Educational Research Review最新文献

{"title":"The effects of educational robotics on students’ learning outcomes: A three-level meta-analysis","authors":"Yanqun Lu ,&nbsp;Shengnan Geng","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100790","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100790","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Educational robotics has been extensively employed to support students' learning. Although the effect of educational robotics on students' learning has been widely examined, extant empirical studies have reported contradictory conclusions. A comprehensive meta-analytic study was conducted to examine the effects of educational robotics on students' learning outcomes across various educational levels and school subjects and explore potential application-related, interaction-related, research-related moderators of the effects. A total of 108 effect sizes from 58 studies (<em>N</em> = 5806) that met the eligibility criteria were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the random-effects model indicated a moderate-to-large overall effect (<em>g</em> = .756) of educational robotics interventions on students’ learning outcomes. Specifically, educational robotics had a moderate-to-large impact on cognitive learning outcomes (<em>g</em> = .738) and a large effect on affective learning outcomes (<em>g</em> = .808). The moderator analysis revealed that control group condition was the only statistically significant moderator, indicating that the relative advantage of robotics is larger when compared to traditional instruction than to other technology. The non-significance of most moderators suggests the robust and versatile applicability of educational robotics across diverse educational contexts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"51 ","pages":"Article 100790"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147752666","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}

{"title":"The shades of (un)productive disagreement: A systematic literature review and a hierarchical taxonomy","authors":"Asaf Salman,&nbsp;Yifat Ben-David Kolikant","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100769","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100769","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Enhancing discussions through technology requires a deep understanding of their building blocks and dynamics. Disagreement plays a key role in shaping the productivity of discussions. The ways we choose to express disagreement – Disagreement Strategies (DS) – impact both the cognitive-epistemic and social-emotional dimensions of the discussion, hindering or facilitating participants’ learning from each other. Uttering DS inherently fuses these dimensions, resulting in a trade-off where one dimension may diminish, amplify, or overshadow the other. However, we found no theoretical framework addressing the correspondence between DS and discussion productivity in terms of learning. To bridge this gap, we conducted a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) and Qualitative Meta-Analysis (QMA), pursuing two research questions: (I) Which primary forms of DS were reported or can be elicited from the literature? (II) How can they be ranked according to learning? Our findings reveal prominent characteristics of DS studies across a variety of settings, languages, cultures, and populations. We challenge their limited power of focus, often dichotomous, on assessing discourse productivity. Complimented by cluster analysis and statistical testing, the QMA enabled us to create the ‘Hierarchical Taxonomy of Disagreement Strategies’ (HiTODS), comprising 18 DS categorized into 4 unique clusters. The DS are ranked in light of our definition of responsiveness, reflecting the degree to which a speaker is attuned to (fuses) both dimensions. We discuss the implications of the taxonomy as a refined framework for researchers and practitioners. Specifically, by laying the foundations to harness artificial intelligence for automated, real-time analysis of contentious discussions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"51 ","pages":"Article 100769"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146135452","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}

