Physical activity, defined as bodily movement produced by skeletal muscles that result in energy expenditure (World Health Organization), has been shown to be beneficial to developing cognitive function in children, where cognitive function (CF) refers to basal mental operation, such as perception, memory, and executive function. Physical activity (PA) intervention can be classified into two categories: acute PA, which involves a single short-term bout (between 10 - 40 min), and chronic PA, which entails multiple sessions per week or month for an extended period (e.g., 6 weeks). The underlying mechanisms of these two types of PA are different so the effect of PA interventions (acute vs chronic) on improving CF in children may also be different. Song and colleagues conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the effect of acute and chronic PA interventions on the cognitive function of preschool children.

Eligible studies were those that targeted preschool children aged 2-6 years, contained a sport or PA intervention component (e.g., yoga, aerobic, physical education session), and reported at least one cognitive outcome (e.g., attention, perception, logic and reasoning). The study identified 16 articles (4 acute PA and 12 chronic PA) that met the inclusion criteria. Following the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale, a mean quality score of 5.6 out of 10 was found for those selected studies.

• The 4 studies of acute PA found no effect on executive functions (g =0.04; 95% CI = [−12, 0.19]).
• Overall, chronic PA interventions showed a moderate effect on CF (g = 0.49; 95% CI = [0.29, 0.69]). The effect on perception was strongest (g = 1.19; 95% CI = [0.64, 1.75]), followed by inhibitory control (g = 0.58; 95% CI = [0.17, 0.98]).
• Two moderators were found significant: (1) intervention modality (curricula PA (g = 0.97) vs after school sports/PA program (g=0.34)); and (2) assessment (field battery/scale (g = 0.64) vs computerized test (g = 0.18)).

The undetermined effect of acute PA intervention on CF may be due to the inadequate number of studies. Moreover, this meta-analysis included a variety of cognitive tasks which may result in high heterogeneity. Thus, the findings have to be interpreted with caution.

Source: Song, H., Wang, J.-J., Zhang, B., Shi, L., & Lau, P. W. C. (2023). Do acute and chronic physical activity interventions affect the cognitive function of preschool children? A meta-analysis. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 67, 102419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2023.102419… Read the rest

How can the United States bridge math proficiency gaps? Ensuring equitable opportunities for students to receive adequate preparation and access to advanced math is critical to the equation. This is due to the clear benefits of learning advanced math in high school, such as increased options for majoring in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, higher rates of college acceptance, and greater opportunities for college scholarships and financial aid. Despite these benefits, a significant portion of high school students are either not being offered the opportunity to take or are opting out of advanced math courses. A recent report from RAND identified gaps in students’ opportunities to access advanced math and provided recommended support to address these gaps.

This report utilized data from nationally representative surveys of teachers and school leaders in kindergarten through grade 12 during the 2021-2022 school year. The findings indicated that fewer advanced math courses were offered in small high schools, rural high schools, and high schools primarily serving historically marginalized communities, and that uneven access to advanced math started before high school. In addition, math teachers who worked in high-poverty schools were likely to report skipping standards-aligned content and replacing the skipped content with material from prior grade levels. A large proportion of K-12 math teachers expressed the need for additional support in delivering high-quality math instruction.

The authors recommend the following to policymakers and education leaders: First, school districts should allocate funding towards implementing high-dosage tutoring programs for economically disadvantaged high schoolers; Second, education leaders should support teachers with high-quality training and standards-aligned curriculum materials; Third, district leaders should collaborate with regional colleges to make high-quality advanced courses accessible for all high school students; Fourth, education leaders and teachers should establish transparency in communication regarding the importance of course-taking.

Source (Open Access): Wolfe, R. L., Steiner, E. D., & Schweig, J. (2023). Getting Students to (and Through) Advanced Math: Where Course Offerings and Content Are Not Adding Up. RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA827-10.html… Read the rest

A high-dosage math tutoring program, modeled after Saga Education in the U.S., was developed in the Netherlands through a collaboration of schools, funders and providers to support students from low-income families. The program was delivered by a tutor to student pairs four times a week for an entire school year. In the sessions tutors reviewed mathematical concepts introduced by the teachers to the whole class, as well as personalized the instruction based on student needs.

