research question on how psychology affects learning

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

How the psychology of education contributes to research with a social impact on the education of students with special needs: the case of successful educational actions.

• 1 Department of Theory and History of Education, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
• 2 Department of Pedagogy, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain
• 3 Departament of Comparative Education and Education History, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain

One current challenge in the psychology of education is identifying the teaching strategies and learning contexts that best contribute to the learning of all students, especially those whose individual characteristics make their learning process more difficult, as is the case for students with special needs. One main theory in the psychology of education is the sociocultural approach to learning, which highlights the key role of interaction in children’s learning. In the case of students with disabilities, this interactive understanding of learning is aligned with a social model of disability, which looks beyond individual students’ limitations or potentialities and focuses on contextual aspects that can enhance their learning experience and results. In recent years, the interactive view of learning based on this theory has led to the development of educational actions, such as interactive groups and dialogic literary gatherings, that have improved the learning results of diverse children, including those with disabilities. The aim of this paper is to analyze the social impact achieved by a line of research that has explored the benefits of such successful educational actions for the education of students with special needs. National and European research projects based on the communicative methodology of research have been conducted. This methodology entails drawing on egalitarian dialogue with the end-users of research – including teachers, students with and without disabilities, students’ relatives and other community members – to allow an intersubjective creation of knowledge that enables a deeper and more accurate understanding of the studied reality and its transformative potential. This line of research first allowed the identification of the benefits of interactive learning environments for students with disabilities educated in mainstream schools; later, it allowed the spreading of these actions to a greater number of mainstream schools; and more recently, it made it possible to transfer these actions to special schools and use these actions to create shared learning spaces between mainstream and special schools. The improvement of the educational opportunities for a greater number and greater diversity of students with special needs evidences the social impact of research based on key contributions of the psychology of education.

Introduction

Access to mainstream, inclusive and quality education for children with disabilities has not yet been fully achieved. Children with disabilities are still being educated in special schools in most countries, with varying percentages depending on the country, and therefore these schools attend diverse special needs ( World Health Organization, 2011 ). In addition, students with disabilities and special needs tend to leave school without adequate qualifications ( European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2017 ). Therefore, the appropriate inclusion of children with disabilities into the general education system is part of the European Disability Strategy 2010–2020 ( European Commission, 2010 ). In this context, one current challenge of the psychology of education is to identify the teaching strategies and learning contexts that best contribute to the education of students with special needs. In this endeavor, research in the psychology of education is focused on the strategies, actions and practices that enhance the learning of these students, taking into account their individual characteristics, however, importantly, research is also focused on the strategies, actions and programs that benefit the learning of all students, including those whose individual characteristics make the learning process more difficult, so that shared learning environments that promote successful learning for all can be created.

Instrumental learning, especially in regards to difficulties in reading and literacy, is one of the main concerns of research on the psychology of education ( Lloyd et al., 2009 ; Alanazi, 2017 ; Alenizi, 2019 ; Auphan et al., 2019 ; Hughes et al., 2018 ). Numerous programs for improving reading and/or reading difficulty prevention have emerged from research on reading and literacy from the perspective of the psychology of education, and their impact on improving children’s learning has been analyzed ( Vellutino and Scanlon, 2002 ; Papadopoulos et al., 2004 ; Hatcher et al., 2006 ). There are also specific studies about reading and literacy programs and their success with students with special needs ( Holliman and Hurry, 2013 ) and/or with students at risk for reading disabilities ( Lovett et al., 2017 ). Strategies to promote the learning of mathematics in children with special educational needs and disabilities have also been studied ( Pitchford et al., 2018 ), and programs based on these strategies have been developed ( Montague et al., 2014 ).

Research has also explored the association between learning difficulties and behavior problems ( Roberts et al., 2019 ), showing that lower academic achievement is a risk factor for developing behavior difficulties among students with special educational needs and disabilities ( Oldfield et al., 2017 ). The study of the learning context and the school environment, which facilitates or hinders learning, has shown that the expectations from teachers and their attitudes toward children with special needs are some of the most influential elements ( Anderson et al., 2014 ; Wilson et al., 2016 ; Bowles et al., 2018 ). Research has also found that teachers can have an important influence on the social acceptance of peers with special needs ( Schwab et al., 2016 ), which is important because the social exclusion of children can affect their learning difficulties and behavior problems ( Krull et al., 2018 ). The efficacy of peer network interventions for improving the social connections of students with severe disabilities has been highlighted ( Asmus et al., 2017 ), and programs and educational actions based on peer interaction, such as cooperative learning ( Velázquez Callado, 2012 ), have been developed to improve the school climate. Importantly, there are effective programs for improving peer acceptance and a positive coexistence related to curricular learning ( Law et al., 2017 ; Vuorinen et al., 2019 ), which is a key issue in facilitating inclusive education.

This body of research on effective actions and programs to enhance the learning and inclusion of students with disabilities and special needs shows the capacity that research in the psychology of education has for improving the education of these students. It also shows the importance that the learning context has, regarding both instruction and social relations, on the academic and social performance of students with special needs. This resonates with the social model of disability, an approach that has been claimed, from the perspective of human rights, to shift the focus from non-disabled centrism and to transcend the traditional and individualistic perspective of disabilities to focus on the improvement of educational experiences for these students ( Chun Sik Min, 2010 ; Park, 2015 ). This perspective assumes not only that children with disabilities should be included in mainstream education but also that inclusive education can be more effective ( Lindsay, 2007 ). This interactive understanding of learning allows seeing beyond individual students’ limitations or potentialities and focusing on contextual aspects that can enhance their learning experience and results ( Goodley, 2001 ; Haegele and Hodge, 2016 ).

The classical psychology of education already emphasized the importance of the social context for children’s learning. In particular, the sociocultural approach of learning developed by Vygotsky and Bruner highlighted the key role of interaction in children’s learning and development. Both authors agreed that what a child learns has been shared with other persons first, emphasizing the social construction of knowledge. While Vygotsky (1980) stated that in children’s development, higher psychological functions appear first on the interpsychological level and then on the intrapsychological level, Bruner (1996) refers to a social moment where there is interaction and then an individual moment when interiorization occurs.

Bruner evolved from a more cognitivist perspective of learning centered on individuals’ information processing ( Bruner, 1973 ) to a more sociocultural and interactive perspective ( Bruner, 1996 ) within the framework of which he conceptualized the idea of “scaffolding,” which enables novice learning in interaction with an expert, and “subcommunities of mutual learners,” where “learners help each other learn” and “scaffold for each other” ( Bruner, 1996 , p. 21). For Bruner, “It is principally through interacting with others that children find out what the culture is about and how it conceives of the world” (1996, p. 20); therefore, learning occurs through interaction within a community.

Vygotsky stated that learning precedes development, not the other way around, and he conceptualized the zone of proximal development (ZPD), which represents the opportunity that learning interactions with adults and more capable peers have to advance children’s development ( Vygotsky, 1980 ); beyond the actual level of development, the ZPD emphasizes the importance of interactions with others to solve problems and learn. He emphasized that this interaction is especially important for children with disabilities: “Precisely because retarded children, when left to themselves, will never achieve well elaborated forms of abstract thought, the school should make every effort to push them in that direction and to develop in them what is intrinsically lacking in their own development” ( Vygotsky, 1980 , p. 89). In this regard, he warned of the risks of working with children with disabilities from a perspective centered on biological processes and basic dysfunctions instead of working with higher psychological functions ( Vygotsky, 2018 ). Vygotsky’s focus on interaction provides new opportunities for learning and development for children with special needs to develop these higher psychological processes.

The sociocultural approach of learning developed by Vygotsky and Bruner has continued inspiring theory and research in the psychology of education to today. According to Dainez and Smolka (2014) , Vygotsky’s concept of compensation in relation to children with disabilities implies a social formation of mind and therefore the social responsibility of organizing an appropriate educational environment for these children. Vygotsky’s approach has been taken into account in studies about how peer mediation increases learning, especially when peers have different cognitive levels ( Tzuriel and Shamir, 2007 ), and research on children with disabilities, for instance, cerebral palsy, has been conducted based on Vygotsky’s contributions and showed improvements in these children’s spatial abilities, social interaction, autonomy, and participation in class activities ( Akhutina et al., 2003 ; Heidrich and Bassani, 2012 ).

In recent years, the interactive view of learning has led to the development of educational actions that have improved the learning results of diverse children, including those with disabilities. INCLUD-ED ( Flecha, 2006-2011 ) was an integrated project funded by the European Union under its 6th Framework Programme with the main objective of achieving both academic success and social cohesion for all children and communities in Europe, regardless of their socioeconomic status and/or ethnic background. INCLUD-ED identified successful educational actions (SEAs), that is, actions that can improve school success and contribute to social cohesion in every context where they are implemented ( Flecha, 2015 ). Some of the SEAs that have demonstrated improvements in reading, mathematics and peer relationships include interactive groups (IG) and dialogic literary gatherings (DLG). IG ( Valls and Kyriakides, 2013 ) consists of organizing classrooms in small heterogeneous groups that work on instrumental learning activities drawing on mutual support and dynamized by adult volunteers from the community; DLG ( Soler, 2015 ; Lopez de Aguileta, 2019 ) consists of reading and discussing classical works of literature based on the principles of dialogic learning, reaching deeper understanding of the texts as a result of sharing the participants’ interpretations and meanings. In both actions, learning interactions, as the main tool to promote learning, are facilitated among diverse persons in accordance with the contributions of the sociocultural theory of learning. In this regard, previous research has identified that Vygotsky’s and Bruner’s contributions are at the basis of these SEAs ( Elboj and Niemelä, 2010 ; Garcia et al., 2010 ).

Materials and Methods

The objective of this paper is to analyze the social impact achieved by a line of research that has explored the benefits of SEAs on the improvement of the education of students with special needs. For this purpose, the following data collection methods were used. First, existing data from case studies conducted within the four projects that compose this line of research have been analyzed to identify the impact of SEAs on students with special needs. These projects studied the benefits of SEAs for diverse students at different specific levels (i.e., school and classroom organization, community participation, interactions). In this paper, we aim to go beyond these specific aspects to understand in a more integrated and comprehensive manner how these different levels contribute to the impact that SEAs have, specifically on students with special needs. Second, new data were collected through in-depth interviews with teachers involved in the implementation of these actions in their schools as a consequence of this line of research. These interviews allowed the analysis of the subsequent impacts achieved as a result of conducting research on this topic from the perspective of the agents involved in the implementation of the results of this line of research.

All participants (teachers, volunteers, families, and children) agreed to provide researchers access to relevant data for the purpose of the study. Prior to data collection, they were informed of the nature of the research, and written informed consent was obtained. In the case of minors, informed consent was obtained from their parents or guardians. All participants were informed that their participation was anonymous and voluntary and that data would be treated confidentially and used solely for research purposes. Ethical requirements were addressed following the Ethics Review Procedure established by the European Commission (2013) for EU research, the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2000/C 364/01). The study was fully approved by the Ethics Board of the Community of Researchers on Excellence for All (CREA) 1 .

Case Studies

The line of research that we analyze in terms of social impact is composed of four national and European research projects in which the authors have participated in the last 15 years. In these projects, a total of 36 case studies were conducted. Of these cases, 10 included data on the participation of students with special needs in SEAs (see Table 1 ), and these were analyzed for the purposes of this paper. These cases fulfilled two criteria: (1) the schools were implementing SEAs and (2) students with special needs participated in SEAs with their classmates. Overall, 60 data collection techniques were used in the 10 case studies. These included 36 interviews, 14 with class teachers (3 of them were also special education teachers), 4 with special education teachers, 3 with volunteers, 8 with students, and 7 with students’ relatives; 13 focus groups, 5 with teachers, 8 with students, and 1 with students’ relatives; and 10 observations, 9 in classrooms and 1 in a teachers’ meeting (see more details in Table 1 ).

Table 1. Summary of the data collection instruments and participants in the project case studies.

The different projects focused on different aspects of the SEAs and therefore entailed different layers of analysis throughout this line of research, which has allowed a comprehensive view of the benefits of SEAs for diverse students and specifically for students with special needs.

The doctoral project funded by the Catalan Government ( Molina, 2003-2007 ) was the first research to specifically focus on the inclusion of students with special needs in SEAs, and particularly analyzed the type of classroom interactions that facilitate students’ inclusion when classrooms are organized in IG. The project’s main objective was to analyze the influence that students’ participation in IG has on their educational inclusion. The main categories of analysis were peer interactions and community participation as components of IG and learning , participation and social inclusion as components of educational inclusion.

INCLUD-ED ( Flecha, 2006-2011 ) aimed to identify educational actions that contributed to overcoming segregation and promoted the inclusion of all students in schools across Europe, with a special focus on vulnerable groups of students. INCLUD-ED clarified the distinction between mixture, streaming and inclusion ( INCLUD-ED Consortium, 2009 ) as different ways of organizing student diversity and human resources with different consequences on students; distinguished different forms of family and community participation; identified educative, decisive, and evaluative forms of participation as those that had more impact on students’ success; and identified successful educational actions. The contribution of this project to this line of research was an analysis of SEAs at the level of school organization, resource management and community engagement. The main objective of the case studies within this project was to analyze components from educational practices that decrease the rates of school failure and those of the practices that increase them. The main categories of analysis were inclusive practices and community participation .

MIXSTRIN ( Valls, 2008-2011 ), as a continuation of the INCLUD-ED research in the Spanish context, deepened the analysis of the different forms and consequences of mixture, streaming and inclusion from a mixed methods approach. Thus, this project focused on analyzing SEAs at the level of classroom organization. The main objective of the case studies was to identify how different ways of grouping students are related to students’ learning results. The main categories of analysis were practices of mixture, streaming , and inclusion .

Finally, INTER-ACT ( Garcia-Carrion, 2018-2020 ) analyzes how SEAs are being implemented with students with disabilities in both mainstream schools and special schools, with the aim of transferring these actions and their benefits to new schools. The project’s focus of analysis is the interactions that occur in IG and DLG in both types of schools. The main objective of the case study conducted was to analyze in depth successful cases of schools implementing IG and DLG with students with disabilities to identify the best conditions for increasing the impact on the improvement of learning, development and relationships. The main categories of analysis were characteristics of the interactive learning environment and improvements achieved.

Within the different research projects, using the case study as a methodological approach has allowed understanding the reality of the object of study in context. Following Stake (2006) , case studies were selected based on what information they could provide about the issue explored, in this case, the increase in the educational quality provided to students in SEAs, especially to those with special needs. In this regard, case studies were instrumental in providing insight into this issue. As a sum of individual research projects, the line of research presented here constitutes multicase research ( Stake, 2006 ), where cases share similarities – e.g., data collection techniques, the population object of study and purpose – and allow understanding from the singularity of each case of the broader phenomenon that all of them are part of.