{"title":"The structure and methodological quality of randomised controlled trials addressing school absenteeism and dropout in children and adolescents: a systematic review","authors":"Pamela Louise Graham ,&nbsp;Andrea Carrick ,&nbsp;David Littlefair ,&nbsp;Diego Melo ,&nbsp;Kirstin Mulholland ,&nbsp;Pamela Graham ,&nbsp;Gemma Bradley ,&nbsp;Caleb Davies ,&nbsp;Renee Speyer ,&nbsp;Reinie Cordier","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100791","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100791","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>School absenteeism and dropout remain persistent global challenges with significant consequences for educational, psychosocial, health and economic outcomes. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, attendance rates in many countries have declined and remain below pre-pandemic levels, intensifying the need for robust, context-sensitive interventions. This systematic review synthesised and critically appraised randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions designed to address absenteeism and dropout among children and adolescents under 18 years of age. In accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines, five electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, Eric, PsycINFO, and PubMed) were searched in February 2024. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Interventions were categorised using Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory to examine the ecological levels at which they operated. Twenty-nine RCTs involving 153,740 participants across nine countries with diverse socioeconomic contexts met inclusion criteria. Sixteen studies reported absenteeism outcomes, four focused on dropout, and nine examined both. Most interventions were multi-component and targeted multiple ecological domains. Substantial heterogeneity was observed in intervention design, outcome definitions, measurement timeframes, and reporting practices, including limited reporting of intervention development processes. Over half of the studies were at high risk of bias, and inconsistent reporting of effect sizes and variances prevented meta-analysis. This review does not determine comparative superiority across intervention types; rather, it examines how the RCT evidence base is structured, operationalised, and reported. The findings underscore the need for clearer operational definitions, standardised outcome reporting, and transparent adherence to CONSORT guidelines to enable cumulative, interpretable, and theoretically coherent progress in the field.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"51 ","pages":"Article 100791"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147858130","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}

{"title":"A decade of reflection and thematic review on artificial intelligence's impact on educational measurement","authors":"Jiawei Xiong ,&nbsp;Feiming Li","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100789","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100789","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Educational measurement stands at a transformative juncture as artificial intelligence (AI) reshapes assessment practices, however, no comprehensive synthesis has examined this evolution systematically. This thematic review integrates five major international conference trends with peer-reviewed literature to map AI's decade-long impact on educational measurement and to derive heuristic insights for learning and instruction. Through systematic content analysis, we identify three distinct evolutionary eras, the Formative Era (2015-2018), the Expansion Era (2019-2022), and the ongoing Generative Era (2023-present). Our analysis traces AI's progression from an operational tool to a co-designer for assessment and learning, organized through an Efficiency–Enhancement–Transformation framework. Within this framework, we highlight four key themes: (a) AI on scoring and item generation, (b) AI on psychometric modeling, (c) AI on assessment innovation and process data, and (d) AI on fairness, ethics, and equity. Across these themes, the literature reveals both opportunities, such as scalability and richer diagnostic inference, and challenges, including interpretability, algorithmic bias, and construct validity. The evidence also points to a new paradigm that integrates measurement theory with AI methods. The review concludes future directions for the responsible adoption of AI in educational measurement and discusses how AI-integrated measurement can inform learning and instruction, with emphasis on transparency, equity, and the reconceptualization of educational constructs in the context of human–AI interaction.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"51 ","pages":"Article 100789"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147752612","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}

{"title":"Effects of virtual reality-based collaborative learning on students’ learning achievement: A meta-analysis","authors":"Cheng-Huan Chen, Po-Jen Kuo, Shu-Hsuan Chang","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100785","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100785","url":null,"abstract":"Application of virtual reality (VR) in education has gained increasing attention, especially in collaborative learning contexts. However, existing research on the impact of VR-based collaborative learning on students’ learning achievement has yielded inconsistent findings. The present meta-analysis synthesized 25 empirical studies published between 2013 and 2024, yielding 46 comparisons and a total of 3,720 students, and examined the overall effect of VR-based collaborative learning on achievement. In addition, this study examined eight moderating variables: educational level, field of study, type of collaborative environment, group size, type of VR device, mode of VR device use, time spent in VR, and length of intervention. The results revealed a medium-positive effect size (Hedges’ <ce:italic>g</ce:italic> = 0.50), suggesting that VR-supported collaborative learning can significantly enhance students’ learning achievement. Moderator analyses showed that group size, time spent, and length of intervention in VR significantly influenced learning outcomes. Specifically, groups of four demonstrated the highest observed effect size in this meta-analysis, whereas the effect size for six-person groups was approximately half as large, suggesting that moderate group size may better support interaction and collaboration in VR-based learning. The most effective implementation involves 3 to 4 hours per session with a minimum of four weeks of intervention in VR learning. The most effective implementation involved a total of 3 to 4 hours in VR, indicating that balanced intensity and time investment enhance learning outcomes. These findings provide empirical support for the educational value of VR-based collaborative learning and offer practical guidance for designing effective VR-integrated learning environments.","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"130 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":11.7,"publicationDate":"2026-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147681051","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}

