Socioeconomic status is a major predictor of educational achievement. This systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to identify effective academic interventions for elementary and middle school students with low socioeconomic status. Included studies have used a treatment-control group design, were performed in OECD and EU countries, and measured achievement by standardized tests in mathematics or reading. The analysis included 101 studies performed during 2000 to 2014, 76% of which were randomized controlled trials. The effect sizes (ES) of many interventions indicate that it is possible to substantially improve educational achievement for the target group. Intervention components such as tutoring (ES = 0.36), feedback and progress monitoring (ES = 0.32), and cooperative learning (ES = 0.22) have average ES that are educationally important, statistically significant, and robust. There is also substantial variation in effect sizes, within and between components, which cannot be fully explained by observable study characteristics.
AlexanderK. L.EntwisleD. R.OlsonL. S. (2001). Schools, achievement, and inequality: A seasonal perspective. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 171–191. doi:10.3102/01623737023002171
2.
AlfieriL.BrooksP. J.AldrichN. J.TenenbaumH. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning?Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 1–18. doi:10.1037/a0021017
3.
AndreassenC.FletcherP. (2007). Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort (ECLS–B) psychometric report for the 2-year data collection (Institute of Education Sciences Report; NCES 2007-084). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2007084
4.
AnglemyerA.HorvathH. T.BeroL. (2014). Healthcare outcomes assessed with observational study designs compared with those assessed in randomized trials. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (4), MR000034. doi:10.1002/14651858.MR000034.pub2
5.
BjörklundA.SalvanesK. (2011). Education and family background. In HanushekE. A.MachinS.WoessmannL. (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of education (Vol. 3, pp. 201–247). Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland.
6.
BorensteinM.HedgesL. V.HigginsJ. P. T.RothsteinH. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis, Chichester, England: Wiley.
7.
BormanG. D.HewesG. M.OvermanL. T.BrownS. (2003). Comprehensive school reform and achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 73, 125–230. doi:10.3102/00346543073002125
8.
BradleyR. H.CorwynR. F. (2002). Socioeconomic status and child development. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 371–399. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135233
9.
ChettyR.FriedmanJ. N.RockoffJ. E. (2014). Measuring the impacts of teachers I: Evaluating bias in teacher value-added estimates. American Economic Review, 104, 2593–2632. doi:10.1257/aer.104.9.2593
10.
CheungA. C. K.SlavinR. E. (2012). How features of educational technology applications affect student reading outcomes: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 7, 198–215. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2012.05.002
11.
ConnorC. M.MorrisonF. J.FishmanB.CroweE. C.Al OtaibaS.SchatschneiderC. (2013). A longitudinal cluster-randomized controlled study on the accumulating effects of individualized literacy instruction on students’ reading from first through third grade. Psychological Science, 24, 1408–1419. doi:10.1177/0956797612472204
CookP. J.DodgeK.FarkasG.FryerR. J.GuryanJ.LudwigJ.. . . SteinbergL. (2014). The (surprising) efficacy of academic and behavioral intervention with disadvantaged youth: Results from a randomized experiment in Chicago (NBER Working Paper No. 19862). Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w19862
14.
CurrieJ. (2009). Healthy, wealthy, and wise: Socioeconomic status, poor health in childhood and human capital development. Journal of Economic Literature, 47, 87–122. doi:10.1257/jel.47.1.87
15.
de BoerH.DonkerA. S.van der WerfM. P. C. (2014). Effects of the attributes of educational interventions on students’ academic performance: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 84, 509–545. doi:10.3102/0034654314540006
16.
DexterD. D.HughesC. A. (2011). Graphic organizers and students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34, 51–72. doi:10.1177/073194871103400104
17.
EdmondsM. S.VaughnS.WexlerJ.ReutebuchC.CableA.Klingler TackettK.Wick SchnakenbergJ. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79, 262–300. doi:10.3102/0034654308325998
18.
EppleD.RomanoR.ZimmerR. (2015). Charter schools: A survey of research on their characteristics and effectiveness (NBER Working Paper No. 21256). Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w21256
19.
Esping-AndersenG.GarfinkelI.HanW.-J.MagnusonK.WagnerS.WaldfogelJ. (2012). Child care and school performance in Denmark and the United States. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 576–589. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.10.010
20.
FlynnL. J.ZhengX.SwansonH. L. (2012). Instructing struggling older readers: A selective meta-analysis of intervention research. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27, 21–32. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00347.x
21.
FryerR. G. (2014). Injecting charter school best practices into traditional public schools: Evidence from field experiments. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129, 1355–1407. doi:10.1093/qje/qju011
22.
FryerR. G.LevittS. D. (2013). Testing for racial differences in the mental ability of young children. American Economic Review, 103, 981–1005. doi:10.1257/aer.103.2.981
23.
GershensonS. (2013). Do summer time-use gaps vary by socioeconomic status?American Educational Research Journal, 50, 1219–1248. doi:10.3102/0002831213502516
24.