In-Depth Interviews

Five interviews were conducted with teachers who fulfilled two criteria: (1) they were implementing SEAs with their students, including students with special needs, and (2) they had started to implement these actions as a consequence of the research line on SEAs and special needs, that is, after becoming aware of the evidence obtained on the benefits of SEAs for these students. Two of the interviewees were teachers at one school where one of the case studies was conducted while the other interviews were not related to the case studies. The interviews were conducted by one of the researchers at the end of the 2018–2019 school year, and at that time, the participants had been implementing SEAs for a period of 4–6 years (see Table 2 ). The interviews lasted between 20 and 55 min and were conducted at times and in places that were convenient for the participants. We introduced the interviews as follows: “In the last 15 years, a line of research has been conducted on the educational inclusion of students with special needs through SEAs. We are interested in gathering information on the social impact of this line of research.” Sample questions were as follows: “Can you identify some of those impacts (e.g., improvements in the learning of students with special needs or improvements in the schools’ approach to responding to students’ diversity)?”; “How has the line of research led/contributed to such impacts?”; “Have these impacts been transferred to different contexts or students with different characteristics?”; and “Have the impacts been sustained over time?” All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim for subsequent analysis.

Table 2. Profiles of the participants in the in-depth interviews.

Communicative Methodology

This line of research has been conducted based on the communicative methodology ( Gómez et al., 2011 ). The data collection and analysis of the social impact achieved has also been conducted based on this methodology. The communicative methodology entails drawing on egalitarian dialogue with the end-users of the research – including teachers, students with and without disabilities, students’ relatives and other community members – to allow an intersubjective creation of knowledge that enables a deeper and more accurate understanding of the studied reality and its transformative potential ( Gómez et al., 2012 ), therefore enabling greater social impact. Different studies have demonstrated the suitability of this methodology when researching vulnerable groups ( Puigvert et al., 2012 ; Gómez et al., 2019 ), as well as the social impact that this methodology produces.

Following the communicative methodology, in this line of research, data collection techniques were aimed not only at gathering the individuals’ experiences and perceptions but also to discussing these experiences and perceptions with them in light of previous scientific knowledge on the issue and with the purpose of identifying both the exclusionary and transformative components of the reality studied. While exclusionary components refer to the barriers encountered by certain persons or collectives, for instance, educational barriers encountered by persons with disabilities, transformative components are those elements that contribute to overcoming these barriers, for instance, certain types of classroom organization or learning interactions. The objective of the dialogues held with end-users and other stakeholders in the research process is to agree upon these exclusionary and transformative components, which strengthens the validity of the research results and its potential social impact.

Data Analysis

For this paper, the different case studies have been analyzed together to understand in an integrated manner how the different layers analyzed previously (school and classroom organization, community participation, interactions) contribute to the social impact of the implementation of SEAs with students with special needs. For this purpose, the existing data of the case studies were analyzed with a new set of categories that was created to examine this social impact. Taking into account that the main challenges in the education of children with special needs are their limited participation in normalized learning environments ( World Health Organization, 2011 ), their lower educational levels achieved ( European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2017 ) and their higher risk of being socially marginalized and bullied ( UNESCO, 2017 ), the improvements in these domains constitute the social impact of the educational intervention aimed at students with special needs; therefore, the following were the basis for creating the categories for the analysis of the social impact of SEAs:

(1) Impact on students’ participation: characteristics of the successful educational actions that enable the participation of students with special needs.

(2) Impact on the cognitive dimension: improvements achieved in instrumental learning and cognitive development.

(3) Impact on the socioemotional dimension: improvements achieved in social cohesion and emotional/affective development.

The newly conducted interviews on the social impact of the line of research were analyzed with categories that take into account the social impact criteria identified by IMPACT-EV (European Commission FP7, 2014-2017) and used in SIOR ( Flecha et al., 2015 ) regarding improvements, sustainability and transference. The fourth category emerged inductively from the data:

(1) Impact on students with special needs: improvements and sustainability,

(2) Impact on schools: improvements and sustainability,

(3) Transference to new contexts, and

(4) Factors supporting social impact.

The themes present in the transcripts were coded by the researchers on a line-by-line basis. A deductive, flexible approach was used for the coding to identify subthemes within the categories. Categories of analysis were applied to the transcripts by two independent coders to enhance the validity of the results. Consensus for the coding was achieved through discussion.

In the following, the social impact of the line of research is presented, which includes evidence on the benefits of SEAs for students with special needs and how such SEAs led to a new social impact on different schools, students, teachers and contexts. Three types of social impact are presented: (1) impact on students with special needs and their opportunities to participate, learn and have positive relationships in SEAs; (2) impact on schools’ and teachers’ approaches to meeting students’ special needs; and (3) the replicability of SEAs to new types of educational contexts and student populations. The factors that have enabled the achievement of these impacts are also reported.

Social Impact 1: Enhanced Participation, Learning Opportunities, and Group Cohesion for Students With Special Needs in Successful Educational Actions

The social impact of seas.

Previous analyses of the case studies showed that SEAs entail a more efficient organization of classrooms and schools, allowing a more inclusive education for a diverse student body, including students with special needs, who can benefit from enhanced access to the content of the general curriculum in a shared learning environment ( Christou and Molina, 2009 ; Molina and Ríos, 2010 ). A key feature of the inclusive learning environments promoted in the SEAs is the diverse interactions promoted around learning among, on the one hand, students, as they are organized in heterogeneous groups and, on the other hand, relatives and other members of the community, who are welcome to participate in the students’ learning activities. These interactions are key components of the SEAs that have created new learning opportunities for students with special needs in mainstream schools and, more recently, in special schools ( García-Carrión et al., 2016 , 2018 ).

The analysis of the social impact of SEAs on students with special needs shows positive impacts in terms of the participation, learning and social inclusion of these students. Regarding student participation, the supportive peer interactions promoted within the SEAs and the participation of volunteers from the community, who ensured that these supportive interactions were implemented and provided assistance themselves when necessary, facilitated normalized and active participation in learning activities and natural support within the student group, which progressively made specific, individualized support less necessary ( Molina, 2003-2007 ). For this to occur, the case studies showed the importance of the activities that students worked on in the IG being the same for all of them and of students with special needs not being given different activities in any case. The same occurred with DLG: all students participating in the gathering read the same book. The analysis showed that this was important because both IG and DLG work based on interactions and, if one student was given an activity or a book that was different than that of the other students, interaction of this student with the group would be easily broken. In some cases, adaptations were made regarding the way students accessed the material, interacted with it or produced an output or regarding the level of complexity required. However, the learning content was always the same to allow the maximum benefit from interaction and the highest possible level of attainment. Across the case studies, teachers reported that supportive interactions within heterogeneous groups in successful educational actions had been more effective than differentiated individual attention separated from the class, even in the cases when additional human resources were used. Therefore, SEAs have prevented reducing learning opportunities related to the segregation and individualization of educational measures often aimed at these students ( Valls, 2008-2011 ; Flecha, 2015 ).

In terms of learning and cognitive development, the possibility of asking questions when necessary and constantly seeing and listening to peers working on the activity and talking about it helped students with special needs stay connected to the activity, understand it and do it ( Molina, 2003-2007 ; Valls, 2008-2011 ). Learning progress was more evident in instrumental learning subjects (literacy, math), which are prioritized in IG and DLG. Specifically, due to the interactive and dialogical nature of both IG and DLG, communicative ability is one learning and development area in which students show a clear improvement. In this regard, for these children, DLG have meant the opportunity to broaden their vocabulary and gain a better understanding of the language structure, as they are able to listen more proficient children and adults, who also model language and help the students with special needs express themselves better ( Garcia-Carrion, 2018-2020 ).

Regarding the social impact of SEAs on the social inclusion of students with special needs and group cohesion, it was observed that the participation of these students in regular class activities that IG and DLG facilitated contributed to considering these students as “one of the class” and not a “part-time student” who only shares part of their time and activities with their classmates. Beyond participation, SEAs gave students opportunities to interact with their peers and therefore to come to know better each other, ultimately building new friendships. Peer support and friendship that were learned in IG and DLG often extended beyond the class and beyond the context of school, creating new opportunities for both cognitive and social development, for instance, when students with special needs had the opportunity to share their doubts with their classmates when doing homework via telephone or social networks or to meet them at birthday parties ( Valls, 2008-2011 ; Garcia-Carrion, 2018-2020 ).

Extending Improvements to More Schools and Students

The case studies showed ways in which the education of students with special needs improved in SEAs, as well as key components of these actions that explained the results. Both findings were crucial to extend these actions and their benefits to more children with special needs and thus for the social impact of the research.

The first time that primary schools were transformed into learning communities and implemented SEAs was in 1995 in Spain. There were five schools at that time. Ten years later, in 2005, there were 22 schools. After 10 more years, in 2015, the number reached 120 schools in different countries ( Flecha, 2015 ). Today, 225 schools in Spain 2 , 49 schools in other European countries 3 , and 411 schools in Latin America 4 , each with diverse populations, have become learning communities through the application of successful educational actions. These data show that the INCLUD-ED project (2006–2011) was a turning point in the spread of SEAs in schools. The spread of the project also meant that these actions could reach more diverse students with special needs. The applicability of the SEAs with these students was usually a topic of debate among the teachers that incorporated these actions in their schools. When the knowledge of the evidence provided by the line of research reached the new schools, both teachers and the rest of community became more confident when including students with disabilities in IG, DLG, and other shared learning activities in the school. The different teachers interviewed explained that the implementation of SEAs in their schools has increased over time and so has the participation of students with special needs, which reaches 100% in some cases. As one teacher explained, the participation in SEAs prevents the need for individual support outside the classroom: “Out of all the classes, there is not any child that gets out of the classroom [to receive individual support] when they work on SEAs” (Sandra). The implementation of SEAs with students with special needs – as well as with the general population of students – has not only been sustained but has increased, as, for teachers, it is an efficient way to respond to these – and other – students’ needs:

In the school, almost all students with special needs participate in SEAs (.) From my experience I can tell you that I used to do an SEA session per week, then I did two, this year I have done three, and now I cannot imagine less than three, every time I need to do it more and more. (Carmen)

The benefits observed by research in the case studies then started to spread to more children in other schools. Two examples can illustrate these improvements. First, the case of a child with a severe neurological deficit, for whom participating in SEAs made it possible to transform the expectations that were imposed on his learning possibilities:

The neurologist said that he could not learn almost anything. literacy and all the learning, they saw it as impossible. but he has learnt to read (…) if we hadn’t known about it, that evidence about interactions… Last year we did 6 sessions [of IG] per week, plus DLG, we did as much as we could, and it is amazing what he has learnt. (Sandra)

Research has already shown that being able to participate and learn in IG and DLG changes the self-concept and learning expectations of the children with special needs as well as the concept and expectations their peers and adults have of them. In these interactive learning environments, students were often able to solve tasks that they could not solve alone or read books that could not read alone, going beyond teachers’ and families’ expectations for their learning ( Flecha, 2015 ). When SEAs reached new schools and students, these higher expectations, which create new learning opportunities, were created there too.

The second example is of a child with Down syndrome who could benefit from a more normalized learning environment where he could make progress in both learning and group belonging; this shows how the benefits that research had identified in group cohesion were replicated in other cases like this:

We had another child with a disability who was very isolated from the group, he did not have an emotional bond either, and the attention he received was too individualized; with the special education teacher, the speech therapist, he did not feel he belonged to the group. And when we started implementing SEAs, work in IG, DLG, the group changed very much, (…) and the child, who had Down syndrome, started to belong to the group: worked on the same activities as the others, and the others counted on that child. It was a huge change. (…) We achieved a lot of things. (Carmen)

Both teachers, Sandra and Carmen, clearly attributed the improvements observed to the students’ participation in IG and DLG. In some cases, looking for the participation of these children in SEAs has made teachers look for adaptations that enabled their participation. This was the case for a child in Irene’s school. He had not developed oral language, which made it difficult to participate in DLG, but the teachers adapted the book to pictograms and facilitated him in using a tablet with the pictograms and synthesized voice software installed so that he could communicate in the group. This had several impacts: first, the child could follow the reading, think of an idea to share and structure the idea; second, he could share the idea with the group and contribute to the gathering; third, the other children could realize that their classmate wanted and was able to communicate with the others, and even “heard his voice” for the first time; fourth: new opportunities for communication and the sharing of knowledge, experiences and thoughts appeared in the group. These changes did not occur until the teachers considered how they could improve the child’s participation in DLG, so it was the SEA that encouraged teachers to mobilize the resources that enabled the child’s participation and made these changes possible.

Importantly, the improvements achieved have been sustained and even increased through time as the implementation of SEAs also increased. Awareness of improvements has spread in their communities and that has led, in some cases, to an increased demand to enroll students with special needs in these schools, as Sandra explains in the quote below; this is another way in which the participation and learning opportunities of students with special needs in SEAs have been enhanced:

More families are coming with children with special needs that attended other schools. (…) Here, in the town, all the families know each other. (…) They talk and explain their experiences… and therefore many are requesting a change of school. (Sandra)

Social Impact 2: Transforming Schools’ Approaches to Meeting Students’ Diversity in Terms of Special Needs

The education of students with special needs has changed not only because of increased opportunities to participate in SEAs but also because the dialogic, interactive and transformative approach behind the SEAs has been assumed by the teachers and the entire community to change the way they approach the education of these students at every moment – within and outside SEAs – now being more dialogic, interactive and transformative as well.

Before implementing SEAs, schools tended to respond to students’ special needs through individual attention, often outside the classroom and based on low expectations; they understood the students’ disabilities as an indicator of what the students could achieve. The participation of students with special needs in SEAs has meant a turning point in the schools’ approach to diversity.

