Do younger children benefit more from cognitive and academic interventions? How training studies can provide insights into developmental changes in plasticity

Educational interventions are frequently designed to occur during early childhood, based on the idea that earlier intervention will have greater long-term academic benefits. However, surprisingly little is known about when cognitive and academic skills are most plastic, or malleable, during development. One way to study plasticity is to ask whether learning from targeted practice varies as a function of age. In this review, we summarize behavioral and neuroimaging studies that have tested for age-related differences in cognitive training gains, for executive functions, and for academic skills (reading and math). Findings are mixed, with no clear evidence for an overall younger age benefit. We discuss current challenges and opportunities for leveraging research on cognitive and brain plasticity to inform the timing and content of early academic interventions.

Practical Use of Single-Case Research Design to Target Improved Behavioral Outcomes for Students With SLD

Intensive academic interventions help address the learning difficulties of students with specific learning disabilities (SLDs). Challenging behaviors exhibited during instruction can have a negative impact on the overall effectiveness of an academic intervention. In addition to academic interventions, students with SLD may benefit from behavioral interventions. One method for evaluating the effect of interventions that target improved behavioral outcomes for students with SLD is single-case research designs (SCRDs). This article provides an overview of critical features of SCRD studies evaluating behavioral interventions with students with SLD or interventions with teachers of students with SLD. The article also examines how research decisions were made to support other researchers’ development of high-quality SCRD studies.

Evidence-Based Use of Cognitive Testing for Academic Interventions: A Critical Appraisal of Meta-Analytic Methodologies

Research suggests Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) are directly linked to specific neurocognitive deficits that result in unexpected learning delays in academic domains for children in schools. However, meta-analytic studies have failed to find supporting evidence for using neurocognitive tests and, consequently, have discouraged their inclusion in SLD identification policies. The current study critically reviews meta-analytic findings and the methodological validity of over 200 research studies used in previous meta-analytic studies to estimate the causal effect of neurocognitive tests on intervention outcomes. Results suggest that only a very small percentage (6–12%) of studies used in previous meta-analytic studies were methodologically valid to estimate a direct effect of cognitive tests on academic intervention outcomes, with the majority of studies having no causal link between neurocognitive tests and intervention outcomes. Additionally, significant reporting discrepancies and inaccurate effect size estimates were found that warranted legitimate concerns for conclusions and policy recommendations provided in several meta-analytic studies. Given the lack of methodological rigor linking cognitive testing to academic interventions in current research, removing neurocognitive testing from learning disability evaluations may be premature. Suggestions for future studies evaluating the impact of neurocognitive tests on intervention outcomes as well as guidelines for synthesizing meta-analytic findings are discussed.

Risk Factors and Effectiveness of Implemented Academic Interventions on Student Retention at a Hispanic-Serving Institution

We examined three large freshman cohorts from Texas State University, a Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI), to identify risk factors that might affect academic retention. Risk factors supported by empirical studies such as first-generation, ethnicity, gender, financial aid need, high school performance, and living off campus were examined. We also determined the effectiveness of four academic interventions in achieving retention of students that were on academic probation for two consecutive semesters. Statistical analyses demonstrated that being a first-generation college student and receiving financial aid were significant risks for attrition in all cohorts. Living off-campus and being an URM student were not. Retention in two cohorts was dependent on the combinations of three peer mentoring, two academic coaching, and two to three academic advising sessions. A probation predictive model was developed. Finally, we discussed the importance of examining risk factors and interventions that are tailored to each academic institution.