GerstenR.ChardD. J.JayantiM.BakerS. K.MorphyP.FlojoP. (2009). Mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of instructional components. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1202–1242. doi:10.3102/0034654309334431
25.
GlazermanS.ProtikA.TehB. R.BruchJ.MaxJ. (2013). Transfer incentives for high-performing teachers. Final results from a multisite randomized experiment (Institute of Education Sciences Report; NCEE 2014–4003). Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20144003/pdf/20144003.pdf
26.
GoodC.AronsonJ.InzlichtM. (2003). Improving adolescents’ standardized test performance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 24, 645–662. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2003.09.002
27.
GoodwinA. P.AhnS. (2010). A meta-analysis of morphological interventions: Effects on literacy achievement of children with literacy difficulties. Annals of Dyslexia, 60, 183–208. doi:10.1007/s11881-010-0041-x
28.
HackmanD. A.FarahM. J. (2009). Socioeconomic status and the developing brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13, 65–73. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2008.11.003
HattieJ.TimperleyH. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112. doi:10.3102/003465430298487
31.
HeckmanJ. J. (2006). Skill formation and the economics of investing in disadvantaged children. Science, 312, 1900–1902. doi:10.1126/science.1128898
32.
HedgesL. V. (2006). Meta-analysis. In RaoC. R. (Ed.), The handbook of statistics (Vol. 26, pp. 919–953). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
33.
HedgesL. V. (2007). Effect sizes in cluster-randomized designs. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 32, 341–370. doi:10.3102/1076998606298043
34.
HedgesL. V.HedbergE. C. (2007). Intraclass correlation values for planning group randomized trials in education. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29, 60–87. doi:10.3102/0162373707299706
35.
HedgesL. V.TiptonE.JohnsonM. C. (2010). Robust variance estimation in meta-regression with dependent effect size estimates. Research Synthesis Methods, 1, 39–65. doi:10.1002/jrsm.5
36.
HellerS. B.ShahA. K.GuryanJ.LudwigJ.MullainathanS.PollackH. A. (2015). Thinking, fast and slow? Some field experiments to reduce crime and dropout in Chicago (NBER Working Paper No. 21178). Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w21178
37.
HigginsJ. P. T.GreenS. (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (Version 5.1.0). Retrieved from http://www.cochrane-handbook.org
38.
HigginsJ. P.ThompsonS. G.DeeksJ. J.AltmanD. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. British Medical Journal, 327, 557–560. doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
39.
KimJ. S.QuinnD. M. (2013). The effects of summer reading on low-income children’s literacy achievement from kindergarten to grade 8: A meta-analysis of classroom and home interventions. Review of Educational Research, 83, 386–431. doi:10.3102/0034654313483906
40.
KyndtE.RaesE.LismontB.TimmersF.CascallarE.DochyF. (2013). A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings?Educational Research Review, 10, 133–149. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2013.02.002
41.
LipseyM. W.PuzioK.YunC.HerbertM. A.Steinka-FryK.ColeM. W.. . . BusickM. D. (2012). Translating the statistical representation of the effects of education interventions into more readily interpretable forms (Institute of Education Sciences Report; NCSER 2013-3000). Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncser/pubs/20133000/pdf/20133000.pdf
MagnusonK.ShagerH. (2010). Early education: Progress and promises for children from low-income families. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 1186–1198. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.03.006
44.
NisbettR. E.AronsonJ.BlairC.DickensW.FlynnJ.HalpernD. F.TurkheimerE. (2012). Intelligence—New findings and theoretical developments. American Psychologist, 67, 130–159. doi:10.1037/a0026699
45.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2010). PISA 2009 results: Overcoming social background: Equity in learning opportunities and outcomes (Vol. II). Paris, France: Author. doi:10.1787/9789264091504-en
46.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2013). PISA 2012 results: Excellence through equity: Giving every student the chance to succeed (Vol. II). Paris, France: Author. doi:10.1787/9789264201132-en
47.
PigottT. D. (2009). Handling missing data. In CooperH.HedgesL. V.ValentineJ. C. (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (pp. 399–416). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
48.
ReljicG.FerringD.MartinR. (2015). A meta-analysis on the effectiveness of bilingual programs in Europe. Review of Educational Research, 85, 92–128. doi:10.3102/0034654314548514
49.
ReynoldsA. J.MagnusonK. A.OuS-R. (2010). Preschool-to-third grade programs and practices: A review of research. Child and Youth Services Review, 32, 1121–1131. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.10.017
50.
RhemtullaM.Tucker-DrobE. M. (2012). Gene-by-socioeconomic status interaction on school readiness. Behavioral Genetics, 42, 549–558. doi:10.1007/s10519-012-9527-0
51.
RitterG.AlbinG.BarnettJ.BlankenshipV.DennyG. (2006). The effectiveness of volunteer tutoring programs: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2(7). doi:10.4073/csr.2006.7
52.