A Focus on Interactions to Enhance Students’ Learning Opportunities

Knowing SEAs and their scientific and theoretical bases, especially the relevance of interactions for learning, has meant that teachers who have incorporated SEAs in their schools focus on the interactions they promote. In mainstream schools, the more diverse and rich interactions students found in SEAs was an element that convinced teachers to include the participation of students with special needs and to do the necessary material adaptations to allow that interaction. They could observe improvements in typically developing children, both in learning and coexistence, as a consequence of participating in SEAs, which also encouraged them to include students with special needs and extend these benefits to them, overcoming previous ideas about special education, as Irene explained:

We were intoxicated with the idea that [mainstream] students make progress, but those with special needs need different things, need that we adapt to their learning level… But we have advanced in inclusion as we have been implementing SEAs, because we realized that children with special needs can participate too, and interactions with peers are positive for them to progress, besides self-esteem, seeing they are capable, and that they can improve. (Irene)

In the context of special schools, interactions are also a topic of discussion now, which helps teachers focus on providing their students with the best learning environment possible. For the professionals working there, this has meant an opportunity to give their students richer learning opportunities within their segregated placement:

In our school program, we include what the students will learn, but we also consider and talk very much about the interactions they will have, which is a topic we had never discussed before knowing about SEAs. We focus on the type of interactions they have, if they are quality interactions, if they can have more quality, how we can promote them through SEAs, IG, DLG… (Marta)

Evidence, the SEAs, which explain what is best for our students, give us confidence in our work. We know our way to advance in giving the best results to our students. Therefore, we think of interactions; since they are segregated, we consider which type of interactions we should offer to them. (Ana)

Development of Scientific Thinking About Education

Another consequence of being aware of the benefits of SEAs for students with special needs, as demonstrated by research, has been the development of a more scientific way of thinking among the teaching staff. The teachers interviewed, as well as other teachers in their schools, read scientific publications emerging from or related to this line of research and discussed them in dialogic pedagogical gatherings. This helped them become familiar with research and scientific evidence, and they now look for this evidence when they must make decisions on their students’ education:

Now we say: “But is there evidence for it? Let’s see who has written about that” (…) for instance, when we are working on autism, [we want to know] if what we implement is based on scientific evidence or not, and what the most recent research about autism says. It has emerged from having implemented evidence and talking about evidence. (Marta)

Once the teachers learned that there is scientific evidence behind the success achieved by SEAs, they looked for evidence-based actions, practices or programs in any aspect of their professional activity, which increased their chances of enhancing students’ education, not only when the students participate in SEAs but at any moment they are at school. SEA participation therefore increases the potential social impact that other research in education and psychology of education can have, as these teachers look for the evidence of previous improvements achieved and reported by this research to transfer them to their own context and achieve similar improvements.

Changing Teachers’ Minds and Talk About Students With Special Needs

In relation to the scientific view of education, teachers have changed the way they think and talk about their students, focusing not on the students’ disabilities but on what the teachers can do to transform the educational context and improve the education of such students. These teachers do not ask whether students with special needs can participate in SEAs; they start from the premise they can, and they think on the way they can facilitate their students’ participation through, for instance, necessary adaptations. These teachers believe that this way of thinking about their students has made them improve as teachers, as their professional performance is permeated by language of possibilities:

We realize that we have a different approach, I mean, [we think about] how are we going to include these students or how are we going to promote interactions with them. And we did not have this perspective before. As a school, having had scientific evidence within reach made us improve our teaching practice, reconsider many things, and find meaning. (Marta)

At the personal level, we have improved our dialogues about what is best for our students. We are advancing in this direction, always putting the focus on the students, on what we will achieve, on the fact that this is the best for them. (Ana)

Rethinking and Reorganizing Specialized Support Within and Beyond SEAs

Implementing SEAs with students with special needs entailed rethinking the role of special education teachers, speech therapists and other specialized support. While these professionals used to work outside the class to provide individualized support to students with special needs, usually based on different curricular material of lower academic level, when SEAs started to be implemented, teachers agreed with these specialists that students with special needs would not leave the classroom. Instead, these professionals started to enter the classroom to support students in IG. When the class was not organized in IG, teachers kept the criteria of organizing heterogeneous groups of students to facilitate the inclusion of students with special needs, and specialists also provided support there. Speech therapists, who, in some cases, were more reluctant to change their role into a more inclusive role, also agreed to participate in SEAs by preparing activities for IG or supporting students in DLG.

One of the first things we were clear about was that these students would not leave the classroom and would be distributed within the classroom in heterogeneous groups, and at the same time, we started working in IG and DLG. (…) In my school, all of them used to leave the classroom and had different curricular materials. Objectives were set with very low expectations, low academic objectives, and then we engaged in debates and there were several changes. (…) On the one hand, the role of the speech therapist changed, and this was difficult to achieve because they felt they had lost their identity, their role, (…) but now we work and plan children’s learning together. (Sandra)

In some cases, reading and discussing research publications, such as INCLUD-ED results ( INCLUD-ED Consortium, 2009 ), helped in organizing students and supporting them in a more inclusive way when working in SEAs and beyond, which supported the decision to maintain students with special needs in the class when SEAs were implemented:

Little by little, we saw that all students improved, and we started to do pedagogic gatherings. For instance, I remember that we discussed INCLUD-ED “Actions for success in schools in Europe,” and we emphasized the topic of groupings with the teaching staff because the special education teachers had the idea that they had to take the students with special needs out of the classroom. So, we agreed that when we worked in SEAs, these students would stay in the classroom so that they could participate in the same activities as everyone else. (Ines)

Higher Expectations and Enhanced Learning: Teachers Recovering Meaning in Their Profession

Being aware of SEAs and the improvements promoted and having the opportunity to discuss them and implement them in their school facilitated teachers’ enhanced belief about their students’ potential and, at the same time, gave them the tools to make that potential real; as teachers’ expectations were raised, students’ performances also raised and even surpassing these expectations. This has had an impact on students but also teachers, as some of the teachers reported rediscovering meaning in their profession as a result of being better able to facilitate the learning of students with more difficulties:

I think that the teachers who implement SEAs with our students have found more meaning in teaching, because we see that they learn. We have had high expectations, and even with these high expectations, many times, they have surprised us. We’ve said “I never imagined it could but it happened”, even if we always had high expectations. Sometimes, unintentionally, working with disabilities, we think, “well, we have high expectations, but we will get there one day”, and we are already there. (Marta)

The higher expectations and the possibilities enabled by them has meant a shift, especially in the context of special education, where low expectations and low educational levels predominate, as Ana reflected:

I think that in special schools we can easily find the “happiness curriculum”, that is to say, “poor kids, they have enough with their disability, instead of trying to learn more [let’s make them happier]”. I have worked in several special schools, and I always found colleagues with this attitude. Then, I think that implementing SEAs, and now with the line of research, I think we have realized that we have to change our minds, through dialogue: Why expect less? Let’s go for high expectations, for the best of each student, and see what we can achieve. I think it has been something that has spread in the school, as a result of starting to work in this way with students and other colleagues seeing the results. (Ana)

Importantly, the higher expectations supported by the previous evidence of improvement achieved through SEAs have made it possible for teachers to take on challenges that they would not have taken on before. For instance, Carmen explained that once she learned about the SEAs and their impact at a conference, she decided to implement these actions with the most challenging group at her school. The groups with most challenging students are often those that teachers do not choose to work with and are assigned to the least experienced teachers or those who arrived most recently at the school; however, SEAs make teachers more confident in their ability to improve these students’ educations and, as occurred in the case of Carmen, make them wish to teach precisely the most difficult groups because they know they can make a difference in the education of those students:

I could not understand how it was possible to respond to the diversity we had in the classrooms. I remember that when I arrived at the school I couldn’t, I was overwhelmed, and I remember going at the international conference and seeing it crystal clear. I saw it so clear that I remember we had a class in the school with much diversity, a very special group, and I went to the principal’s office and said, “I need to take this group and implement what I know, what the evidence says that works, to ascertain that it works, and to transform this group”. (…) And the change was amazing. (…) Now I cannot see it in any other way, because now, I feel that any challenge I face, I will succeed. And now, I feel very much like taking the group most in need, the most vulnerable one. For me, it has been awesome working like this. (Carmen)

Social Impact 3: From Mainstream to Special Education Settings: The Transference of SEAs

The expansion of SEAs to new schools has entailed SEAs reaching new educational contexts, some of which are specific contexts in special education. Reaching these new contexts has entailed the opportunity for more inclusive, quality education.

SEAs as a Way to Include Students Segregated in Special Education Classes in the Mainstream Class

As the teachers reported, the inclusion of all students with special needs in SEAs has sometimes been a process, especially when the school serves students with severe disabilities, which directly affects areas of curricular learning. Irene’s school contains a specific classroom for students with language and communication disorders (a communication and language classroom) related to the autism spectrum disorder, which serves students from different municipalities. These students have little or no development of oral language, which makes it difficult for them to participate in actions such as IG and DLG, as such methods are based on dialogue and interaction. Teachers relied from the beginning on research evidence for including in SEAs other students with special needs who attended the mainstream classes. Subsequently, guided by the evidence of the improvements achieved with these students in the school, the students from the communication and language classroom also started to be included in the SEAs.

The students of mainstream classrooms started to participate first. (…) At the beginning, the students with autism, who had many difficulties, who could not speak, did not participate in SEAs; we had not thought about that yet. (…) We still had to break with the idea that we had to teach students with special needs outside the classroom. Then, when we started to include them in the classroom, especially by participating in SEAs, and we saw that the students with difficulties – but who could speak – improved, then we said, “And the other students? The most difficult ones? Let’s see if it is possible”. And it is possible. (Irene)

In this case, the teacher highlighted the importance of adapting some aspects of the development of the activity to facilitate the progressive participation of these students. In the case of students with autism and little language development, the readings for the DLG were prepared with pictograms so that the children could follow the story and express themselves. The teachers prepared the reading and the contribution for the gathering with their families ahead of time. In IG, the students started participating in only one activity, with additional support if necessary, and progressively participated in two or more activities of the IG session.

IG and DLG have made the participation of students who previously shared little learning time with their peers possible in the mainstream classroom, which means that SEAs have had an impact on their educational inclusion and learning opportunities. Furthermore, some of these students have left the communication and language classroom and are now enrolled full time in the mainstream classroom. SEAs have helped to make the possibilities for these students to learn in mainstream inclusive settings more visible and, as a consequence, some students have left open places in the communication and language classroom that can be occupied by students who are now attending special schools. Therefore, in this case, SEAs not only promote the inclusion of students within that school but also open possibilities for more inclusive trajectories for students in other schools.

Pau is a child who came to the communication and language classroom as a child with autism. Today, after having worked with him in the mainstream classroom of peers of the same age, participating in SEAs with interactions has improved his performance at the social level, and now this child is in the mainstream classroom and has left an available place in the communication and language classroom for other children with language difficulties at special schools. That is, we have achieved students who were schooled in the communication and language classroom now being in the mainstream classroom. (Ines)

Transference of SEAs in Special Schools

In the context of Spain, where the research was conducted, 17% of students with special needs are enrolled in special schools ( World Health Organization, 2011 ). According to national law 5 , these are students with disabilities whose special educational needs cannot be met in mainstream schools, the most frequent types of disabilities including intellectual disabilities (36%), multiple disabilities (24%) and pervasive developmental disorder (19%) 6 . Some special schools concerned with providing the best education to their students have also wondered about the possibility of bringing to their schools the educational actions that transformed the education of students with disabilities in mainstream schools. Today, there are 4 special schools that implement SEAs. In Marta and Ana’s school, when the teaching staff started to implement SEAs, no one there had previous experience with implementing SEAs in special schools, so they had to recreate the SEAs in the new context. To ensure proper implementation to achieve the benefits that had already been observed in mainstream schools, they implemented the SEAs progressively and assessed the ongoing results:

In our school, we started with one classroom, and little by little, the number of classrooms that implemented DLG increased. Today, not only has this implementation been sustained, but the number of participants has increased, both in DLG and IG. (…) The results are very positive, because in primary education, at the beginning, only one classroom participated and now 5 entire classrooms participate. (Ana)

The transference of SEAs in their special school was not only sustained but, in time, also increased: similarly to what occurred with mainstream schools, more SEAs have been implemented in more groups and with more diverse children: “We included first children with more speech ability, and little by little we included students with less speech ability to see how we could manage to guarantee that all of them could participate in the SEA” (Marta). “Now, when you look at the timetable for the next school year, you can see that it is full of SEAs” (Ana). This extension in the implementation of SEAs in the school cannot be separated from the students’ progress: it is the improvements such work has achieved that encourages teachers to extend IG and DLG to new groups, students and learning content.

In some cases, preparing the activity with the children ahead of time facilitated their incorporation into the SEA. According to the teachers, using such strategies has made it possible for approximately 80% of the students of preprimary and primary education to participate in IG, and approximately 40% of the students to participate in DLG. In this context of special education and with this group of students, SEAs have also demonstrated improved learning. Language is an area in which most of these students present difficulties, and it is the area of improvement that the teachers have highlighted most, along with an improved coexistence between students:

With the SEAs, new language structures appeared in the students that we never imagined before that they could develop, reasoning, argumentation, first with much help and modeling, but finally, it appeared spontaneously. Then, reading books, which we did not foresee either (…). Expanding their vocabulary. (…) With the SEAs they gain richer vocabulary too. (Marta)

The main results we have seen are improvements in language competence and the quality of their contributions, sentence structures of greater complexity, improvement in explaining their opinions, improved coherence of discourse, taking into account the topic of the debate. (…) Then, an increase in the number of participants in the DLG, better knowledge of the other participants, the creation of new bonds and friendships, and the reduction of coexistence problems. (Ana)

This evidence suggests that SEAs are not limited to a particular type of school or student population but can be effective with very different types of student diversity and educational contexts. According to the teachers, the research on SEAs and special needs had an influence on these improvements achieved in their school:

I think that we could not have achieved it if we would not have this line of research and impact. I mean, it has given us much robustness, a great deal of science to say, “Okay, it has been studied, it works,” and this robustness helped us to transfer, sometimes we say “to recreate,” the SEAs. (Marta)

Building Collaboration Between Special and Mainstream Schools

The replicability of SEAs in special schools was accompanied by the previously mentioned transformation of teachers’ understanding of the education of students with special needs. The focus on learning interactions that both IG and DLG have led teachers in these schools not only to ensure maximum diversity in the interactions within the school by, for instance, grouping students with different disabilities and with different capabilities together, but also to look for interactions with typically developing peers who are educated in mainstream schools. Sharing learning activities with these children in an inclusive learning context entailed new learning opportunities for the special school students in a more normalized environment that could eventually help them prepare for a transition from special education to combined (special-mainstream) education. As Ana explained, in her school, the idea of collaborating with mainstream schools emerged from the high expectations developed and the will to pursue more ambitious objectives for their students. Now, the teachers want to establish this beneficial experience as a regular collaboration and extend it from DLG to IG.

Since we started to work with DLG with our students, we have seen that our objectives in DLG are changing, the same way they are progressing and improving, there is an evolution. They start to structure sentences, ask questions, talk about the topic; then, we see the need to look for higher expectations, that is, there is always a bit more. Then, we thought that as we wanted a bit more, and the ones who could provide it as role models were students of their same age. We wanted them to participate in DLG in the most normalized way possible. (…) When we did it with the [mainstream] school it was a spectacular experience, because new dialogues emerged, our students participated very much spontaneously. (…) Then, the need to create these DLG as something periodical and systematic for the next years emerged, starting with DLG, and then we will continue with IG. Each time a bit more, more inclusion, more interactions, more communication, and more learning. (Ana)

According to the teachers’ experience, the students of both regular and mainstream schools benefited from this experience. The special education students could improve their language and academic learning and find new contexts where they could be accepted and respected, and the mainstream school students had the opportunity to learn more about people with disabilities, including their difficulties and capabilities and how to interact with them, which is learning for life. In one of the mainstream schools that had less experience in implementing DLG, students could even learn from the greater experience students from the special school had with DLG. For both groups of students, many of whom lived in the same town, this collaboration entailed the possibility of coming to know each other and creating bonds beyond the school context:

For the children of the mainstream school, it has brought the opportunity to know students with disabilities and learn how to interact with them; for instance, they live in the same municipality, and maybe they met in the street and they did not interact, they did not know how to talk to each other. The gatherings are above all respect, humanity, a climate of total acceptance, that many times we do not find in society. And our students were able to demonstrate what they knew and had no problem raising their hands and sharing what they knew. Although they needed help, they asked questions to their peers at the mainstream school. I mean, their concerns, their language improvement, I think that apart from the academic and the language improvement, regarding human values it is helping both the mainstream and the special school. (Ana)

The fact that SEAs have been replicated in special schools and there are therefore mainstream and special schools that implement SEAs in the same geographical context has made these collaborations and new learning opportunities for both groups of students possible.

