The effects of small class sizes on students' academic achievement, socioemotional development and well-being in special education: A systematic review.

Background: Class size reductions in general education are some of the most researched educational interventions in social science, yet researchers have not reached any final conclusions regarding their effects. While research on the relationship between general education class size and student achievement is plentiful, research on class size in special education is scarce, even though class size issues must be considered particularly important to students with special educational needs. These students compose a highly diverse group in terms of diagnoses, functional levels, and support needs, but they share a common need for special educational accommodations, which often entails additional instructional support in smaller units than what is normally provided in general education. At this point, there is however a lack of clarity as to the effects of special education class sizes on student academic achievement and socioemotional development. Inevitably, such lack of clarity is an obstacle for special educators and policymakers trying to make informed decisions. This highlights the policy relevance of the current systematic review, in which we sought to examine the effects of small class sizes in special education on the academic achievement, socioemotional development, and well-being of children with special educational needs. Objectives: The objective of this systematic review was to uncover and synthesise data from studies to assess the impact of small class sizes on the academic achievement, socioemotional development, and well-being of students with special educational needs. We also aimed to investigate the extent to which the effects differed among subgroups of students. Finally, we planned to perform a qualitative exploration of the experiences of children, teachers, and parents with class size issues in special education. Search Methods: Relevant studies were identified through electronic searches in bibliographic databases, searches in grey literature resources, searches using Internet search engines, hand-searches of specific targeted journals, and citation-tracking. The following bibliographic databases were searched in April 2021: ERIC (EBSCO-host), Academic Search Premier (EBSCO-host), EconLit (EBSCO-host), APA PsycINFO (EBSCO-host), SocINDEX (EBSCO-host), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (ProQuest), Sociological Abstracts (ProQuest), and Web of Science (Clarivate, Science Citation Index Expanded & Social Sciences Citation Index). EBSCO OPEN Dissertations was also searched in April 2021, while the remaining searches for grey literature, hand-searches in key journals, and citation-tracking took place between January and May 2022. Selection Criteria: The intervention in this review was a small special education class size. Eligible quantitative study designs were studies that used a well-defined control or comparison group, that is, studies where there was a comparison between students in smaller classes and students in larger classes. Children with special educational needs in grades K-12 (or the equivalent in European countries) in special education were eligible. In addition to exploring the effects of small class sizes in special education from a quantitative perspective, we aimed to gain insight into the lived experiences of children, teachers, and parents with class size issues in special education contexts, as they are presented in the qualitative research literature. The review therefore also included all types of empirical qualitative studies that collected primary data and provided descriptions of main methodological issues such as selection of informants, data collection procedures, and type of data analysis. Eligible qualitative study designs included but were not limited to studies using ethnographic observation or field work formats, or qualitative interview techniques applied to individual or focus group conversations. Data Collection and Analysis: The literature search yielded a total of 26,141 records which were screened for eligibility based on title and abstract. From these, 262 potentially relevant records were retrieved and screened in full text, resulting in seven studies being included: three quantitative and five qualitative studies (one study contained both eligible quantitative and qualitative data). Two of the quantitative studies could not be used in the data synthesis as they were judged to have a critical risk of bias and, in accordance with the protocol, were excluded from the meta-analysis on the basis that they would be more likely to mislead than inform. The third quantitative study did not provide enough information enabling us to calculate an effect size and standard error. Meta-analysis was therefore not possible. Following quality appraisal of the qualitative studies, three qualitative studies were judged to be of sufficient methodological quality. It was not possible to perform a qualitative thematic synthesis since in two of these studies, findings particular to special education class size were scarce. Therefore, only descriptive data extraction could be performed. Main Results: Despite the comprehensive searches, the present review only included seven studies published between 1926 and 2020. Two studies were purely quantitative (Forness, 1985; Metzner, 1926) and from the U.S. Four studies used qualitative methodology (Gottlieb, 1997; Huang, 2020; Keith, 1993; Prunty, 2012) and were from the US (2), China (1), and Ireland (1). One study, MAGI Educational Services (1995), contained both eligible quantitative and qualitative data and was from the U.S. Authors' Conclusions: The major finding of the present review was that there were virtually no contemporary quantitative studies exploring the effects of small class sizes in special education, thus making it impossible to perform a meta-analysis. More research is therefore thoroughly needed. Findings from the summary of included qualitative studies reflected that to the special education students and staff members participating in these studies, smaller class sizes were the preferred option because they allowed for more individualised instruction time and increased teacher attention to students' diverse needs. It should be noted that these studies were few in number and took place in very diverse contexts and across a large time span. There is a need for more qualitative research into the views and experiences of teachers, parents, and school administrators with special education class sizes in different local contexts and across various provision models. But most importantly, future research should strive to represent the voices of children and young people with special needs since they are the experts when it comes to matters concerning their own lives.

PROTOCOL: Performance pay and employee health: A systematic review.

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The main objective of the review is to answer the following research question: What is the effect of performance pay on employee health?

PROTOCOL: School-based language, math, and reading interventions for executive functions in children and adolescents: A systematic review.

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. Our primary objective for this systematic review is to examine if preschool and school-based interventions aimed at improving language, literacy, and/or mathematical skills increase children's and adolescents' executive functions. As a secondary objective, we will examine how the effects of language, literacy, and mathematics interventions on executive functions are moderated by the subject of the intervention, child age or grade, the type of EF measured, and the at-risk status of participants. We will also explore how the effects are moderated by other study characteristics, and estimate the effects of the included interventions on language, literacy, and mathematical skills.

Feedback-informed treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the partners for change outcome management system.

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. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

PROTOCOL: Parenting interventions to support parent/child attachment and psychosocial adjustment in foster and adoptive parents and children: A systematic review.

This is the protocol for a Campbell review. The objectives are as follows: 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 (for example, age of the child at placement and at intervention start, programme duration, programme focus).