Background: Low levels of numeracy and literacy skills are associated with a range of negative outcomes later in life, such as reduced earnings and health. Obtaining information about effective interventions for children with or at risk of academic difficulties is therefore important.Objectives: The main objective was to assess the effectiveness of interventions targeting students with or at risk of academic difficulties in kindergarten to Grade 6.Search Methods: We searched electronic databases from 1980 to July 2018. We searched multiple international electronic databases (in total 15), seven national repositories, and performed a search of the grey literature using governmental sites, academic clearinghouses and repositories for reports and working papers, and trial registries (10 sources). We hand searched recent volumes of six journals and contacted international experts. Lastly, we used included studies and 23 previously published reviews for citation tracking.Selection Criteria: Studies had to meet the following criteria to be included:• Population: The population eligible for the review included students attending regular schools in kindergarten to Grade 6, who were having academic difficulties, or were at risk of such difficulties.• Intervention: We included interventions that sought to improve academic skills, were conducted in schools during the regular school year, and were targeted (selected or indicated).• Comparison: Included studies used an intervention-control group design or a comparison group design. We included randomised controlled trials (RCT); quasirandomised controlled trials (QRCT); and quasi-experimental studies (QES).• Outcomes: Included studies used standardised tests in reading or mathematics.

The Partners for Change Outcome System (PCOMS) is a feedback system that has been developed as part of psychotherapeutic treatment. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of the PCOMS. We searched the literature and included studies that used a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design. We calculated a combined effect size across studies for outcomes related to the number of sessions attended. We also calculated a combined effect size for outcomes related to the participants’ well-being. However, in the analysis of the effect on well-being, we excluded studies that included only the Outcome Rating Scale as a measure of effect because this scale is part of the PCOMS. In the calculation of the combined effect size, we used random effect models with inverse weighted variance. In the systematic literature search we identified 14 RCT studies that evaluated the effect of the PCOMS. Based on 12 studies, we found a rather small effect size for the number of sessions attended favoring the PCOMS intervention (Hedges’s g = 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI: 0.001, 0.26]). The effect size corresponded to a difference of less than 1 session. Six studies included a well-being scale that was independent of the PCOMS intervention as the outcome. The effect size for the 6 studies was insignificant (Hedges’s g = 0.03; 95% Cl [−0.18, 0.23]). We found no evidence that the PCOMS feedback system has an effect on the number of sessions attended by clients or that the PCOMS improves the well-being of clients.

No abstract

This is the protocol for a Campbell review. The objectives are as follows: To assess the efficacy of attachment‐based interventions on measures of favourable parent/child outcomes (attachment security, dyadic interaction, parent/child psychosocial adjustment, behavioural and mental health problems and placement breakdown) within foster and adoptive families with children aged between 0 and 17 years. To identify factors that appear to be associated with more effective outcomes and factors that modify intervention effectiveness (for example, age of the child at placement and at intervention start, programme duration, programme focus)

Background: Adopted children and children placed in foster care are at increased risk of developing a range of mental health, behavioural, and psychosocial adjustment problems. Previous studies suggest that due to early experiences of separation and loss some children may have difficulties forming a secure attachment relationship with the adoptive/foster parents.Objectives: The objectives of the present review were: (1) to assess the efficacy of attachment-based interventions on measures of favourable parent/child outcomes (attachment security, dyadic interaction, parent/child psychosocial adjustment, behavioural and mental health problems, and placement breakdown) within foster and adoptive families with children aged between 0 and 17 years. (2) to identify factors that appear to be associated with more effective outcomes and factors that modify intervention effectiveness (e.g., age of the child at placement and at intervention start, programme duration, programme focus).Search Methods: Relevant studies were identified through electronic searches of bibliographic databases, governmental and grey literature repositories, hand search in specific targeted journals, citation tracking, contact to international experts and Internet search engines. The database searches were carried out to October 2020. SelectionCriteria: The interventions of interest were parenting interventions aimed at helping the foster/adopted children and their parents to form or sustain a secure attachment relationship. The interventions had to be at least partly informed by attachment theory. Data Collection and Analysis: The total number of potentially relevant studies constituted 17.822 hits after duplicates were removed. A total of 44 studies (27 different populations) met the inclusion criteria and were critically appraised by the review authors. Due to critical study quality, missing numeric data and re-use of the same data, only 24 studies analysing 16 different populations could be used in the data synthesis (children, N = 1302; parents, N = 1344). Meta-analysis using both child and parent outcomes were conducted on each metric separately. All analyses