A recent evaluation assessed the effectiveness of this program in fourth and fifth grade. The study randomly assigned 434 students to the experimental group or to the control group for one school year. Using the national math and reading tests to assess the effectiveness of the program, results showed a significant improvement in math achievement (ES = +0.28) in both grade 4 and 5. No effects were found in reading. The authors’ conclusion affirms that this high-dosage math tutoring program was effective and scalable, bolstering the academic success of low-income students.

Source (Open Access): de Ree, J., Maggioni, M. A., Paulle, B., Rossignoli, D., Ruijs, N., & Walentek, D. (2023). Closing the income-achievement gap? Experimental evidence from high-dosage tutoring in Dutch primary education. Economics of Education Review, 94, 102383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2023.102383… Read the rest

Recently, Mathematica reported the results of  an evaluation study  of the Math Corps’ Tutoring Program, an evidence-based math tutoring program delivering personalized support to all students, in particular students who are Black, Latino, and/or in poverty.

During two school years (i.e., 2020–2021 and 2021–2022), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funded the rapid-cycle evaluations of a cohort of 10 tutoring providers seeking to understand how different tutoring models lead to improved academic outcomes. Mathematica worked with each one of the tutoring providers to identify the most rigorous and feasible study design within a one-to-three-month planning period. Math Corps’ quasi-experimental study used a mixed methods analysis. Their evaluation matched AmeriCorps tutors with schools to support approximately 24 students in grades 4 through 8, in pairs or groups of three, for 90 minutes each week in 30- to 45-minute, in-person sessions.

The evaluation encountered some delays in gathering data, affecting both the quality of matching between students who participated in Math Corps and the comparison group and the window to gather data. The main findings focused on growth from midyear to the end of the year and showed that (a) participating in Math Corps was associated with improvements in students’ math knowledge and positive student–tutor relationships, sense of belonging, and confidence in math; and (b) Math Corps students demonstrated moderate growth in math knowledge compared to similar students in the control group.

Source (Open Access): Robles, S., O’Connell, K., Gothro, A., & Place, K. (2023). Math Corps’ tutoring program: Math knowledge impacts and participant math perceptions. https://www.mathematica.org/publications/math-knowledge-impacts-and-math-perceptions-among-participants-in-math-corps-tutoring-program… Read the rest

A recent publication in Language Teaching Research compared the effect of a gamified collaborative intervention to non-gamified collaborative learning on students’ English reading outcomes and motivation. The participants were two classes of junior secondary students at a school in northern China. One class (N=52) was assigned to the experiment group receiving gamified instruction, while another class (N=52), the control group, received non-gamified instruction. All students were native speakers of Chinese learning English as a foreign language.

Both groups received their assigned program on learning word meaning through morphological analysis for a total of ten 55-minute sessions from the same instructor with the same materials, but only the experimental group was exposed to physical game elements.  Although both gamification and game-based learning share game-design elements, they differ in nature. Game-based learning involves the design of complete games, while gamification only employs game-design elements to make learning more game-like. In this research, game-like situations but not games were used, which does not alter the instructional contents but incorporates a gameful environment guided by rules, responsive feedback, challenging tasks, cumulative feedback (e.g., cards, badges, small gifts) and an inviting environment. In the experimental group, collaboration in gamification was achieved through students working in teams to tackle challenges and win awards.

Results of ANCOVA after controlled pretest scores are indicated below.

• There was no difference in morphological analysis scores between the experimental group and the control group (ES = +0.01)
• The gamified group significantly outperformed the non-gamified group in reading comprehension (ES = +0.33)
• The gamification approach was more effective in enhancing students’ self-reported intrinsic motivation (ES = +0.47). Two of the three components of intrinsic motivation demonstrated significant effects (relatedness, ES = +0.56; autonomy, ES = +0.48), but not perceived competence (ES = +0.20).

Due to the sample of this study including only two classes from one school, the results of the study cannot be generalized. Moreover, the results have to be interpreted with caution as no class effect was taken into consideration, for instance, the baseline scores equivalence was not mentioned in the paper.

Source: Qiao, S., Yeung, S. S., & Chu, S. K. W. (2023). Design and evaluation of non-digital gamification to support collaborative morphological analysis. Language Teaching Research, 13621688231161168. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688231161168… Read the rest