Educational Research Review最新文献

{"title":"A systematic review and meta-analysis of research on eye-tracking of K–12 students during scientific text–picture reading","authors":"Zhujun Jiang,&nbsp;Feng-Kuang Chiang","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100745","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100745","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Text–picture reading is fundamental to science education, and eye-tracking research provides unique insights into the cognitive and metacognitive mechanisms underlying this process. This systematic review synthesized 66 studies, including 16 studies (82 effect sizes) incorporated into a meta-analysis, to present a comprehensive overview of the field. First, the review examined methodological characteristics concerning disciplines focus, participant demographics, and stimuli types. Within K–12 contexts, biology emerged as the most frequently investigated discipline, whereas chemistry remained underrepresented. Elementary school students were the most commonly studied population, and diagrams were the predominant stimulus type. Areas of interest (AOIs) were typically defined by a text–picture division, with finer-grained categorizations encompassing structural layout, functional elements, semantic content, and text–picture correspondence. Second, the review synthesized findings on learners’ processing patterns. These studies suggested a text-preference effect, with high-level learners generally showing more selective attention, strategic cross-modal integration, and metacognitive control, whereas low-level learners demonstrated localized fixations and insufficient self-regulation, requiring external scaffolds for effective integration. Third, the meta-analysis confirmed that high-level learners focused more on pictures than did low-level learners, as reflected in fixation counts (g = 0.473) and fixation proportions (g = 0.365), and performed more saccades between text and pictures (g = 0.420). In contrast, low-level learners focused more on text, as reflected by their fixation proportions (g = −0.255). Overall, this review synthesizes methodological insights and empirical evidence on science reading, providing informed directions for advancing research design, instructional practices, and learner development in multimedia science education.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"49 ","pages":"Article 100745"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145531158","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 systematic critical review of research on ‘research use’ in education: Towards more profession-sensitive conceptualisations","authors":"Sølvi Mausethagen,&nbsp;Hege Hermansen,&nbsp;Hilde Afdal,&nbsp;Marte Lorentzen,&nbsp;Hanna Holmeide","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100740","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100740","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article presents a systematic critical review of the research literature on ‘research use’ in education. The concept of research use has gradually developed with increased policy expectations that teachers should engage in externally produced research. With such expectations, it is important to ask how existing research positions the teaching profession in relation to ‘research’ and its ‘use’. The characteristics of these relations have implications for how the professional knowledge and practices of teachers are conceptualised. Based on a full-text analysis of 34 articles published in renowned databases and peer-reviewed English scholarly journals, we find that research on research use is characterised by similar problem framings and results over a 30-year period. Based on the analysis, we argue that there is a need for more profession-sensitive conceptualisations of research use in education and for more complex understandings of what it entails to employ a system perspective on research use. We argue that the next generation of studies on research use must be developed to include a conception of the teaching profession and of teachers' professional knowledge.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"49 ","pages":"Article 100740"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145397731","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":"What do we know about cyberbullying assessment tools for Primary and Secondary Education students? A systematic review and meta-analytical study","authors":"Mercedes Chicote-Beato ,&nbsp;Ana Rosa Bodoque-Osma ,&nbsp;Manuel Jacob Sierra Díaz ,&nbsp;Sixto González-Víllora","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100734","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100734","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>New forms of violence, such as cyberbullying, have emerged partly due to the increased use of technological devices at an early age. This rise in risk situations has led to a proliferation in the number of instruments that assess these behaviors, requiring an exhaustive analysis to determine the contents they address, the age range in which they are validated, their psychometric properties, and the way in which they approach the conceptualization of cyberbullying. To this end, a systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted, obtaining 3859 results in the selected databases (Web of Science, Scopus, PsycInfo, PsicoDoc, ProQuest, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences and PubPsych), which through a screening process, resulted in the analysis of 28 cyberbullying assessment tools that met the established inclusion criteria ((I) scientific articles that were published in peer-reviewed scientific journals; (II) that were validated in the selected age range (Primary or Secondary Education); (III) that addressed cyberbullying; (IV) that were written in English, Spanish or Portuguese; (V) that validity and/or reliability be analyzed). Taking into consideration the meta-analytical approach, the internal consistency of the cyberbullying detection instruments and scales was found to be significant, and the meta-analysis showed satisfactory results. According to the qualitative interpretation of this statistic, all of the aforementioned scales showed reliable results (between 0.84 and 0.90). The data indicated a medium-to-large effect of the precision and reliability of the psychological scales of bullying and cyberbullying.</div><div>Furthermore, with regard to the systematic review, it was possible to appreciate the need for the instruments to have a mixed methodology, establishing a connection between the macrosocial and microsocial frameworks. Similarly, it would be appropriate for these tools to address the subject from the age of eight, without combining educational stages or different variables.