This is the protocol for a Campbell review. The objectives are as follows: To synthesize data from studies to assess the impact of adult/child ratio and group size in ECEC on measures of process characteristics of quality of care and on child outcome measures.

Background: Considering the rapid global movement towards inclusion for students with special educational needs (SEN), there is a surprising lack of pedagogical or didactic theories regarding the ways in which inclusive education may affect students with SEN. Group composition within the educational setting may play a role in determining the academic achievement, socio-emotional development, and wellbeing of students with SEN. Proponents of inclusion propose that segregated educational placement causes stigmatisation and social isolation which may have detrimental effects on the self-concept and self-confidence of students with SEN.On the other hand, opponents of inclusion for all special needs students suggest that placement in general education classrooms may have adverse effects especially if the time and resources allocated for individualisation are not aligned with student needs. Since the 1980s, a number of reviews on the effects of inclusion have been published. Results are inconsistent, and several reviews point to a number of methodological challenges and weaknesses of the study designs within primary studies. In sum, the impact of inclusion on students with SEN may be hypothesised to be both positive and negative, and the current knowledge base is inconsistent.Objectives: The objective was first:• To uncover and synthesise data from contemporary studies to assess the effects of inclusion on measures of academic achievement, socio-emotional development, and wellbeing of children with special needs when compared to children with special needs who receive special education in a segregated setting.• A secondary objective was to explore how potential moderators (gender, age, type and severity of special need, part or full time inclusive education, and co-teaching) relate to outcomes.

The term children with special educational needs (SEN) refers to highly diverse populations of children with a wide range of physical, cognitive and socioemotional disabilities or difficulties as well as strengths and resources causing them to require varying degrees of special educational support and assistance (Squires, 2012;Vehmas, 2010;Wilson, 2002).Several studies document significant gender imbalances in the number of students who receive special educational support, and for most disability categories the prevalence is higher for boys (Skårbrevik, 2002). The reasons for these imbalances are likely complex, and it is beyond the scope of the present review to account for the hypotheses and findings associated with each disability category. However, a general hypothesis across different categories of special educational needs is the notion that special educational needs are more likely to remain undetected in girls as symptoms and problems in girls may be less visible to educators (Arms et al., 2008).Traditional special education consists of segregating students with special needs from mainstream students within separate and typically smaller classrooms or educational settings. However, as early as in the 1930s, a movement originally known as mainstreaming, and in more recent years as inclusion, has sought to bring an end to segregated placement as the preferred educational option for students with special needs (Carlberg & Kavale, 1980). In 1994, the idea of inclusive education became even more consolidated when the Salamanca Statement was adopted by representatives from 92 countries, resulting in an international shift in policy. This meant that far more students with special needs started entering general educational settings around the globe (Murawski & Lee Swanson, 2001;Ruijs & Peetsma, 2009).The terms inclusion, mainstreaming, integrated placement, and cross-categorical instruction all refer to educational settings with a group composition consisting of a mixture of students with and without special educational needs. In the present review, we have chosen to use the term inclusion to refer to general educational settings in which there is a mixture of students with and without special educational needs. Ideally, inclusion and inclusive education should be based on an educational approach in which the goal is to continuously address and respond to the diversity of needs of all learners through increasing participation and reducing exclusion within and from education. Inclusion thus may involve changes and modifications in content, approaches, structures and strategies, with a common vision which covers all children and a conviction that it is the responsibility of the regular system to educate all children.Inclusion emphasises the provision of opportunities for equal participation of children with disabilities (physical, social and/or emotional) whenever possible into general education, but leaves open the possibility of personal choice and options for special assistance and facilities for those who need ...