Reaching Other Educational Contexts in the Community

The research on SEAs and students with special needs has also had an impact in other places of the community beyond the school context. An illustrative example explained by Sandra is an association dedicated to people with disabilities that offers activities for children with disabilities. The fact that SEAs are open to the community facilitated the president of the association participating in IG in Sandra’s school, showing how both learning and coexistence improve in IG. In addition, the mother of a child with special needs at Sandra’s school is an active member of the association. These connections with members of this association have caused a change in the association, which is now more oriented toward promoting academic learning among the children and is more impregnated with high expectations, creating new contexts where learning and inclusion can be enhanced:

This summer, the association is promoting instrumental learning for the first time; they are doing homework, which they had done never before, and they are very satisfied. And also, the issue of the evidence (…) she told me the other day that a girl with autism had come, the family explained that she had behaviors such as pulling hair, pushing, and she told them, “Don’t worry, we are changing it”, and the mother was very happy, and she was happy too (…) They are learning to read and write since preprimary, and the families are really satisfied… This has been a big change, because they did not think like this before. (Sandra)

Factors Supporting Social Impact

The interviews held with teachers about the impacts achieved have also shown several factors that contributed to these impacts, mainly via supporting the sustainability and replicability of the actions and the promoted improvements. It is important to summarize these factors here because taking them into account may contribute to an enhanced social impact of the research.

Teachers’ Permanent Training Based on Scientific Evidence

As mentioned above, a more scientific approach to education was one of the impacts achieved for teachers. This was translated into the practice of regularly reading scientific texts related to their profession, which, in turn, reinforced this scientific view. Some schools organized seminars in which the teaching staff debated these texts, and in other cases, teachers attended seminars or meetings with teachers from other schools. The texts that they read and debated included articles, books and reports resulting from this line of research and other scientific publications related to teaching and learning that could help them solve problems they encountered and improve their practice. According to the interviewed teachers, sharing this space of learning and debate has been a help in replicating the SEAs in new classes or schools and in bringing the SEAs to more students; it has also been a source of sustainability when the barriers found in the implementation of SEAs were shared and discussed:

Training is essential. As we read about the evidence and debated it, if we had a preconceived idea, we said, “No, this is true, it is as you say, this girl may be able to do that”. I think that training has been and still is essential for all this, because theory gives us a clue to put everything into practice. If we know the theory, then it is very easy. (…) We have to know first, we have to learn first. And then we see it very clearly. (Carmen)

Gaining confidence and feeling empowered to implement the actions that are supported by research has also been an effect of the teachers having access to scientific knowledge:

We emphasized very much that evidence says that children improve more with inclusion, that is, not taking them out of the classroom, if you do not group them separately… Then, you get empowered, and say, “This is really what we have to do; every time, if we could do that it would be ideal”. Then, you change your outlook a bit. (…) Because we came from another paradigm, we had another trajectory, and with the training we started to see things more clearly; we got empowered and said, “It has to be done this way, it is demonstrated that it is best, so let’s do it”. (Ines)

Teamwork and Networks of Support

Another facilitator of social impact highlighted by the teachers was the availability of a network of support among teachers and schools. The previously mentioned seminars are one place where some of these networks have been created. The previous experiences of other colleagues that are shared in these spaces have encouraged new teachers to implement SEAs and have also helped solve doubts and difficulties in the implementation of SEAs. These networks of support have made possible, for instance, collaborations between special and mainstream schools in sharing SEAs. Irene explained that this was an important factor in her case; the same way that special schools took the progress achieved in mainstream schools as a reference to replicate the SEAs in their context, Irene’s school took one special school as evidence of the possibilities for successfully implementing SEAs in her school:

The more positive, inclusive, rich, high expectations and interactions you have in more contexts with other professionals that are implementing SEAs in other schools and see that it is possible, that a special school is doing it and it is possible, and they improve… the more things like that you listen to throughout your professional life, and the more people you can share these spaces with, the more you empower yourself… and finally, you do it, because you believe it is true that it is possible and that you are going to make it. (Irene)

Recording Results and Being Aware of the Improvements Achieved

For teachers, it was also important to have a record of the students’ results related to the SEAs so that they could register progress and be fully aware of the improvements achieved. Some schools had more systematic records than others, and some of them were aware that they had to improve their recordkeeping, but all of them agreed on the importance of gathering this evidence, as it demonstrates teachers they are doing well and encourages the continuance of their work:

Results, because in daily life the inertia doesn’t let us see progress, but it is very important to talk about it with colleagues: “Look at what we have achieved,” “Look, this child could not do that and now he does”. When we verbalize it, we realize all we are achieving. (Carmen)

Sharing the Impact of SEAs With Families

When schools share the development and outcomes of SEAs not only among teachers but also with students’ families, the latter also become active supporters of these actions. This information can be shared in the schools’ seminars or assemblies that are open to families, in individual meetings with the family of a particular student, or while developing the SEAs if families participate, for example, as volunteers in IG. This information has led, for instance, to families not authorizing their children with special needs to receive support outside the classroom – because they know their children can progress further by participating in SEAs in their classroom—or agreeing that their child can stay in the school one more year so as to continue taking advantage of learning in SEAs.

Within education, I think that special education is the great forgotten area, and, with this research, I really believe that now is our time. I think that special education is starting to be visible and show that with them [students with disabilities], it is also possible. (…) I believe that it is our moment and I hope that this research helps all students and that finally, inclusion becomes a reality that we achieve between all. (Ana, teacher at a special school)

Ana, with these words, tried to synthesize what the actual and potential social impact of the line of research was for teachers such as her. Research conducted on SEAs and students with disabilities and other special educational needs allowed the identification of benefits that these educational actions entailed for these children in the schools that were already implementing them. Subsequently, this evidence has reached new schools, bringing these improvements to new student populations and improving teachers’ professional experiences, thus achieving a social impact that, as Ana said, is contributing to transforming special education.

This line of research is an example of the body of research in the psychology of education that studies several aspects of the education of students with special needs, creating interventions that improve their learning and coexistence with peers or bringing forth scientific evidence on which effective educational programs can be based. As interaction and dialogue are key components of SEAs, we argue that the evidence collected on the impact of SEAs on students with special needs shows the transformative potential of the sociocultural approach of learning ( Vygotsky, 1980 ; Bruner, 1996 ) for the education of these students. Because evidence on the social impact of this line of research was obtained from a limited number of interviews, conclusions must be cautiously made. However, there is evidence supporting the achievement of social impact. The criteria defined by SIOR 7 , the Social Impact Open Repository that aims at monitoring, evaluating and improving the impact of research, enables the analysis of how social impact is approached, as well as the limitations that can be addressed to further enhance social impact achievements.

(1) Connection of research with the social priority goals of sustainable development. The line of research responds to UN Sustainable Development Goal 4 on Quality Education: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. Therefore, the research is aligned with one of the social priorities.

(2) Percentage of improvement achieved regarding the departure situation. The interviews conducted allowed the collection of evidence on the improvements achieved in terms of the students’ learning and improved coexistence and the schools’ more efficient response to student diversity. However, an accurate and quantified record of the academic and/or social improvements of these students has not been systematized. Therefore, evidence of the social impact would be enhanced with a more systematic procedure to collect and quantify the improvements.

(3) Transferability of the impact: the actions based on the project’s results have been successfully applied in more than one context. Transferability has been achieved in different directions: first, replicating the SEAs in mainstream schools with the participation of students with special needs in these schools; second, recreating the SEAs in special schools, thus transferring the actions to a new student population; and third, transferring the SEAs to other out-of-school educational contexts in the community.

(4) Scientific, political, and social dissemination. The benefits of SEAs for students with disabilities and other special needs have been disseminated through scientific publications, conferences and training for teachers and schools. Importantly, this dissemination has been a key component for the transferability and sustainability of the impact, according to the evidence collected and is associated with the scientific training of teachers, who used such publications to learn from and discuss the evidence and transform their own professional practice.

(5) Sustainability of the impact achieved. According to the evidence collected, in all the new contexts and new populations of students where SEAs have been transferred, the intensity of the implementation has not only been sustained but also increased, and the same occurred with the improvements achieved. Although an accurate quantification of the improvement is not yet available, the experience of the sample of teachers who were involved in the transference of the SEAs and still implement them in their own context points in this direction.

Taking this into account, further research on SEAs and students with special needs with social impact could cover four aspects. First, to analyze how SEAs put into practice contributions from theory in the psychology of education to support the learning and development of children with special needs more in depth. Second, to define a procedure to collect and quantify the improvements achieved by the students as a result of participating in SEAs. The INTER-ACT project, which is currently advancing this line of research, will contribute to quantifying this improvement and strengthening the evidence of the research’s social impact. Third, to support the transference of the SEAs and the improvements associated with them to new schools. Additional impact is foreseen in this regard, as the ongoing INTER-ACT project will transfer SEAs to new mainstream and special schools and will add further evidence on the key elements for the transferability of SEAs to new contexts with students with special needs and those without. Finally, to extend the interactive understanding of learning and development beyond schools and the teaching and learning contexts, reaching other related professionals and activities, such as evaluation, attention and counseling related to special needs; these areas of intervention are still very much impregnated with an individualistic perspective more aligned with the medical model than with the social model of disability, and students and schools would benefit from coordinated work based on the evidence of the benefits of the interactive approach of SEAs.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated for this study are available on request to the corresponding author.

Ethics Statement

The study was fully approved by the Ethics Board of the Community of Researchers on Excellence for All (CREA). The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author Contributions

SM conceived the original idea with the support of ER. ED conducted the literature review. SM with the support of RG analyzed the results of the line of research (case studies) from the perspective of social impact. ER coordinated the data collection (interviews) on social impact. SM conducted the interviews, and transcribed and analyzed them with the support of RG and ED. SM wrote a full draft of the manuscript. ED, ER, and RG revised it and included corrections. SM revised the final version of the manuscript.

This work was supported by the INTER-ACT, Interactive Learning Environments for the Inclusion of Students With and Without Disabilities: Improving Learning, Development and Relationships. Spanish National Programme for Research Aimed at the Challenges of Society, Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness. Reference Number: EDU2017-88666-R.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

• ^ The Ethics Board was composed of Dr. Marta Soler (president), who has expertise in the evaluation of projects from the European Framework Programme of Research of the European Union and of European projects in the area of ethics; Dr. Teresa Sordé, who has expertise in the evaluation of projects from the European Framework Programme of Research and is researcher in the area of Roma studies; Dr. Patricia Melgar, a founding member of the Catalan Platform Against Gender Violence and a researcher in the area of gender and gender violence; Dr. Sandra Racionero, a former secretary and member of the Ethics Board at Loyola University Andalusia (2016-2018) and a review panel member for COST action proposals in the area of health; Dr. Cristina Pulido, an expert in data protection policies and child protection in research and communication and a researcher in communication studies; Dr. Oriol Rios, a founding member of the “Men in Dialogue” association, a researcher in the area of masculinities, and the editor of “Masculinities and Social Change,” a journal indexed in WoS and Scopus; and Dr. Esther Oliver, who has expertise in the evaluation of projects from the European Framework Programme of Research and is a researcher in the area of gender violence.
• ^ Schools as Learning Communities in Spain: http://utopiadream.info/ca/centros-en-funcionamiento/caracteristicas/
• ^ Schools as Learning Communities in Europe: Successful Educational Actions for all (SEAS4ALL). ERASMUS + Programme. Record number: 2015-1-ES01-KA201-016327. https://seas4all.eu/ ; Social transformation through Educational Policies based on Successful Educational Actions (STEP4SEAS). ERASMUS + Programme. Record number: 11. 580432-EPP-1-2016-1-ES-EPPKA3-IPI-SOC-IN. https://www.step4seas.eu/
• ^ 2018 Report of the Schools as Learning Communities network in Latin America https://www.comunidaddeaprendizaje.com.es/uploads/materials/579/352de6fce741a0d1e6d17c67944cec2c.pdf
• ^ Ley Orgánica de Educación [Organic Law of Education] (LOE), of 2006, amended by the Ley Orgánica para la Mejora de la Calidad Educativa [Organic Law for the Improvement of Quality of Education] (LOMCE), of 2013.
• ^ Spanish Ministry of Education and Vocational Training. Statistics on Education. School year 2017-2018. https://www.educacionyfp.gob.es/servicios-al-ciudadano/estadisticas/no-universitaria/alumnado/matriculado/2017-2018-rd.html
• ^ https://sior.ub.edu/indicators

Akhutina, T., Foreman, N., Krichevets, A., Matikka, L., Narhi, V., Pylaeva, N., et al. (2003). Improving spatial functioning in children with cerebral palsy using computerized and traditional game tasks. Disabil. Rehabil. 25, 1361–1371. doi: 10.1080/09638280310001616358

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Alanazi, M. S. (2017). Use of flashcards in dealing with reading and writing difficulties in SEN students. Multidiscip. J. Educ. Res. 7, 53–87. doi: 10.17583/remie.2017.2211

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Alenizi, M. A. (2019). Effectiveness of a program based on a multi-sensory strategy in developing visual perception of primary school learners with learning disabilities: a contextual study of Arabic learners. Int. J. Educ. Psychol. 8, 72–104. doi: 10.17583/ijep.2019.3346

Anderson, D. L., Watt, S. E., and Shanley, D. C. (2014). A multi-dimensional model of the origins of attitude certainty: teachers’ attitudes toward attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 17, 19–50. doi: 10.1007/s11218-013-9235-5

Asmus, J. M., Carter, E. W., Moss, C. K., Biggs, E. E., Bolt, D. M., Born, T. L., et al. (2017). Efficacy and social validity of peer network interventions for high school students with severe disabilities. Am. J. Intellect. Dev. Disabil. 122, 118–137. doi: 10.1352/1944-7558-122.2.118

Auphan, P., Ecalle, J., and Magnan, A. (2019). Computer-based assessment of reading ability and subtypes of readers with reading comprehension difficulties: a study in French children from G2 to G9. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 34, 641-643. doi: 10.1007/s10212-018-0396-7

Bowles, D., Radford, J., and Bakopoulou, I. (2018). Scaffolding as a key role for teaching assistants: perceptions of their pedagogical strategies. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 88, 499–512. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12197

Bruner, J. S. (1973). Beyond the Information Given: Studies in the Psychology of Knowing. New York, NY: WW Norton.