RobinsonD. R.Ward SchofieldJ.Steers-WentzellK. L. (2005). Peer- and cross-age tutoring in math: Outcomes and their design implications. Educational Psychology Review, 17, 327–362. doi:10.1007/s10648-005-8137-2
53.
Rossin-SlaterM.WüstM. (2016). Are different early investments complements or substitutes? Long-run and intergenerational evidence from Denmark (Unpublished manuscript). Department of Economics, University of California at Santa Barbara, CA. Retrieved from http://econ.ucsb.edu/~mrossin/RossinSlater_Wust_interactions_mar2016.pdf
54.
RubinD. B. (1996). Multiple imputation after 18+ years. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91, 473–489. doi:10.1080/01621459.1996.10476908
55.
RückerG.SchwarzerG.CarpenterJ. R.SchumacherM. (2008). Undue reliance on I2 in assessing heterogeneity may mislead. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8, 79. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-8-79
Sánchez-MecaJ.Marín-MartínezF.Chacón-MoscosoS. (2003). Effect-size indices for dichotomized outcomes in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 8, 448–467. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.8.4.448
58.
ScammacaN. K.RobertsG.StuebingK. K. (2014). Meta-analysis with complex research designs: Dealing with dependence from multiple measures and multiple group comparisons. Review of Educational Research, 84, 328–364. doi:10.3102/0034654313500826
59.
ScammacaN. K.RobertsG.VaughnS.StuebingK. K. (2015). A meta-analysis of interventions for struggling readers in grades 4–12: 1980–2011. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48, 369–390. doi:10.1177/0022219413504995
60.
SirinS. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75, 417–453. doi:10.3102/00346543075003417
61.
SlatesS. L.AlexanderK. L.EntwisleD. R.OlsonL. S. (2012). Counteracting summer slide: Social capital resources within socio-economically disadvantaged families. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 17, 165–185. doi:10.1080/10824669.2012.688171
62.
SlavinR. E.CheungA.HolmesG.MaddenN. A.ChamberlainA. (2013). Effects of a data-driven district reform model on state assessment outcomes. American Educational Research Journal, 50, 371–396. doi:10.3102/0002831212466909
63.
SlavinR. E.LakeC. (2008). Effective programs in elementary mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 78, 427–515. doi:10.3102/0034654308317473
64.
SlavinR. E.LakeC.ChambersB.CheungA.DavisS. (2009). Effective reading programs for the elementary grades: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1391–1466. doi:10.3102/0034654309341374
65.
SlavinR. E.LakeC.DavisS.MaddenN. (2011). Effective programs for struggling readers: A best-evidence synthesis. Educational Research Review, 6, 1–26. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2010.07.002
66.
SlavinR. E.LakeC.GroffC. (2009). Effective programs in middle and high school mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 79, 839–911. doi:10.3102/0034654308330968
67.
SlavinR. E.MaddenN. (2011). Measures inherent to treatments in program effectiveness reviews. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4, 370–380. doi:10.1080/19345747.2011.558986
68.
TimperleyH. S.PhillipsG. (2003). Changing and sustaining teachers’ expectations through professional development in literacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 627–641. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(03)00058-1
69.
TiptonE. (2015). Small sample adjustments for robust variance estimation with meta-regression. Psychological Methods, 20, 375–393. doi:10.1037/met0000011
70.
Tucker-DrobE. M.BrileyD. A.HardenK. P. (2013). Genetic and environmental influences on cognition across development and context. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 349–355. doi:10.1177/0963721413485087
71.
Tucker-DrobE. M.RhemtullaM.HardenK. P.TurkheimerE.FaskD. (2011). Emergence of a gene x socioeconomic status interaction on infant mental ability between 10 months and 2 years. Psychological Science, 22, 125–133. doi:10.1177/0956797610392926
WanzekJ.VaughnS.ScammacaN. K.MetzK.MurrayC. SRobertsG.DanielsonL. (2013). Extensive reading interventions for students with reading difficulties after grade 3. Review of Educational Research, 83, 163–195. doi:10.3102/0034654313477212
74.
WanzekJ.VaughnS.WexlerJ.SwansonE. A.EdmondsM.KimA-H. (2006). A synthesis of spelling and reading interventions and their effects on the spelling outcomes of students with LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 528–543. doi:10.1177/00222194060390060501
75.
WhiteK. R. (1982). The relation between socioeconomic status and academic achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 461–481. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.91.3.461
76.
WilsonS.Tanner-SmithE. E.LipseyM. W.Steinka-FryK.MorrisonJ. (2011). Dropout prevention and intervention programs: Effects on school completion and dropout among school-aged children and youth. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 7(8). doi:10.4073/csr.2011.8
77.
ZiefS. G.LauverS.MaynardR. A. (2006). Impacts of after-school programs on student outcomes: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2(3). doi:10.4073/csr.2006.3
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
