Hester de Boer

A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Classroom Management Strategies and Classroom Management Programs on Students’ Academic, Behavioral, Emotional, and Motivational Outcomes

This meta-analysis examined which classroom management strategies and programs enhanced students’ academic, behavioral, social-emotional, and motivational outcomes in primary education. The analysis included 54 random and nonrandom controlled intervention studies published in the past decade (2003–2013). Results showed small but significant effects (average g = 0.22) on all outcomes, except for motivational outcomes. Programs were coded for the presence/absence of four categories of strategies: focusing on the teacher, on student behavior, on students’ social-emotional development, and on teacher–student relationships. Focusing on the students’ social-emotional development appeared to have the largest contribution to the interventions’ effectiveness, in particular on the social-emotional outcomes. Moreover, we found a tentative result that students’ academic outcomes benefitted from teacher-focused programs.

Effects of the Attributes of Educational Interventions on Students’ Academic Performance: A Meta-Analysis

This meta-analysis examined the influence of attributes related to the implementation of learning strategy instruction interventions on students’ academic performance, and also examined how the attributes related to the method of testing the intervention effects affected the actual effects measured. Using metaregression, we analyzed the influence of the subject domain in which the intervention was implemented, the implementer, its duration and intensity, student cooperation, and research method aspects (including measurement instrument). Most attributes moderated the intervention effect. Using forward regression analysis, we only needed four attributes to obtain the best model, however. This analysis showed that the intervention effect was lower when a standardized test was used for evaluation instead of an unstandardized test. Interventions implemented by assistants or researchers were more effective than those implemented by teachers or using computers. Cooperation had a negative, and session duration a positive, contribution. Together, these attributes explained 63.2% of the variance in effect, which stresses the importance of emphasizing not only the instructional focus of an intervention but also its other attributes.

Influence of misaligned parents’ aspirations on long-term student academic performance

This article deals with the concept of misaligned parents’ aspirations, its relationship with student background characteristics, and its effects on long-term student performance. It is defined as the difference between parents’ educational ambitions for their child and the childs actual capacities. Multilevel regression analyses on a sample of 10,433 Dutch students, who were followed for 5 years, showed that misaligned aspirations are related to parental education level and ethnicity, and have a small/medium positive effect on student performance. Based on ecology theory, we proposed that misaligned aspirations relate to differences in parent involvement, student achievement motivation, and teacher expectation bias, and that these factors subsequently influence student performance. The findings, however, indicate that this only applies to teacher expectation bias.This article deals with the concept of misaligned parents’ aspirations, its relationship with student background characteristics, and its effects on long-term student performance. It is defined as the difference between parents’ educational ambitions for their child and the childs actual capacities. Multilevel regression analyses on a sample of 10,433 Dutch students, who were followed for 5 years, showed that misaligned aspirations are related to parental education level and ethnicity, and have a small/medium positive effect on student performance. Based on ecology theory, we proposed that misaligned aspirations relate to differences in parent involvement, student achievement motivation, and teacher expectation bias, and that these factors subsequently influence student performance. The findings, however, indicate that this only applies to teacher expectation bias.