Google Scholar

Bruner, J. S. (1996). The Culture of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Christou, M., and Molina, S. (2009). Educational inclusion and critical pedagogy. Teor. Educ. 10, 31–55.

Chun Sik Min (2010). Cultural discourse on special education’s identity. J. Intellect. Disabil. 12, 213–229.

Dainez, D., and Smolka, A. L. (2014). The concept of compensation in the dialogue of Vygotsky with Adler: human development, education and disability. Educ. Pesqui. 40, 1093–1108. doi: 10.1590/S1517-97022014071545

Elboj, C., and Niemelä, R. (2010). Sub-communities of Mutual Learners in the Classroom: The case of Interactive groups. Rev. Psicodidáctica 15, 177–189.

European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (2017). Early School Leaving and Learners with Disabilities and/or Special Educational Needs: Final Summary. Available online at: https://www.european-agency.org/resources/publications/early-school-leaving-and-learners-disabilities-andor-special-educational-1 (accessed March 3, 2020).

European Commission (2010). European Disability Strategy 2010-2020: A Renewed Commitment to a Barrier-Free Europe. Brussels: European Commission. Available online at: https://ec.europa.eu/eip/ageing/standards/general/general-documents/european-disability-strategy-2010-2020_en (accessed March 3, 2020).

European Commission (2013). Ethics for Researchers. Facilitating Research Excellence in FP7. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/fp7/89888/ethics-for-researchers_en.pdf (accessed March 3, 2020).

Flecha, R. (2015). Successful Educational Action for Inclusion and Social Cohesion in Europe. Berlin: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-11176-6

Flecha, R., Soler-Gallart, M., and Sordé, T. (2015). Social impact: Europe must fund social sciences. Nature 528:193. doi: 10.1038/528193d

Flecha, R. (2006-2011). INCLUD-ED. Strategies for inclusion and social cohesion in Europe from Education. 6th Framework Programme. Brussels: European Commission.

Garcia, R., Mircea, T., and Duque, E. (2010). Socio-cultural transformation and the promotion of learning. Rev. Psicodidáctica 15, 207–222.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

García-Carrión, R., Molina Roldán, S., Grande López, L. A., and Buslón Valdez, N. (2016). Análisis de las interacciones entre alumnado y diversas personas adultas en actuaciones educativas de éxito: hacia la inclusión de todos y todas. Rev. Latinoam. Educ. Incl. 10, 115–132. doi: 10.4067/S0718-73782016000100007

Garcia-Carrion, R. (2018-2020). INTER-ACT. Interactive Learning Environments for the Inclusion of Students with and Without Disabilities: Improving Learning, Development and Relationships. R+D Plan. Madrid: Spanish Ministry of Science.

García-Carrión, R., Molina Roldán, S., and Roca, E. (2018). Interactive Learning Environments for the Educational Improvement of Students with Disabilities in Special Schools. Front. Psychol. 9:1744. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01744

Gómez, A., Padrós, M., Ríos, O., Mara, L. C., and Pukepuke, T. (2019). Reaching social impact through communicative methodology. Researching with rather than on vulnerable populations: the Roma case. Front. Educ. 4:9. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2019.00009

Gómez, A., Puigvert, L., and Flecha, R. (2011). Critical communicative methodology: informing real social transformation through research. Qual. Inq. 17, 235–245. doi: 10.1177/1077800410397802

Gómez, A., Siles, G., and Tejedor, M. (2012). Contributing to social transformation through Communicative Research Methodology. Qual. Res. Educ. 1, 36–57. doi: 10.4471/qre.2012.02

Goodley, D. (2001). ‘Learning Difficulties’, the social model of disability and impairment: challenging epistemologies. Disabil. Soc. 16, 207–231. doi: 10.1080/09687590120035816

Haegele, J. A., and Hodge, S. (2016). Disability discourse: overview and critiques of the medical and social models. Quest 68, 193–206. doi: 10.1080/00336297.2016.1143849

Hatcher, P. J., Goetz, K., Snowling, M. J., Hulme, C., Gibbs, S., and Smith, G. (2006). Evidence for the effectiveness of the Early Literacy Support programme. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 76, 351–367.

Heidrich, R., and Bassani, P. (2012). Inclusive design - assistive technology for people with cerebral palsy. Work 41, 4762–4766. doi: 10.3233/WOR-2012-0028-4762

Holliman, A. J., and Hurry, J. (2013). The effects of Reading Recovery on children’s literacy progress and special educational needs status: a three-year follow-up study. Educ. Psychol. 33, 719–733. doi: 10.1080/01443410.2013.785048

Hughes, C., Foley, S., White, N., and Devine, R. T. (2018). School readiness in children with special educational needs and disabilities: psychometric findings from a new screening tool, the Brief Early Skills, and Support Index. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 88, 606–627. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12206

INCLUD-ED Consortium (2009). Actions for Success in Schools in Europe. Brussels: European Commission.

Krull, J., Wilbert, J., and Hennemann, T. (2018). Does social exclusion by classmates lead to behaviour problems and learning difficulties or vice versa? A cross-lagged panel analysis. Eur. J. Spec. Needs Educ. 33, 235–253. doi: 10.1080/08856257.2018.1424780

Law, Y., Lam, S., Law, W., and Tam, Z. W. Y. (2017). Enhancing peer acceptance of children with learning difficulties: classroom goal orientation and effects of a storytelling programme with drama techniques. Educ. Psychol. 37, 537–549. doi: 10.1080/01443410.2016.1214685

Lindsay, G. (2007). Educational psychology and the effectiveness of inclusive education/mainstreaming. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 77, 1–24. doi: 10.1348/000709906X156881

Lloyd, J. E. V., Irwin, J. G., and Hertzman, C. (2009). Kindergarten school readiness and fourth-grade literacy and numeracy outcomes of children with special needs: a population-based study. Educ. Psychol. 29, 583–602. doi: 10.1080/01443410903165391

Lopez de Aguileta, G. (2019). Developing school-relevant language and literacy skills through dialogic literary gatherings. Int. J. Educ. Psychol. 8, 51–71. doi: 10.17583/ijep.2019.4028

Lovett, M. W., Frijters, J. C., Wolf, M., Steinbach, K. A., Sevcik, R. A., and Morris, R. D. (2017). Early intervention for children at risk for reading disabilities: the impact of grade at intervention and individual differences on intervention outcomes. J. Educ. Psychol. 109, 889–914. doi: 10.1037/edu0000181

Molina, S., and Ríos, O. (2010). Including students with disabilities in learning communities. Psychol. Soc. Educ. 2, 1–9.

Molina, S. (2003-2007). Interactive Groups: A Practice of the Learning Communities for the Inclusion of Students with Disabilities. Ph.D. thesis, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona.

Montague, M., Krawec, J., Enders, C., and Dietz, S. (2014). The effects of cognitive strategy instruction on math problem solving of middle-school students of varying ability. J. Educ. Psychol. 106, 469–481. doi: 10.1037/a0035176

Oldfield, J., Humphrey, N., and Hebron, J. (2017). Risk factors in the development of behaviour difficulties among students with special educational needs and disabilities: a multilevel analysis. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 87, 146–169. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12141

Papadopoulos, T. C., Charalambous, A., Kanari, A., and Loizou, M. (2004). Kindergarten cognitive intervention for reading difficulties: the PREP remediation in Greek. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 19, 79–105. doi: 10.1007/BF03173238

Park, N. (2015). A study on disabilities human rights education in social studies from the viewpoint of disability studies. J. Hum. Rights Law Relat. Educ. 8, 1–19.

Pitchford, N. J., Kamchedzera, E., Hubber, P. J., and Chigeda, A. L. (2018). Interactive apps promote learning of basic mathematics in children with special educational needs and disabilities. Front. Psychol. 9:262. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00262

Puigvert, L., Christou, M., and Holford, J. (2012). Critical communicative methodology: including vulnerable voices in research through dialogue. Camb. J. Educ. 42, 513–526. doi: 10.1080/0305764X.2012.733341

Roberts, G. J., Cho, E., Garwood, J. D., Goble, G. H., Robertson, T., and Hodges, A. (2019). Reading interventions for Students with reading and behavioral difficulties: a meta-analysis and evaluation of co-occurring difficulties. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 32, 17–47. doi: 10.1007/s10648-019-09485-1

Schwab, S., Huber, C., Gebhardt, M., Goble, G. H., Robertson, T., and Hodge, A. (2016). Social acceptance of students with Down syndrome and students without disability. Educ. Psychol. 36, 1501–1515. doi: 10.1080/01443410.2015.1059924

Soler, M. (2015). Biographies of “Invisible” people who transform their lives and enhance social transformations through dialogic gatherings. Qual. Inq. 21, 839–842. doi: 10.1177/1077800415614032

Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple Case Study Analysis. New York, NY: Guilford.

Tzuriel, D., and Shamir, A. (2007). The effects of peer mediation with young children (PMYC) on chldren’s cognitivie modificability. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 77, 143–165. doi: 10.1348/000709905x84279

UNESCO (2017). School Violence and Bullying. Global Status Report. Available online at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000246970 (accessed March 3, 2020).

Valls, R., and Kyriakides, L. (2013). The power of Interactive Groups: how diversity of adults volunteering in classroom groups can promote inclusion and success for children of vulnerable minority ethnic populations. Camb. J. Educ. 43, 17–33. doi: 10.1080/0305764X.2012.749213

Valls, R. (2008-2011). MIXTRIN. Ways of Grouping Students Together and How this is Related to Success at School: Mixture, Streaming and Inclusion. R+D Plan. Madrid: Spanish Ministry of Science.

Velázquez Callado, C. (2012). Analysis of the effects of the implementation of cooperative learning in physical education. Qual. Res. Educ. 1, 80–105. doi: 10.4471/qre.2012.04

Vellutino, F. R., and Scanlon, D. M. (2002). The Interactive Strategies approach to reading intervention. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 27, 573–635. doi: 10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00002-4

Vuorinen, K., Erikivi, A., and Uusitalo-Malmivaara, L. (2019). A character strength intervention in 11 inclusive Finnish classrooms to promote social participation of students with special educational needs. J. Res. Spec. Educ. Needs 19, 45–57. doi: 10.1111/1471-3802.12423

Vygotsky, L. (2018). Compensatory processes in the development of the retarded child. Educ. Pesqui. 44:e44003001. doi: 10.1590/S1678-4634201844003001

Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wilson, C., Woolfson, L. M., Durkin, K., and Elliott, M. A. (2016). The impact of social cognitive and personality factors on teachers’ reported inclusive behaviour. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 86, 461–480. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12118

World Health Organization (2011). World Report on Disability. Geneva: World Health Organization.

Keywords : social impact, psychology of education, special educational needs, interactive groups, dialogic literary gatherings

Citation: Duque E, Gairal R, Molina S and Roca E (2020) How the Psychology of Education Contributes to Research With a Social Impact on the Education of Students With Special Needs: The Case of Successful Educational Actions. Front. Psychol. 11:439. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00439

Received: 23 September 2019; Accepted: 25 February 2020; Published: 13 March 2020.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2020 Duque, Gairal, Molina and Roca. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Silvia Molina, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2023 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

What Is the Psychology of Learning?

Learning in psychology is based on a person's experiences

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

 James Lacy, MLS, is a fact-checker and researcher.

The psychology of learning focuses on a range of topics related to how people learn and interact with their environments.

Are you preparing for a big test in your psychology of learning class? Or are you just interested in a review of learning and behavioral psychology topics? This learning study guide offers a brief overview of some of the major learning issues including behaviorism, classical, and operant conditioning .

Let's learn a bit more about the psychology of learning.

Definition of Learning in Psychology

Learning can be defined in many ways, but most psychologists would agree that it is a relatively permanent change in behavior that results from experience. During the first half of the 20th century, the school of thought known as behaviorism rose to dominate psychology and sought to explain the learning process. Behaviorism sought to measure only observable behaviors.

3 Types of Learning in Psychology

Behavioral learning falls into three general categories.

Classical Conditioning

Classical conditioning is a learning process in which an association is made between a previously neutral stimulus and a stimulus that naturally evokes a response.

For example, in Pavlov's classic experiment , the smell of food was the naturally occurring stimulus that was paired with the previously neutral ringing of the bell. Once an association had been made between the two, the sound of the bell alone could lead to a response.

For example, if you don't know how to swim and were to fall into a pool, you'd take actions to avoid the pool.

Operant Conditioning

Operant conditioning is a learning process in which the probability of a response occurring is increased or decreased due to reinforcement or punishment. First studied by Edward Thorndike and later by B.F. Skinner , the underlying idea behind operant conditioning is that the consequences of our actions shape voluntary behavior.

Skinner described how reinforcement could lead to increases in behaviors where punishment would result in decreases. He also found that the timing of when reinforcements were delivered influenced how quickly a behavior was learned and how strong the response would be. The timing and rate of reinforcement are known as schedules of reinforcement .

For example, your child might learn to complete their homework because you reward them with treats and/or praise.

Observational Learning

Observational learning is a process in which learning occurs through observing and imitating others. Albert Bandura's social learning theory suggests that in addition to learning through conditioning, people also learn through observing and imitating the actions of others.

Basic Principles of Social Learning Theory

As demonstrated in his classic Bobo Doll experiments, people will imitate the actions of others without direct reinforcement. Four important elements are essential for effective observational learning: attention, motor skills, motivation, and memory.

For example, a teen's older sibling gets a speeding ticket, with the unpleasant results of fines and restrictions. The teen then learns not to speed when they take up driving.

The three types of learning in psychology are classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and observational learning.

History of the Psychology of Learning

One of the first thinkers to study how learning influences behavior was psychologist John B. Watson , who suggested in his seminal 1913 paper Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It that all behaviors are a result of the learning process. Psychology, the behaviorists believed, should be the scientific study of observable, measurable behavior. Watson's work included the famous Little Albert experiment in which he conditioned a small child to fear a white rat.

Behaviorism dominated psychology for much of the early 20th century. Although behavioral approaches remain important today, the latter part of the century was marked by the emergence of humanistic psychology, biological psychology, and cognitive psychology .