{"title":"Unraveling gender disparities in teachers’ technological pedagogical and content knowledge: A large-scale meta-analytic review","authors":"Ronny Scherer ,&nbsp;Diego G. Campos ,&nbsp;Tim Fütterer ,&nbsp;Fazilat Siddiq","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100765","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100765","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This large-scale meta-analytic review investigates gender disparities in pre- and in-service K-12 teachers' Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) self-efficacy and performance. Synthesizing 915 effect sizes from 102 primary studies and 420 teacher samples (<em>N</em> = 681,745 teachers) in 70 countries via multilevel meta-analyses, we found small but significant gender differences favoring male teachers in TPACK self-efficacy (<span><math><mrow><mover><mi>d</mi><mo>‾</mo></mover></mrow></math></span> = −0.17), particularly in technological knowledge (<span><math><mrow><mover><mi>d</mi><mo>‾</mo></mover></mrow></math></span> = −0.31) and technological pedagogical knowledge (<span><math><mrow><mover><mi>d</mi><mo>‾</mo></mover></mrow></math></span> = −0.14). However, no significant gender disparities were observed in TPACK performance (<span><math><mrow><mover><mi>d</mi><mo>‾</mo></mover></mrow></math></span> = −0.08). Our findings revealed considerable heterogeneity in these effects across samples, studies, countries, measures, and over time, which could be partly explained by factors such as educational level, country-level gender inequality, and economic development. These results do not support male teachers’ advantage in all aspects of technology-related teaching competencies. Our meta-analytic review further implies that gender disparities in TPACK vary across contexts or over time.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"50 ","pages":"Article 100765"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145995237","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}

{"title":"Entrepreneurial leadership in educational settings: A systematic literature review from 1996 to 2025","authors":"Chun Sing Maxwell Ho,&nbsp;Junjun Chen","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100762","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100762","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This systematic literature review on Educational Entrepreneurial Leadership (EL) aims to consolidate existing knowledge, address inconsistencies, and clarify EL's conceptual framework, thus providing a more comprehensive understanding of its applications and implications in educational settings while establishing a robust foundation for future theoretical and empirical explorations of EL. Our review covers the origins and conceptual definitions of EL, operational constructs, and conditions necessary for practicing EL. We analyzed the following article types: quantitative (n = 29), qualitative (n = 43), commentary (n = 13), literature review (n = 3) and mixed-method (n = 3) published between 1996 and Oct 2025 using an integrative approach while appraising their quality. The results revealed: (a) schools are increasingly adopting EL as a dynamic and innovative response to the stringent demands of neoliberal educational reforms and market-driven policies; (b) four common approaches were used to conceptually define EL in schools; (c) there were seven operational EL constructs; and (d) dynamic conditions influenced the use of EL for promoting school improvement and facilitating transformative change. The review highlights the conceptual ambiguities and empirical overlaps between EL and other leadership theories underscoring the need for clearer distinctions and more rigorous empirical support. It also highlights the need to refine EL's theoretical framework and assess its distinct impact to fill an important niche in educational leadership studies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"50 ","pages":"Article 100762"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145902478","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}

