Effectiveness of learning strategy instruction on academic performance: A meta-analysis
Primary school (grades 1–6) Lower secondary (grades 7–9) Upper secondary Metacognition and self-regulation
Links to claims
Limits (1)
| Claim | Basis |
|---|---|
| C19 | Abstract: 58 studies, primary and secondary; strategy instruction effects g = 1.25 writing, .73 science, .66 maths, .36 reading comprehension; effects higher on researcher-made than intervention-independent tests; no difference by ability level. No follow-up or independent-test estimate in the abstract. Open access but blocked from the box. |
Review state: first-pass draft, pending human review.
Source note
Syntes: Donker et al. (2014) — learning-strategy instruction: large effects, smaller on tests not made by the researchers
Källa: Donker, A. S., de Boer, H., Kostons, D., Dignath van Ewijk, C. C. & van der Werf, M. P. C. (2014). Effectiveness of learning strategy instruction on academic performance: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review 11, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.11.002
Verified content
- [abstract] 58 studies in primary and secondary education; 95 interventions, 180 effect sizes.
- [abstract] Hedges' g by domain: writing 1.25, science .73, mathematics .66, reading comprehension .36.
- [abstract] Metacognitive knowledge instruction appeared valuable in all domains.
- [abstract] Effects were higher on self-developed (researcher-made) tests than on intervention-independent tests.
- [abstract] No differential effects for students of different ability levels.
Limits
- [assessment] Abstract only; no pooled estimate for intervention-independent tests and nothing about follow-up tests in the abstract. Covers secondary as well as primary pupils, wider than C19's grades 1–8.
Why it is in the library
C19 rests on Dignath & Büttner 2008 and de Boer et al. 2018; this is the same research group's main meta-analysis between them. It supports a gain from strategy instruction but warns that effects shrink on tests the researchers did not write — the kind of test C19's 0.3 SD bar should be judged on.
Added 2026-11-15 by the project (weekly source sweep, kind: old (major review); read: abstract). [abstract] = from the published abstract; [full text] = read in the full text; [assessment] = the project's own assessment.
Metadata as recorded
- ID
- META-021
- Tier
- meta
- Titel
- Effectiveness of learning strategy instruction on academic performance: A meta-analysis
- Författare
- Donker, A. S., de Boer, H., Kostons, D., Dignath van Ewijk, C. C. & van der Werf, M. P. C.
- År
- 2014 (Educational Research Review 11, 1–26)
- Källa/DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.11.002
- URL
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.11.002
- Typ
- meta-analysis of 58 studies (95 interventions, 180 effect sizes) of learning-strategy instruction aimed at self-regulated learning in primary and secondary education
- Åldersgrupp
- grundskola-lag, grundskola-hog, gymnasium
- Teman
- metakognition-och-sjalvreglering
- Hämtad
- 2026-11-15
- Paywall
- open access (bronze / Taverne) but blocked from the box; abstract read
- Tillagd
- source sweep 2026-11-15 (kind: old (major review)); links pending human review
The original files (PDF or abstract) are kept in the project archive and are not published here.