Other important figures in the psychology of learning include:

• Edward Thorndike
• Ivan Pavlov
• B.F. Skinner
• Albert Bandura

A Word From Verywell

The psychology of learning encompasses a vast body of research that generally focuses on classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and observational learning. As the field evolves, it continues to have important implications for explaining and motivating human behavior.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

How to Assess Whether an Instructional Intervention Has an Effect on Learning

• Published: 05 June 2023
• Volume 35 , article number  64 , ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Richard E. Mayer   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4055-6938 1  

1340 Accesses

2 Citations

14 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This commentary critiques Brady et al.’s (2023) paper, “How scientific is educational psychology research? The increasing trend of squeezing causality and recommendations from non-intervention studies” and analyzes six research methods for assessing whether an instructional intervention affects learning outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Theories of Motivation in Education: an Integrative Framework

The use of cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education.

The Impact of Peer Assessment on Academic Performance: A Meta-analysis of Control Group Studies

Data availability.

Data are available upon request.

Brady, A. C., Griffin, M. M., Lewis, A. R., Fong, C. J., & Robinson, D. H. (2023). How scientific is educational psychology research? The increasing trend of squeezing causality and recommendations from non-intervention studies. Educational Psychology Review, 35 , 37.

Article   Google Scholar  

Grosz, M. (2023). Should researchers make causal inferences and recommendations for practice on the basis of non-experimental studies? Educational Psychology Review, 35 , 37.

Shavelson, R. J., & Towne, L. (2002). Scientific research in education . National Academies Press.

Google Scholar  

Zitzmann, S., Machts, N., Hubner, N., Schauber, S., Moller, J., & Lindner, C. (2023). The yet underestimated importance of communicating findings from educational trials to teachers, schools, school authorities, or policy makers. Educational Psychology Review. (in press)

Download references

Preparation of this paper was supported by grant N00014-21–1-2047 from the Office of Naval Research.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA

Richard E. Mayer

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard E. Mayer .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Mayer, R.E. How to Assess Whether an Instructional Intervention Has an Effect on Learning. Educ Psychol Rev 35 , 64 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09783-9

Download citation

Accepted : 30 May 2023

Published : 05 June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09783-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Causal effects
• Experimental comparisons
• Qualitative studies
• Instructional effectiveness
• Intervention studies
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

How Does the Psychological State Affect Learning Outcomes?

Learning is a process where a student grows. It starts with the basics and progresses deeper as they advance from one class to the next. The education sector provides teachers with different teaching strategies. It helps students learn better. Some students show positive outcomes sooner than others. 

A student’s intelligence can be a major factor in performance. Regardless, there has to be a balance with other factors. It could be motivation, interest, and cognition. If the student’s psychological state is not good, these factors fail to work for them. 

The different psychological states a student can have during a classroom lesson

Different psychological states play important roles in the outcomes recorded by students. Throughout the lessons, the teacher may interact with the student positively. But, the different factors determine the level of responsiveness they show. 

• The student’s state of mind. The central nervous system affects the body in many ways. It impacts a person’s thoughts, emotions, desires, and movements. It controls many other factors like breathing, body temperature, and hormones. If the student’s state of mind is functioning well, they will record positive outcomes in learning.
• Student’s personality. A learner can have a sanguine, choleric, melancholic, or phlegmatic personality. Each personality has a different style of learning, and they record outcomes at different levels. The student’s beliefs and characteristics play an important role in learning outcomes.
• Student social status. A learner’s acceptability in a social group, family, and society influences their social status. If they feel accepted, their emotional state, motivation, and cognition get better. It will contribute to their learning success. 

A lot of factors affect how learners perform in college education. Students might continually put more effort into their studies, but they still record poor grades. As much as their personality may affect the way they learn, their emotional well-being cannot be overlooked. Learners can be mentally healthy, but they fail to use the right writing tools. Due to this, they begin to record poor outcomes. Different ways work for the student. It includes seeking help whenever they can or learning to  use plagiarism detector  by FixGerald. It is to ensure their work is plagiarism-free. Ethics in education matter a lot, so you should use the best plagiarism tool to stay free of any controversy. 

Positive psychology must work in the classroom

Each morning when learners enter a classroom, they bring with them some positive and negative issues. These are the issues that affect their psychological status. This, in turn, affects their learning outcomes. A status where every student’s psychological wellness is good is important to support engagement in the classroom. Students with a positive psychological attitude have the following advantages:

• They have a sense of belonging in the student community.
• They give honest feedback.
• They learn in an open and welcoming learning atmosphere.
• They are willing to ask questions and take part in the learning process. 

Such students  prepare for exams  in earnest, do their assigned papers in time, and are vibrant. It is easy for them to remember concepts, and when the time for a test comes, they record positive outcomes. These are important reasons that show why positive psychology is necessary for the classroom. 

The relationship between academic success and mental wellness

Researchers associate depression, worry and anxiety with mental health disorders. Researchers have revealed that mental health disorders include obsessive features. Other features were identified as Compulsive ADHD, bipolar, impulsive, and oppositional defiance disorders. These problems, according to studies, are prevalent in communities where racial and ethnic issues are deeply rooted.

Perception plays  an important role  in student performance. You measure it from a variety of perspectives. Perception can be influenced by external factors or internal factors. External variables relate to the teacher, society, or family.

A teacher’s attitude related to racial, ethnic, or social classes affects performance. A student might believe that teachers grade their tasks based on their ethnicity. In such a scenario, their psychological status gets affected. They will have a negative view of education. The internal factors can affect the emotional or physical health.

Different psychological factors affect performance at any given level. Mentally healthy students will love to learn, study, ask questions or do assignments. Those with negative mental health will hate learning, miss class lessons, submit assignments late, or skip exams. These two categories of students will record entirely different learning outcomes. Students must seek help when they realize they cannot perform due to avoidable situations. 

Percy J. Bunnell works for a large multinational. The company provides software solutions to global companies. He prepares white papers and technical books for the company. He’s active in academic writing too, where he is popular for his outstanding quality in essays and research papers. His free time is for watching NBA games and learning yoga.

Related Articles

Icpce 2024 invites global researchers to explore integrative approaches in mental health – hybrid conference, study shows psychological intervention boosts rural teacher well-being, calls grow for intelligence studies in psychology curricula, entrepreneur and budding midwife from coventry university join 100 faces campaign, new rush hall school expands its capacity for student well-being with a third modular building from gcs cabins, top tips to pass your acls certification exam, coventry university phd student wins place on royal college of nursing’s international research conference, top 10 ways nurses can increase their knowledge and expertise, over 26,000 graduates switch to uk care jobs in 2023 visa shift, 24/7 learning boost – how online tutoring platforms benefit high scholars and college students, nurturing young minds: 10 tips and strategies for school psychologists, income inequality heightens test anxiety and lowers student achievement, new study reveals movement’s key role in enhancing learning, new study challenges traditional views on mental effort, study reveals homework management styles impact undergraduate success, measuring the impact of online education: key metrics and analytics, researchers emphasise crucial role of effective classroom management in fostering equitable education, the impact of proper assignment formatting on grades, school absences reach record high as children grapple with transition stressors, how experience and environmental surroundings impacts individuals, teachers in primary and secondary schools use similar yet distinct emotional tactics in discipline, online masters programmes in mental health – a guide for aspiring professionals, how education is paving the way for better public health initiatives, psychreg donates to support the reading programme at prenza national high school in the philippines.

Psychreg is a digital media company and not a clinical company. Our content does not constitute a medical or psychological consultation. See a certified medical or mental health professional for diagnosis.

• Privacy Policy

© Copyright 2014–2034 Psychreg Ltd

• PSYCHREG JOURNAL
• MEET OUR WRITERS
• MEET THE TEAM

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 29 June 2016

Learning and memory under stress: implications for the classroom

• Susanne Vogel 1 &
• Lars Schwabe 1  

npj Science of Learning volume  1 , Article number:  16011 ( 2016 ) Cite this article

315k Accesses

221 Citations

460 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Hippocampus
• Human behaviour
• Stress and resilience

Exams, tight deadlines and interpersonal conflicts are just a few examples of the many events that may result in high levels of stress in both students and teachers. Research over the past two decades identified stress and the hormones and neurotransmitters released during and after a stressful event as major modulators of human learning and memory processes, with critical implications for educational contexts. While stress around the time of learning is thought to enhance memory formation, thus leading to robust memories, stress markedly impairs memory retrieval, bearing, for instance, the risk of underachieving at exams. Recent evidence further indicates that stress may hamper the updating of memories in the light of new information and induce a shift from a flexible, ‘cognitive’ form of learning towards rather rigid, ‘habit’-like behaviour. Together, these stress-induced changes may explain some of the difficulties of learning and remembering under stress in the classroom. Taking these insights from psychology and neuroscience into account could bear the potential to facilitate processes of education for both students and teachers.

Similar content being viewed by others

Implications of Tamarkoz on stress, emotion, spirituality and heart rate

Effect of sleep and mood on academic performance—at interface of physiology, psychology, and education

A synergistic mindsets intervention protects adolescents from stress

Stressful events are very common in educational settings, both for students and for teachers. A multitude of exams, evaluations and deadlines creates an enormous pressure to perform. This stress, however, can have a critical impact on learning and memory processes, 1 , 2 which are at the heart of our educational system. Beyond their relevance in educational contexts, stress-induced alterations in learning and memory are also thought to contribute to stress-related mental disorders, such as major depressive disorder or post-traumatic stress disorder. 3 Therefore, a large number of studies has been conducted to better understand how stress affects learning and memory. The effects of stress were found to be complex, though, with stress having both enhancing and impairing effects on memory, depending on the specific memory process or stage that is affected by stress 1 , 4 and the activity profile of major physiological stress response systems.

This review summarises the current state of knowledge on the impact of (acute) stress on memory and derives implications for educational settings from these laboratory findings. Because our focus is on memory processes most relevant in the classroom, we will concentrate mainly on the effects of (moderate) stress (induced in laboratory settings) on episodic and semantic memory, as well as the engagement of multiple memory systems in healthy humans (for reviews on the influence of stress on other forms of memory or other cognitive processes, see e.g. Arnsten 5 and Sandi 6 ). As the influence of stress on learning and memory is intimately linked to the physiological and endocrine changes initiated on a stressful encounter, we will cover these changes first. Next, we will provide a concise overview of how stress, through the action of major stress mediators, induces time-dependent changes in how much information is learned, consolidated and retrieved (i.e., memory quantity). In the third part of this review, we will discuss recent findings on how stress may change the dynamics of memories, their updating in the face of novel information, and the integration of new knowledge into existing memories, all key processes in educational settings. We will then highlight the impact of stress on the engagement of different memory systems, arguing that stress effects are not limited to how much we learn or remember but that stress also changes the nature (or quality) of memories, for instance, the strategies that are used during learning. Based on these empirical findings, we will finally discuss the implications of stress effects on learning and memory processes for the classroom.

The well-coordinated physiological response to stressors

Difficult situations in the classroom such as exams or interpersonal conflicts can challenge or exceed the coping strategies or resources available and thus threaten our homoeostasis, our inner balance, leading us to feel ‘stressed’. 7 The individual appraisal of the situation is critical as it determines the response that follows. 8 , 9 If a situation is appraised as stressful, a well-described cascade of physiological and endocrine changes is set in motion in order to re-establish homoeostasis and to promote long-term well-being. 10 Although this stress response is very complex with numerous mediators involved, two major stress systems appear to be critical for the modulation of learning and memory processes, the rapid autonomic nervous system (ANS) and the slower hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal axis ( Figure 1 ). Within seconds, the ANS is activated, leading to the release of catecholamines such as noradrenaline (NA), both from the adrenal medulla and the locus coeruleus in the brain. 10 Catecholamines prepare the body for ‘fight-or-flight’ responses and rapidly affect neural functioning in several brain regions critical for learning and memory, such as the hippocampus, amygdala and prefrontal cortex (PFC). 5 , 11 Somewhat slower, a second system is activated in response to stress, the hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal axis, resulting in the release of corticosteroids (in humans mainly cortisol) from the adrenal cortex. Cortisol reaches peak level concentrations ~20–30 min after stressor onset, 10 readily enters the brain and binds to two different receptors to induce its effects on cognition: The glucocorticoid receptor (GR) is expressed ubiquitously throughout the brain, whereas the mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) is mainly expressed in brain regions related to memory and emotion, for instance, the hippocampus, amygdala and PFC. 12 , 13 On binding to these receptors, cortisol operates via two different modes of action, a non-genomic, often MR-mediated mode develops rapidly 14 and enhances neural excitability in the amygdala and hippocampus, 15 , 16 presumably supporting memory formation. This rapid mode is followed by a slower, often GR-dependent mode that is assumed to develop ~60–90 min after stressor onset and to involve longer-lasting changes to DNA translation and transcription. 17 The slow genomic mode is assumed to revert the acute effects of stress and to re-establish homoeostasis by decreasing neural excitability in the amygdala and hippocampus long after stress. 4

Systems activated in response to stressful events. On a stressful encounter, the autonomic nervous system (left) is activated within seconds to release catecholamines (e.g., noradrenaline) from the adrenal medulla and the locus coeruleus in the brain stem. Catecholamines are implicated in the ‘fight-or-flight’ response, but they also have profound effects on attention, working memory and long-term memory. Somewhat slower, the hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal axis is activated, releasing corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH) from the hypothalamus which stimulates the anterior pituitary to secrete adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH). ACTH in turn causes the adrenal cortex to produce cortisol and release it into the blood stream. Cortisol reaches peak level concentrations ~20–30 min after stress onset and readily enters the brain to affect cognition and behaviour. Cortisol feedback to the pituitary, hypothalamus and other brain areas (e.g., the hippocampus) prevents the system from overshooting.

This striking temporal profile of the stress response leads to differential effects of stress on learning and memory, depending on the temporal proximity between the stressful event and the memory process investigated. For instance, stress experienced just before memory retrieval, when catecholamine levels are still high and cortisol levels are not elevated yet, may have very different effects than stress experienced 90 min before retrieval, when catecholamine levels returned to baseline and genomic cortisol actions are at work. 18 , 19 Moreover, distinct memory stages, i.e., encoding, consolidation or retrieval may be differently affected by these time-dependent physiological changes after a stressful encounter. In the next section, we will portray the time-dependent effects of stress on learning and memory, taking into account both the specific memory stage affected and the temporal proximity between the stressful event and the memory formation or retrieval process ( Figure 2 ).

The effects of stress on memory depend on the specific memory process investigated and the temporal proximity between the stressful event and this memory process. While stress (indicated as red flash) long before encoding impairs memory formation, stress shortly before or after the presentation of new information generally enhances subsequent memory performance. In sharp contrast, stress before memory retrieval impairs the recall of information learned previously which may directly affect performance at exams. In education, knowledge needs to be frequently updated by new facts or concepts relating to prior knowledge. In addition to its effects on memory encoding and retrieval, stress appears to impair this integration of new information into existing knowledge structures.