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"49 ","pages":"Article 100734"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145315063","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":"Financial literacy programs in school settings: a scoping review","authors":"François Molin ,&nbsp;Ivonne Lipsch-Wijnen ,&nbsp;Alana Vandebeek ,&nbsp;Gjalt-Jorn Peters","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100732","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100732","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Financial literacy programs in schools aim to equip students with the knowledge and skills needed for sound financial decision-making. This review provides an integrated overview of program content, outcome measures, and assessment methods. A systematic search of seven databases identified 56 relevant studies. The review highlights substantial heterogeneity in how financial literacy is conceptualized and operationalized, which limits comparability across studies. While most studies report positive effects, variation in methodological quality raises concerns about the robustness of these findings. By mapping these patterns, the review establishes a foundation for more coherent, evidence-based guidance for policymakers and educators seeking to design and evaluate effective financial literacy initiatives.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"49 ","pages":"Article 100732"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145416088","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":"How valid, really? A meta-analysis of the validity evidence of Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) self-report assessments","authors":"Iris Backfisch ,&nbsp;Ronny Scherer ,&nbsp;Jürgen Schneider ,&nbsp;Andreas Lachner","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100718","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100718","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) plays a central role for teacher training and measuring teachers’ preparedness for technology-enhanced teaching. Hence, crafting a validity argument of the popular TPACK self-assessments is key to facilitating evidence-based practices in these areas. However, the existing body of validity evidence abounds in divergent findings, for instance on the factor structure of TPACK self-reports across pre- and in-service teacher samples. To synthesize this evidence and capture its heterogeneity, we conducted a systematic review with a meta-analysis. First, we examined the internal validity of TPACK by analyzing its factor structure using meta-analytic structural equation and network modeling. Second, we compared two theoretical models describing the relations among the TPACK dimension—the transformative and integrative models—against the data. Third, we assessed the external validity of self-reported TPCK by examining its correlation with actual technology use in teaching. Our findings revealed two distinguishable dimensions of TPACK for both pre- and in-service teacher samples, which represented the technological and non-technological dimensions. The integrative model provided an overall better fit to the data. Moreover, TPACK self-reports were moderately correlated with technology use (<span><math><mrow><mover><mi>r</mi><mo>‾</mo></mover></mrow></math></span> s = 0.23–0.49) and exhibited substantial heterogeneity. Our results underscore the importance of generating and considering both internal and external validity evidence when applying TPACK assessments to generate implications for educational research and practice.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"49 ","pages":"Article 100718"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144898800","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":"Unveiling the effects of GenAI on motivation of learning English as a second/foreign language: Evidence from meta-analysis","authors":"Meng Xiong ,&nbsp;Timothy Teo","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100744","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100744","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Despite growing interest in the use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in second language education, its impact on learners' motivation in English as a second or foreign language (ESL/EFL) contexts remains unclear due to inconsistent findings and limited theory-based synthesis. This meta-analysis synthesized 47 effect sizes from 24 empirical studies (N = 7075) to examine the effects of GenAI-supported interventions on ESL/EFL learner motivation. A three-level model revealed a moderate and statistically significant overall effect (g = 0.611, p &lt; .001). Stronger effects were observed for motivation types such as the Ideal L2 Self, L2 Learning Experience, and self-efficacy, while intrinsic, extrinsic, and Ought-to L2 Self motivation showed non-significant effects. Moderator analyses based on the usefulness framework identified three significant contextual factors: communication format , use context, and ESL/EFL learning setting. Specifically, multimodal formats combining text and voice yielded stronger effects than single-mode formats, in-class applications were more effective than after-class use, and GenAI produced larger motivational gains in EFL settings than in ESL ones. These findings offer theory-informed insights and practical guidance for developing GenAI-supported language learning interventions that align with learners’ motivational profiles and instructional contexts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"49 ","pages":"Article 100744"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145509518","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":"Can digital assistive technology interventions foster well-being among students with disabilities? A meta-analytic review","authors":"Feifan Pang ,&nbsp;Jesus Alfonso D. Datu","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100729","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100729","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Assistive technology (AT) is important in supporting students with disabilities. Previous reviews have summarized the effectiveness of AT interventions for enhancing academic performance and career growth of students with special needs. However, limited reviews have focused on AT's impact on well-being outcomes. This meta-analytic review summarized the effects of digital AT interventions on well-being of students with diverse types of disabilities. A total of 26 between-group studies were identified through extensive literature search, which produced 77 independent effect sizes. After removing outliers, the three-level meta-analysis yielded an overall statistically significant effect of g = 0.39 (SE = 0.18). Subgroup analyses showed that digital AT interventions were less effective for secondary school students than non-secondary school students. There was no evidence to support publication bias in this review. Findings indicate that digital AT can serve as a pathway toward cultivating well-being in children and adolescents with disabilities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"49 ","pages":"Article 100729"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145060523","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":"Teacher online professional learning: A systematic literature review","authors":"Chao Wang ,&nbsp;Xiao