Meta-analysis methodology has evolved with the development of more robust statistical techniques; however, few reviews in special education have focused specifically on methodological rigor in meta-analyses. In this study, we examined 29 meta-analyses of mathematics interventions published from 2000 to 2022 to determine the extent to which researchers have applied four best practices in meta-analyses focused on mathematics interventions for students with disabilities. Our findings were (a) studies used three primary moderator techniques: meta-regression ( k = 10), subgroup analysis ( k = 8), analysis of variance ( k = 3), and both subgroup analysis and meta-regression ( k = 1); (b) only one study considered small sample corrections for hypothesis tests; (c) few researchers handled the dependence between multiple effect sizes ( k = 3); and (d) the funnel plot was commonly used to detect publication bias ( k = 8). Based on our findings, we make recommendations for methodological considerations for future meta-analyses.

Intelligent Tutoring Systems are a genre of highly adaptive software providing individualized instruction. The current study was a conceptual replication of a previous randomized control trial that incorporated the intelligent tutoring system Native Numbers, a program designed for early numeracy instruction. As a conceptual replication, we kept the method of instruction, the demographics, the number of kindergarten classrooms (n = 3), and the same numeracy and intrinsic motivation screeners as the original study. We changed the time of year of instruction, changed the control group to a wait-control group, added a maintenance assessment for the first group of participants, and included a mathematical language assessment. Analysis of within- and between-group differences using repeated measures ANOVA indicated gains of numeracy were significant only after using Native Numbers (Partial Eta Square = 0.147). Results of intrinsic motivation and mathematical language were not significant. The effect size of numeracy achievement did not reach that of the original study (Partial Eta Square = 0.622). Here, we compared the two studies, discussed plausible reasons for differences in the magnitude of effect sizes, and provided suggestions for future research.

An essential element for increasing student mathematics achievement is providing teachers with professional development (PD) aimed at the design and delivery of high-quality mathematics instruction. To date, however, there is a lack of consistent data on the efficacy of PD on student outcomes; moreover, there is a need to explore PD characteristics as moderators of student outcomes. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to synthesize the effects of teacher PD on mathematics outcomes for students in PreK through 12th grade. Additionally, this study explored whether specific characteristics (i.e., grade level, format, PD focus, PD days, and inclusion of students with or at risk of disabilities) served as potential moderators of the effect of PD programs. The 20 studies included in the review investigated PD intended for in-service teachers who work with a full range of learners, including students with or at risk of disabilities. The results showed that there was a positive average effect of PD on student mathematics outcomes (g = 0.34, 95% PI = [−0.47, 1.15]), with wide heterogeneity of most effects ranging from −0.20 to 5.83. In addition, the five moderators examined in this meta-analysis were not significantly correlated with the relation between PD efficacy and student mathematics outcomes. Recommendations for improving the features of PD programs as well as exploring mechanisms of change hypothesized to improve student mathematics outcomes are discussed.

The purpose of this study was to explore the differences in cognitive-behavioral attitudes and emotional connectedness toward people with disabilities (PWDs) and the attitudes toward inclusive education. In total, 309 college students from various universities in South Korea aged from 18 to 29 years (177 male and 130 female) voluntarily participated in this study. The participants were completed a set of questionnaires: Social Distance Toward Disabilities scale, Interaction with Disabled Person Scale, and Teachers’ Attitudes toward Inclusive Education Scale. Latent profile analysis (LPA) was used to model four distinct types: distant (3.56%), lukewarm (73.91%), rationalizing (8.41%), and potential proactive (14.12%). The majority of participants were lukewarm type who had a slightly cognitive-behavioral distance with mediocre empathy toward PWDs, which links to vague stands toward inclusive education. Potential proactive type, the second largest group, showed a positive attitude toward inclusive education with a high level of empathy but still had ambivalent perceptions toward PWDs. The rationalizing and distant groups had one thing in common that they had a relatively low level of empathy toward PWDs, but showed a markedly opposite position in inclusive education. The findings indicate that interventions should be tailored based on the type-specific attitudes and experiences with PWDs in public and educational settings.