Time-dependent effects of stress on memory quantity

Emotionally arousing events are typically very well-remembered. Likewise, individuals who experienced extremely stressful (traumatic) events may suffer from very vivid memories of these events, suggesting that severe stress during or just before encoding may boost memory formation. In line with these observations, studies showed that also lower levels of stress (as they may occur more frequently in schools) during or just before learning may strengthen human memory. 20 – 23 This effect of stress on encoding was often stronger for emotional compared with neutral learning material. 24 Another factor moderating the influence of stress on learning is the correspondence between the stressful context and the learning material. For example, stress during learning specifically enhanced memory for material that was related to the context of the stressful task and thus putatively more relevant. 20 Material that is unrelated to an ongoing stressor, however, is typically not very well-remembered later on. 25 Despite many studies showing a stress-induced learning enhancement if stressor and learning coincide, some studies found the opposite effect. 26 , 27 This divergence might be due to other factors than just the timing of the stressful encounter, such as differences in the interval between study and retrieval or individual differences due to sex, genetics or the developmental background. 28 – 31 In sum, being moderately stressed can enhance memory formation for emotional material and information that is related to the stressful context, whereas stress may impair the encoding of stressor-unrelated material.

At the neural level, catecholamines such as NA appear to play a critical role in the enhancing effects of stress or emotional arousal on learning. Studies in rodents demonstrated that NA exposure strengthened synaptic contacts in the hippocampus 11 and that the concentration of NA in the amygdala after encoding predicted memory strength. 32 Corticosteroids, however, appear to play an important role as well. For instance, MR-activation rapidly enhanced neural excitability in the amygdala and hippocampus which may further aid successful memory encoding. 15 , 16 Additional evidence for a role of corticosteroids came from human pharmacological studies, demonstrating that the administration of 20 mg cortisol prior to learning boosted later memory, especially for emotionally arousing pictures. 33 Notably, this memory advantage for emotional material depends on NA, as it can be blocked by the beta-blocker propranolol. 34 Human neuroimaging studies then set out to elucidate the neural mechanism underlying the stress-induced learning enhancement. The immediate release of NA under stress activated a network of brain regions known as the salience network encompassing the amygdala, anterior cingulate cortex and anterior insula. 35 , 36 This rapid upregulation of the salience network allowed enhanced vigilance and better processing of threat-related information which may improve memory encoding in stressful situations. Some minutes later, the release of cortisol reduced global signal in the electroencephalogram (EEG), which was interpreted as a reduction in background processing in order to allow efficient processing of relevant information by enhancing the signal-to-noise ratio. 37 In line with an enhanced processing of important information, the stress-induced increase in processing and encoding of study items in the brain was related to better memory performance for these items at test. 38 , 39 Several studies also investigated the interplay of NA and cortisol in memory encoding. Supporting evidence for such an interaction came, for instance, from a study showing that emotional learning material activated the amygdala, an effect that depended on NA availability as it was abolished by propranolol. 40 Importantly, this amygdala response to emotional stimuli was particularly prominent in those individuals with higher cortisol levels during encoding. 41 Moreover, the combined administration of cortisol and yohimbine, a drug increasing NA stimulation, switched neural activity towards a strong deactivation of prefrontal areas, 42 potentially releasing the amygdala from inhibitory top-down control and improving memory encoding.

While stress around the time of learning enhances memory, stress (or cortisol administration of 25 mg) long before learning or in a distinctly different context does not promote new learning 43 and can even hinder successful encoding of new information. 21 For example, while stress directly before learning enhanced later recognition memory, memory was impaired if stress was experienced 30 min before learning. 21 This memory impairing effect of stress long before learning has been associated with a decrease in neural excitability in the hippocampus long after cortisol administration, 44 which might suggest that genomic actions of cortisol protect the consolidation of information learned during the stressful encounter. 2 In line with this finding of decreased hippocampal excitability, cortisol administered more than 1 h before MRI measurements reduced hippocampal and amygdala activity in humans, 45 , 46 possibly impairing the formation of new memories. In the same time period, the activity of the salience network decreased again to pre-stress levels while activity in the executive control network increased, 35 allowing the individual to recover from the stressful situation and to re-approach homoeostasis. However, there is evidence that this reversal of heightened salience network activity, which is important for higher cognitive control functions to improve coping in the aftermath of stress, does not occur when the participants remain in the stressful context. For instance, the coupling between the amygdala and the salience network remained enhanced after 1 h if the participants were still in the context of the stress induction procedure, 47 again highlighting the role of context as a moderator of stress effects on learning.

When stress is experienced before or during a learning episode, its effects on memory encoding can hardly be dissociated from those on memory consolidation. Also in educational settings, influences of stress on memory encoding can often not be separated from those on memory storage. However, by administering stress or stress mediators shortly after learning, thus excluding an influence on memory encoding, experimental studies were able to isolate stress effects on memory consolidation. Several studies in humans showed that stress or adrenaline injections shortly after learning improved memory consolidation, an effect which was more pronounced for emotionally arousing material, 26 , 48 , 49 , 50 highlighting the importance of the emotionality of the study material. Studies in rodents also demonstrated that the administration of NA or corticosteroids just after learning improved consolidation, 51 and that this enhancing effect (at least on hippocampal memory) required the interaction between NA and GR-mediated cortisol effects in the amygdala. 52 – 55

The effects of stress on memory are, however, not limited to the formation of memories (i.e., memory encoding and consolidation) but extend also to memory retrieval. Given that exams and tests can easily cause stress in students and students are evaluated based on their performance in these tests, it is particularly relevant to understand how stress affects memory recall. In line with seminal findings in rodents, 56 many studies in humans demonstrated that acute stress impaired memory retrieval after a stressful encounter (refs 18 , 19 , 57 , 58 , 59 but see refs 60 , 61 ). Retrieval in the stressful situation itself seemed not to be affected or even enhanced, 18 , 19 particularly when retrieval performance was directly relevant to the stressful encounter. Retrieval more than 20 min after stress, however, when cortisol levels were already elevated, was impaired by the cortisol response to stress 18 , 19 , 58 ( Figure 3 ) and the impairment appeared to be even stronger at a time point when genomic cortisol actions had developed, 18 suggesting that the impairing effects of stress can last much longer than previously known. This retrieval deficit after stress was not only found in adults but was also observed in 8–10-year-old children, highlighting the relevance of these findings for educational settings. 59 The disrupting effect of stress on retrieval was stronger for emotional material 26 , 62 and also the context appeared to play a moderating role on the effects of stress on retrieval. For instance, if the retrieval test was relevant for the stressful situation or if both learning and test took place in the same context, so that the context served as a retrieval cue, recall was spared from the impairing effects of stress. 19 , 63

Stress impairs memory retrieval. Participants learned a two-dimensional object location task similar to the game ‘concentration’ (note that for illustrative purposes encoding is depicted by a book, similar to studying in class). One day later, participants either underwent a mild stress induction procedure (indicated by the red flash) or a non-stressful control procedure before recalling the card pair locations learned on day 1. Participants in the stress group recalled significantly fewer card pair locations on day 2 than participants in the control group (relative to their performance on day 1), indicating that stress before retention testing reduced memory performance. Adjusted, with permission, from ref. 63 .

The negative effect of stress on retrieval could be mimicked by administering a GR agonist and blocked by the cortisol synthesis inhibitor metyrapone in rodents, which suggests a GR-dependent pathway 43 , 56 , 64 , 65 reducing blood flow in the medial temporal lobe. 66 However, the interaction with NA appears to be crucial as the impairing effects of cortisol depended on noradrenergic activation of the amygdala. 52 For instance, blocking the action of NA pharmacologically with propranolol abolished the impairing effect of cortisol on emotional memory retrieval. 67 Thus, similar to memory consolidation, the interaction between GR-mediated cortisol action and NA appears to be crucial for stress-induced effects on memory retrieval. 67

To summarise, stress affects memory in a time-dependent manner, often enhancing memory formation around the time of the stressful encounter but impairing memory retrieval and the acquisition of information encoded long after the stressful event. These effects depend on interactions between NA and cortisol in the amygdala and are thus often stronger for emotional than for neutral learning material. In the next paragraph, we will move beyond stress-induced changes in memory performance and describe how stress may also affect the integration of new information into existing memories, i.e., knowledge updating.

Stress and the dynamics of memory

Very often, students are not only required to recall study material, but to integrate new information into existing knowledge structures. In fact, integrating new information into existing memories is a key process in education (as well as in life in general where we are constantly required to update our knowledge). Such updating implicates that memories remain malleable even long time after they have been formed initially and research over the past 15 years shows that this is indeed the case (for review, see ref. 68 ). There is compelling evidence that consolidated, seemingly stable memories return to a labile state when they are reactivated, 68 – 71 which requires the re-stabilization of those memories in a process called reconsolidation. During reconsolidation, the reactivated memory can be weakened, strengthened or altered. 69 , 71 In other words, reconsolidation most likely represents the mechanism underlying memory updating processes. 72 As reconsolidation involves the hippocampus 71 and the PFC, 73 areas that are main targets of stress modulators, it seems reasonable to assume that stress would also affect reconsolidation. First evidence for such stress effects on reconsolidation came from rodent studies showing that stress or cortisol injections after memory reactivation impaired subsequent memory expression, suggesting that stress impaired reconsolidation. 74 , 75 For instance, stress after reactivation of a memory trace interfered with performance at a later memory test, an effect which depended on GR-mediated cortisol activity in the amygdala. 75 Several studies in humans support the hypothesis that stress can affect memory reconsolidation and thus memory updating, yet the specific conditions leading to impairing or enhancing effects of stress on reconsolidation are still under investigation. 76 – 78

Further evidence for a critical role of stress in the updating of memories comes from studies on the so-called misinformation effect. This effect describes the incorporation of misleading information presented after encoding the original event into the memory for this event. 79 Although this effect mainly concerns the biasing influence of misinformation on memory, it provides important insights into memory updating in general and studying how stress affects the misinformation effect may allow a deeper understanding of how stress affects the updating of memories. For instance, it was shown that if highly arousing information is learned during stress, this resulted in more robust memories that were less vulnerable to being ‘updated’ by subsequent (mis)information. 80 Similarly, misinformation was less often incorporated into existing memories if the participants were stressed before the presentation of misinformation, thus indicating that stress interferes with the updating of the existing memory trace 81 ( Figure 4 ). As the mechanism underlying the misinformation effect is assumed to be reconsolidation, 72 this finding is in line with reports showing an impairing effect of stress on memory reconsolidation. 74 , 75 , 78 In sum, there is accumulating evidence that stress may interfere with the updating of memories, which may have negative implications for education where new information often has to be incorporated into existing knowledge.

Stress reduces the integration of new information into existing memories. On day 1, participants were instructed to memorise different stories presented in short movie clips (note that encoding is illustrated by a book for illustrative purposes). On day two, participants either underwent a mild stress induction procedure (indicated by the red flash) or a non-stressful control procedure before they were presented with a questionnaire regarding the study material from day 1. Importantly, some items of this questionnaire included wrong information about the study material (misinformation, shown in orange). On day 3, forced choice questions were used to test whether the misinformation had been integrated into the memory trace of the study material. In the memory test, possible answers were the correct original information, the misinformation presented the day before and other incorrect answers (lures) that were not referred to on day 2. Overall, participants endorsed misinformation more often than lures, thus demonstrating a misinformation effect. Critically, stressed participants endorsed fewer misinformation items than participants of the control group, suggesting that stress reduced the modification of the original memory on day 2. Adjusted, with permission, from ref. 81 . * P <0.005

Stress alters the way we learn: effects on memory quality

Most studies investigating the effects of stress on memory encoding, retrieval or updating focused on memories encoded by the hippocampus. However, experiences can be encoded by multiple memory systems operating in parallel, differing in their neural substrate and in the information processed. 82 , 83 Several studies demonstrated that stress has a critical impact on which of these memory systems is used to form and retrieve memories, implicating that stress changes the nature or quality of memories 84 , 85 (see Figure 5 ). Early studies in rodents demonstrated that stress or amygdala activation through anxiogenic drugs at encoding induced a shift from a flexible ‘cognitive’ memory system depending on the hippocampus towards a more rigid, ‘habit’-like memory system based on the dorsal striatum. 82 , 86 , 87 Thus, under stress, more rigid stimulus–response associations are learned rather than complex representations of our environment including the relationship between stimuli or task requirements. This shift in the system that controls memory could be blocked by an MR-antagonist, suggesting that the shift is due to MR-mediated cortisol action. 88 , 89 Importantly, stress itself did not disrupt learning, but blocking the shift towards habit memories markedly impaired performance, 88 suggesting that the shift towards the striatum-based habit system is adaptive and beneficial for performance under stress. So far, only one study investigated whether this stress-induced shift also affects memory retrieval, and indeed anxiogenic drugs injected into the amygdala before retrieval biased rats towards an increased use of their dorsal striatum at the expense of the hippocampal memory system. 90 To summarise, these studies in rodents suggest that stress induces a qualitative shift in the systems guiding learning (and, most likely, retrieval), from a cognitive, hippocampus-dependent memory system towards a habit-like memory system based on the striatum.

Stress shifts the balance between multiple systems underlying learning and memory. At rest, this balance is tilted towards the ‘cognitive’ memory system depending on the hippocampus, allowing for the formation and recall of flexible memories. Stress, however, is thought to alter the system domination learning and memory. Under stress (indicated by a red flash), the balance tips towards more rigid ‘habit’ memories encoded by the dorsal striatum. Thus, stress affects not only how much is learned (memory quantity) but also what is encoded and how memories are built (memory quality).

In line with these rodent findings, stress shifts the systems dominating memory encoding also in humans towards an increased use of striatal habit-like memory, at the expense of hippocampal memory. 91 – 93 For example, stressed participants often used a habit-like striatal learning strategy instead of a hippocampal strategy to solve a learning task. 93 Similar to the findings in rodents, stress did not affect learning performance per se if participants switched to the striatal memory system, 91 yet performance was impaired when participants tried to recruit the hippocampal memory system despite stress. 93 Accordingly, task performance was positively correlated with hippocampal activity in non-stressed control participants, whereas performance correlated positively with striatal activity and even negatively with hippocampal activity in stressed participants. 93 The amygdala appeared to orchestrate this stress-induced shift by rapidly increasing functional connectivity with the dorsal striatum and decreasing its coupling with the hippocampus. 94 , 95 Importantly, an MR-antagonist blocked the stress-induced shift both at the behavioural and neural level, 94 , 95 demonstrating that the stress-induced shift appears to depend on cortisol acting via the MR. 89

In addition to the shift from hippocampal to striatal memory, stress affects the balance between memory systems underlying instrumental behaviour, i.e., behaviour aimed at obtaining rewards or avoiding punishments. Learning and performing these actions can be controlled by a ‘habitual’ system relying on the dorsolateral striatum which acts largely independently of the current value of the action-outcome, or a ‘goal-directed’ system depending on the PFC, dorsomedial striatum, and dorsomedial thalamus which is sensitive to changes in outcome value. 96 Under stress, human and rodent behaviour is rendered more habitual and based on stimulus–response associations rather than action-outcome associations which underlie goal-directed actions. 97 – 101 Moreover, the behaviour of stressed individuals was more resistant against extinction procedures, 92 further highlighting the rigid, rather habitual behaviour of stressed individuals. For example, stressed infants continued to use habit actions even though the behaviour was not reinforced anymore, whereas non-stressed infants stopped showing the behaviour when the reinforcement ended. 100 The stress-induced modulation of instrumental behaviour can be abolished by beta blockers, suggesting that NA plays a crucial role in this shift towards habit behaviour. 98 Again, NA appears to interact with the effects of cortisol as the stress-induced shift towards habits can be mimicked by the combined administration of cortisol and yohimbine, 97 and beta-adrenergic blockade by propranolol prevents the stress-induced bias towards habits. 98 In the brain, this shift has been associated with a reduced sensitivity of the orbitofrontal and medial PFC to changes in outcome value, whereas brain regions implicated in habit learning were not affected. 99

To summarise, stress cannot only affect how much information we learn and remember, but stress also flips the balance between the systems dominating learning and memory, which has considerable consequences for the nature and flexibility of memories and the goal-directedness of behaviour.