{"title":"The association of school bullying with symptoms and diagnosis of PTSD: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Serap Keles ,&nbsp;Salman Türken ,&nbsp;Terri Pigott ,&nbsp;Thormod Idsoe","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100768","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100768","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>School bullying has been linked to lower academic achievement and increased mental health problems, making it a critical concern for the field of educational psychology. Understanding the psychological consequences of bullying is essential for educators, school psychologists, and policymakers to develop effective interventions that support students’ well-being and learning outcomes. One ongoing debate is whether bullying qualifies as a traumatic event that may lead to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms and diagnosis. A previous meta-analysis revealed a significant association between bullying and PTSD symptoms, highlighting their prevalence among both children and adults who have been bullied. Our meta-analysis updates and expands these findings by focusing on the association between bullying and PTSD symptoms and diagnosis specifically among school children and youth. A comprehensive systematic literature search across seven databases identified 38 eligible studies in line with the a priori defined inclusion criteria. The frequency of PTSD symptoms above the cut off scores varied between 12.1 % and 65.8 %. The overall pooled effect size was (r = .237, 95 % CI [.173, .299], <em>p</em> &lt; .001), using the correlated-hierarchical effects model with robust variance estimation method. The results were heterogeneous with a 95 % PI [-.155, .563]. Our updated meta-analysis confirms and extends previous findings on the significant association between bullying and PTSD symptoms among school children and youth, and reveals significant moderators (e.g., mean age of the sample, type of group: victims, bullies, bully/victims) in this link. However, we cannot rule out alternative explanations, such as other diagnoses. The implications have been discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"50 ","pages":"Article 100768"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146014275","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}

{"title":"Implementing positive peace education in schools: A systematic literature review of global practices","authors":"Aizat Arystanbek ,&nbsp;Assemgul Bukutova ,&nbsp;Gulbagira Toleu ,&nbsp;Lynne Parmenter ,&nbsp;Hilary Cremin ,&nbsp;Assylzhan Ospanbek","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100759","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100759","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Positive peace education (PPE) builds on Johan Galtung's (1969) theory of positive peace, which emphasizes the importance of addressing not only direct violence, but also structural and cultural violence, to achieve sustainable peace. This means moving beyond peacekeeping and ‘negative peace’ to transform education systems, processes, and practices that facilitate positive peace. Operationalizing PPE in schools, however, remains conceptually and practically underdeveloped, with limited shared understanding of how it can be enacted and divergent ideas of what positive peace looks like in the classroom. This paper addresses this gap through a critical interpretive synthesis of international literature to examine how teachers, students, and school communities enact PPE in curriculum, pedagogy, relationships, and everyday school life. Findings are structured into four key themes: (1) situated practice; (2) pedagogical balancing; (3) teacher and student agency, and (4) lived peace praxis. The paper makes two key contributions, providing the first critical interpretive synthesis of PPE enactment in schools, and positioning ethics of care as a generative lens to interpret, integrate, and theorize PPE as culturally grounded, relational praxis.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"50 ","pages":"Article 100759"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145732703","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}

{"title":"Effectiveness of educational technology applications for struggling readers in secondary grades: A meta-analysis","authors":"Alan C.K. Cheung ,&nbsp;Jieping Shi","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100764","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2026.100764","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article systematically reviews research on the achievement outcomes of educational technology applications designed for improving the reading achievement of students in middle and high schools based on a set of rigorous inclusion criteria. A total of 53 eligible studies involving more than 53,000 students were included in the final analysis. The results indicate that educational technology applications helped to moderately increase reading achievement in secondary-school students who struggle with reading (ES = 0.15). A small majority of the studies (N = 23) were evaluations of two comprehensive models: <em>READ 180</em> (N = 17) and <em>Voyager Passport</em> (N = 6), with an overall effect size of 0.16. Supplemental computer-assisted instruction programs such as the <em>Jamestown Reading Navigator</em> and <em>IRAISE</em> produced a smaller effect size of 0.08. Interactive and personalized software such as Lexia PowerUp Literacy generated the largest effect size of 0.34. Research design also significantly moderated the effectiveness of these educational technology applications, whereas release year, sample size, grade level, and duration did not. Given that the majority of the included studies were conducted in the United States, the findings should be interpreted and generalized with caution. Limitations, policy implications, and future directions are finally discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"50 ","pages":"Article 100764"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145956635","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}