychology Review Pub Date : 2026-08-08 DOI:10.1007/s10648-026-10204-w

Julie Goulet, Isabelle Archambault, Christine Maltais, Ophélie Gilbert-Blanchard, Michel Janosz

{"title":"Promoting Engagement in Elementary School: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Intervention Effects","authors":"Julie Goulet, Isabelle Archambault, Christine Maltais, Ophélie Gilbert-Blanchard, Michel Janosz","doi":"10.1007/s10648-026-10204-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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., <xref ref-type=\"bibr\">2019</xref>). 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 (<italic>k</italic> = 41; <italic>n</italic> = 36,122), affective (<italic>k</italic> = 14; <italic>n</italic> = 5,065), and cognitive engagement (<italic>k</italic> = 5; <italic>n</italic> = 1,907). Three main types of intervention were identified and compared for behavioral engagement: teacher support (i.e., professional development; <italic>g</italic> = .503, 95%CI [.105, .901], <italic>k</italic> = 9), student-directed (<italic>g</italic> = .370, 95%CI [.198, .542], <italic>k</italic> = 27), and multimodal interventions (<italic>g</italic> = .385, 95%CI [.202, .569],<italic> k</italic> = 4). Among student-directed interventions, three strategies were compared: social-emotional skills development (<italic>g</italic> = .171, 95%CI [.027, .314], <italic>k</italic> = 12), learning strategy development (<italic>g</italic> = .801, 95%CI [.318, 1.285],<italic> k</italic> = 6), and classroom physical activity (<italic>g</italic> = .478, 95%CI [-.100, 1.056],<italic> k</italic> = 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.","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":11.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10204-w","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.

查看原文本刊更多论文

促进小学参与：干预效果的系统回顾与元分析

学生的参与对长期学业成功至关重要，是一个关键的干预目标，特别是在上学的最初几年，可能出现最初的脱离迹象。本系统回顾的主要目标是确定促进小学生参与的干预措施，并确定最佳干预方法。我们系统地检索了教育资源信息中心、PsycINFO和Web of Science（2024年7月），通过实验或准实验设计，确定了与标准教学相比，小学生行为、认知或情感参与的干预研究。使用混合方法评估工具评估方法学偏差（Hong et al., 2019）。数据通过meta分析和亚组分析综合，采用三水平模型和稳健方差估计。46项干预（38,225名学生）符合纳入标准，报告了行为（k = 41; n = 36,122）、情感（k = 14; n = 5,065）和认知参与（k = 5; n = 1,907）的数据。在行为参与方面，我们确定并比较了三种主要的干预类型：教师支持（即专业发展）；503, 95%ci[。105年,。[901], k = 9)，学生导向(g =。370,95% ci[。]198年,。[542], k = 27)，多模式干预(g =。385, 95%ci[。]202年,。[569], k = 4)。在以学生为导向的干预措施中，比较了三种策略：社交情感技能发展(g =；171,95% ci[。]027年,。[14], k = 12)，学习策略发展(g =。801, 95%ci[。]318, 1.285], k = 6)，教室体育活动(g =。478, 95%CI [- 0.100, 1.056], k = 7)。方法偏差也被用作调节因素。最有力的证据是行为参与，以教师为中心和学习策略干预似乎特别有希望。关于情感投入和认知投入的结论仍不确定。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Educational Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-

CiteScore

15.70

自引率

3.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Educational Psychology Review aims to disseminate knowledge and promote dialogue within the field of educational psychology. It serves as a platform for the publication of various types of articles, including peer-reviewed integrative reviews, special thematic issues, reflections on previous research or new research directions, interviews, and research-based advice for practitioners. The journal caters to a diverse readership, ranging from generalists in educational psychology to experts in specific areas of the discipline. The content offers a comprehensive coverage of topics and provides in-depth information to meet the needs of both specialized researchers and practitioners.