Hu","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100727","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100727","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Online professional learning has become increasingly vital for teachers' continuous professional learning, especially with the accelerated adoption of remote learning due to the recent global disruptions, the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the effective design and implementation of teacher online professional learning (TOPL) programs present both opportunities and challenges across diverse educational contexts. Addressing the need for a comprehensive and up-to-date synthesis, this study systematically reviewed 82 peer-reviewed articles (2013–2023) from seven databases using the PRISMA framework. Our analysis addressed seven research questions concerning research purposes, study contexts, theoretical frameworks, pedagogical features, learning evaluation, research methodologies, and ongoing challenges in TOPL. The findings reveal growing teacher engagement in online professional learning worldwide, but also highlight significant research gaps—particularly at the tertiary level, in Global South regions, and in fostering cross-country collaboration. Most TOPL initiatives emphasize self-enrollment and individual learning, with recent research trends focusing on strengthening theoretical underpinnings, innovative pedagogical models, feedback mechanisms, and credential recognition. Methodologically, descriptive and inferential statistics, alongside qualitative content analysis, dominate the field. Importantly, this review conceptualizes TOPL as a dynamic ecosystem shaped by interacting factors at multiple levels—including technological, institutional, policy, and individual dimensions—and advocates for exploring TOPL processes at the micro, meso, and macro levels. Illustrating the need to build resilient and equitable TOPL systems capable of adapting to future challenges, this review concludes with actionable recommendations to advance research and practice in teacher online professional learning.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"49 ","pages":"Article 100727"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145050088","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":"Delving into data on students’ instructional knowledge: A scoping review of the empirical research","authors":"Morane Stevens ,&nbsp;Fien Depaepe ,&nbsp;Jan Elen","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100717","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100717","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Students' knowledge of micro-level education – specifically, their knowledge of how education is provided – may impact their perception of the learning environment, which is often ill-adjusted to the situation. This discrepancy may negatively affect learning. To ensure the effectiveness of learning environments, it is therefore essential to take into account students' so-called ‘instructional knowledge’. However, this is made considerably difficult by the highly fragmented nature of available research. To address this issue, this scoping review aims to identify what characterizes the empirical literature on higher education students' instructional knowledge, with particular attention to theoretical foundations, conceptualizations, instrumentalizations, research aims, and findings. After an initial database search, systematic snowballing methods were employed to search for relevant literature. A screening based on specific eligibility criteria resulted in 71 included publications. Findings reveal a scarcity of theoretical underpinnings, which are highly diverse but also share some commonalities. Similarly, numerous conceptualizations were identified, revealing instructional knowledge as a layered construct that can be mapped onto a number of dimensions, such as, for instance, the knowledge domain in which descriptions are situated. Regarding the instruments used, research relies primarily on a specific type of self-report, and there are few psychometrically sound instruments to assess instructional knowledge. Furthermore, the analysis revealed that the research primarily revolves around three categories of aims, with a predominant focus on descriptive publications, and findings tend to be largely inconclusive. The review concludes by proposing a comprehensive, operationalizable conceptualization and updated model of instructional knowledge, providing a strong foundation for further research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"49 ","pages":"Article 100717"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144898720","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":"Aligning interventions with the University Mental Health Charter: A stratified review of reviews of mental health and wellbeing interventions for higher education students","authors":"Rebecca Upsher ,&nbsp;Sanjana Prabhakar ,&nbsp;Tatjana Damjanovic ,&nbsp;Sarah Conner ,&nbsp;Jo Ward ,&nbsp;Katie Rakow ,&nbsp;Luqmaan Waqar ,&nbsp;Helen Lawson ,&nbsp;Nicola Byrom","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100716","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100716","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This stratified review of reviews evaluates the alignment of mental health and wellbeing interventions for higher education students within the University Mental Health Charter's domains. A narrative synthesis of 341 studies was conducted, extracted from 265 reviews. Interventions were stratified by the Mental Health Charter's domains—Live, Learn, and Support—and analysed for their impact on mental health outcomes. The “Live” domain, particularly proactive interventions and mentally healthy environments, had the highest number of studies, predominantly conducted via Randomised Controlled Trials. The “Learn” domain largely comprised quasi-experimental studies, while the “Support” domain featured pre-post designs without control groups. Interventions were primarily conducted in person and were universal, targeting undergraduate students, with North America being the most frequent research location. For the most frequent mental health outcomes (anxiety, depression, and stress), interventions showed mixed effectiveness across all domains, with no significant association between the type of intervention and its impact. Most studies were rated as having medium evidence strength, with less than 10 % classified as strong evidence. The findings highlight a critical need for diversified research focusing on underrepresented areas within the Mental Health Charter, such as academic progression and partnerships with external care providers. Additionally, there is a call for standardised outcome measures to enhance the robustness of future meta-analyses and the overall evidence quality. Addressing these gaps will support the effective implementation of a whole-university approach to student mental health.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"49 ","pages":"Article 100716"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144901705","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}