Stress and memory in the classroom

School children often encounter stressful events inside and outside of their school environment 102 and nearly 70% of primary school children report symptoms of stress such as worries, anxiety or sadness. 103 In the preceding chapters, we argued that situations appraised as stressful have strong and diverse effects on human memory. While learning during or immediately after stress is often enhanced, stress disrupts memory retrieval and updating, and these effects are most pronounced for emotionally arousing material. Finally, we argued that stress shifts the balance between multiple systems underlying memories and instrumental behaviours towards the formation and recall of rather rigid habit-like memories. Together, these findings highlight that stress may critically shape our memories, which is of utmost importance in all educational contexts.

In the classroom, these stress effects on memory may have far-reaching consequences for students. For instance, emotions or light to moderate forms of stress (i.e., cognitive challenges without excessive demands or moderate emotional arousal that results, e.g., from hearing something that is unexpected) may increase memory formation, which may have positive effects on memories for study material. Yet, these effects likely follow an inverted u-shape and can revert with too high levels of stress. 28 , 104 Moreover, stress may lead to stronger memories for negative events happening in the classroom, such as failed exams, embarrassing experiences or interpersonal conflicts (e.g., bullying) and these strong negative memories may induce long-lasting frustration and a negative attitude towards school and the individual’s abilities. These negative consequences of stress on students may be intensified by the deleterious effects of stress on memory retrieval. Moderate or high levels of stress before exams will most likely hinder memory retrieval and lead to an underestimation of the students’ knowledge, putatively resulting in bad grades. Furthermore, stress may hinder the integration of new information into existing knowledge structures, which may prevent the updating of knowledge by new facts or a deep multidisciplinary understanding of concepts which is often required in education. Finally, by altering the balance between memory systems, stress may lead to strong, rigid memories and the retrieval of habits rather than creative and complex solutions to new problems, which may again lead to an underestimation of the students’ abilities.

Although the effects of stress on memory are highly relevant to students, also teachers frequently encounter stressful events and >40% report high levels of work stress. 105 Also for teachers, appraising events as stressful may lead to strong negative memories of unpleasant situations in the classroom with implications for their work attitude and potentially their mental health. Moreover, stress may impair the quality of teaching if the teacher’s flexibility is decreased, which might hamper adaptive responding to the individual needs and resources of students. Instead, habitual procedures may be supported by stress, leading to a more repetitive teaching style, which may in turn lead to more problems in class.

Considering this wide range of possible stress effects in educational settings, strategies to deal with stress and its consequences are needed. First and foremost, teachers should be aware of the impact stress may have on memory formation, retrieval and updating. Moreover, students should be educated about the influence of stress on memory to raise awareness for the powerful effects stress may exert and the need for efficient coping strategies. It is important to note that potentially stressful events do not necessarily lead to a stress response, but that the individual appraisal of the situation and the available coping strategies determine whether a situation results in the activation of stress systems or not. This dependence on appraisal and coping can explain why some individuals suffer much less from potentially stressful circumstances than others. Thus, next to changing potentially stressful situations, students should be educated about effective coping strategies. 8 , 106

Furthermore, based on findings demonstrating that emotional material is typically better remembered than neutral material, an emotional component (mainly positive) may be added while students learn new information to enhance later memory. 21 , 23 , 24 , 33 , 49 , 107 , 108 For example, this could be achieved by explicit positive verbal reinforcement of students during learning in class. Furthermore, movie clips might be used which do not only focus on the learning material itself, but place it into an emotional context, e.g., by making the links to the student and his or her everyday life explicit.

To counteract the strong negative effects of stress on memory retrieval and updating, strong stressors before exams or before new information is presented to update students’ knowledge should be avoided as far as possible. To reduce stress, practice exams may familiarise the students with the exam situation and trainings in stress reduction techniques or other coping strategies might help students to alleviate stress symptoms. Teachers should also be aware that different forms of retrieval may be differentially affected by stress. Free recall seems to be disrupted more easily by stress than cued recall, 62 suggesting that recall cues may enhance the chance that students can actually retrieve the information they have learned. It is important to note that the impairing effects of stress on retrieval are quite long-lasting, such that stressors long before the exam (e.g., at home) may still affect performance in the test situation. Therefore, children with trouble at home or frequent stressful life events may need special attention before exams to reduce the effects of stress.

Stress does not only induce a deficit in memory retrieval and memory updating, it also changes the way information is stored and retrieved by multiple memory systems. Stress before learning may bias students towards rigid forms of learning, which may hinder the successful transfer of knowledge and reduce cognitive flexibility in problem solving. However, the negative effects of stress on memory retrieval may be counteracted to some extent by thoroughly and repeatedly practicing useful routines which can be recalled rather automatically. This may be especially relevant for the training of correct actions during emergency situations. For instance, given that flexible memory recall and knowledge application is hindered under stress, pilots or physicians should be trained extensively in the correct routines they should apply in stressful emergency situations. If these procedures are automatised, it is much more likely that they can actually be retrieved and translated to behaviour.

Last, students and teachers should be aware of the powerful effects of context. It has been shown repeatedly that memory is enhanced when learning and recall take place in the same context as the context serves as a strong retrieval cue. 109 Moreover, although stress often impairs retrieval, this effect seems to be alleviated if learning and retrieval context match, indicating that the effect of context might counteract stress-induced memory impairments. 63

Conclusion and outlook

Stress has far-reaching consequences on our ability to learn and remember, with major implications for educational settings. Considering that stress is ubiquitous in education and even primary school children often report stress symptoms, understanding the effects of stress on memory is very important. For one, an optimised education is of utmost importance for the individual, laying the foundation of later career success and socioeconomic status. In addition, our educational system is highly relevant for society as a whole by building and instructing the next generation.

Despite the striking advances the field has seen in our understanding of how stress changes learning and memory processes, several questions remain to be answered, e.g., concerning interindividual differences in the effects of stress on memory. While some studies suggested that differences in personality, gender or stress system reactivity may moderate how stress affects learning, 28 the findings are not conclusive yet and the involved mechanisms are not understood sufficiently well to derive recommendations for teachers. Understanding these interindividual differences is a key to personalised approaches or training programmes directed at preventing stress-induced impairments. In addition, more research is necessary to understand the precise development of stress effects on memories over time as it is currently unclear when exactly the enhancing and impairing effects of stress on memory formation arise and how long they last. Likewise, it is currently not well-understood whether different types 110 or intensities 104 of stressors have different effects on memory. Furthermore, most studies did not explicitly distinguish between stress effects on different types of declarative memory, i.e., semantic and declarative memories. Future studies are required to assess whether stress has differential effects on these memory systems, which would provide important insights into how stress changes different forms of learning and memory. Finally, the exposure to prolonged or repeated stress, as well as stress during critical periods of brain development may also have strong effects on learning and memory in children which need to be better understood to counteract the impairments they may cause. 111 Thus, different intensities of stress at different time points during development may induce different effects which remain to be further investigated. Future research on the effects of stress on learning and memory will hopefully answer these and related questions and thus further deepen our understanding of how stress affects memory and why individuals differ in response to stress. Answering these questions may help to personalise learning settings to the specific needs of the individual, to make optimal use of the beneficial effects of emotions on memory, and to alleviate the cognitive impairments stress and strong emotional responses may cause.

Joels, M., Pu, Z. W., Wiegert, O., Oitzl, M. S. & Krugers, H. J. Learning under stress: how does it work? Trends Cogn. Sci. 10 , 152–158 (2006).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Schwabe, L., Joëls, M., Roozendaal, B., Wolf, O. T. & Oitzl, M. S. Stress effects on memory: an update and integration. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 36 , 1740–1749 (2012).

Pitman, R. K. et al. Biological studies of post-traumatic stress disorder. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 13 , 769–787 (2012).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Joëls, M., Fernandez, G. & Roozendaal, B. Stress and emotional memory: a matter of timing. Trends Cogn. Sci. 15 , 280–288 (2011).

Arnsten, A. F. T. Stress signalling pathways that impair prefrontal cortex structure and function. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 10 , 410–422 (2009).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Sandi, C. & Haller, J. Stress and the social brain: behavioural effects and neurobiological mechanisms. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 16 , 290–304 (2015).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

de Kloet, E. R., Joels, M. & Holsboer, F. Stress and the brain: from adaptation to disease. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 6 , 463–475 (2005).

Folkman, S., Lazarus, R. S., Dunkel-Schetter, C., DeLongis, A. & Gruen, R. J. Dynamics of a stressful encounter: cognitive appraisal, coping, and encounter outcomes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50 , 992–1003 (1986).

Lazarus, R. S . Emotion and Adaptation xiii 557 (Oxford Univ. Press, 1991).

Google Scholar  

Joëls, M. & Baram, T. Z. The neuro-symphony of stress. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 10 , 459–466 (2009).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   CAS   Google Scholar  

Katsuki, H., Izumi, Y. & Zorumski, C. F. Noradrenergic regulation of synaptic plasticity in the hippocampal CA1 region. J. Neurophysiol. 77 , 3013–3020 (1997).

DeKloet, E. R., Reul, J. & Sutanto, W. Corticosteroids and the brain. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 37 , 387–394 (1990).

Chao, H. M., Choo, P. H. & McEwen, B. S. Glucocorticoid and mineralocorticoid receptor mRNA expression in rat brain. Neuroendocrinology 50 , 365–371 (1989).

Groeneweg, F. L., Karst, H., de Kloet, E. R. & Joëls, M. Rapid non-genomic effects of corticosteroids and their role in the central stress response. J. Endocrinol. 209 , 153–167 (2011).

Karst, H., Berger, S., Erdmann, G., Schutz, G. & Joels, M. Metaplasticity of amygdalar responses to the stress hormone corticosterone. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107 , 14449–14454 (2010).

Karst, H. et al. Mineralocorticoid receptors are indispensable for nongenomic modulation of hippocampal glutamate transmission by corticosterone. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102 , 19204–19207 (2005).

Joëls, M., Sarabdjitsingh, R. A. & Karst, H. Unraveling the time domains of corticosteroid hormone influences on brain activity: Rapid, slow, and chronic modes. Pharmacol. Rev. 64 , 901–938 (2012).

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Schwabe, L. & Wolf, O. Timing matters: temporal dynamics of stress effects on memory retrieval. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 14 , 1041–1048 (2014).

Schönfeld, P., Ackermann, K. & Schwabe, L. Remembering under stress: different roles of autonomic arousal and glucocorticoids in memory retrieval. Psychoneuroendocrinology 39 , 249–256 (2014).

Smeets, T., Giesbrecht, T., Jelicic, M. & Merckelbach, H. Context-dependent enhancement of declarative memory performance following acute psychosocial stress. Biol. Psychol. 76 , 116–123 (2007).

Zoladz, P. R. et al. Pre-learning stress differentially affects long-term memory for emotional words, depending on temporal proximity to the learning experience. Physiol. Behav. 103 , 467–476 (2011).

Domes, G., Heinrichs, M., Reichwald, U. & Hautzinger, M. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis reactivity to psychological stress and memory in middle-aged women: High responders exhibit enhanced declarative memory performance. Psychoneuroendocrinology 27 , 843–853 (2002).

Schwabe, L., Bohringer, A., Chatterjee, M. & Schachinger, H. Effects of pre-learning stress on memory for neutral, positive and negative words: different roles of cortisol and autonomic arousal. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 90 , 44–53 (2008).

Payne, J. et al. The impact of stress on neutral and emotional aspects of episodic memory. Memory 14 , 1–16 (2006).

Schwabe, L. & Wolf, O. T. Learning under stress impairs memory formation. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 93 , 183–188 (2010).

Smeets, T., Otgaar, H., Candel, I. & Wolf, O. T. True or false? Memory is differentially affected by stress-induced cortisol elevations and sympathetic activity at consolidation and retrieval. Psychoneuroendocrinology 33 , 1378–1386 (2008).

Elzinga, B. M., Bakker, A. & Bremner, J. D. Stress-induced cortisol elevations are associated with impaired delayed, but not immediate recall. Psychiatry Res. 134 , 211–223 (2005).

Andreano, J. M. & Cahill, L. Glucocorticoid release and memory consolidation in men and women. Psychol. Sci. 17 , 466–470 (2006).

Rasch, B. et al. A genetic variation of the noradrenergic system is related to differential amygdala activation during encoding of emotional memories. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106 , 19191–19196 (2009).

Vukojevic, V. et al. Epigenetic modification of the glucocorticoid receptor gene is linked to traumatic memory and post-traumatic stress disorder risk in genocide survivors. J. Neurosci. 34 , 10274–10284 (2014).

Schwabe, L., Bohbot, V. D. & Wolf, O. T. Prenatal stress changes learning strategies in adulthood. Hippocampus 22 , 2136–2143 (2012).

McIntyre, C. K., Hatfield, T. & McGaugh, J. L. Amygdala norepinephrine levels after training predict inhibitory avoidance retention performance in rats. Eur. J. Neurosci. 16 , 1223–1226 (2002).

Buchanan, T. W. & Lovallo, W. R. Enhanced memory for emotional material following stress-level cortisol treatment in humans. Psychoneuroendocrinology 26 , 307–317 (2001).

Cahill, L., Prins, B., Weber, M. & McGaugh, J. L. [beta]-adrenergic activation and memory for emotional events. Nature 371 , 702–704 (1994).

Hermans, E. J., Henckens, MJAG, Joëls, M. & Fernández, G. Dynamic adaptation of large-scale brain networks in response to acute stressors. Trends Neurosci. 37 , 304–314 (2014).

Hermans, E. J. et al. Stress-related noradrenergic activity prompts large-scale neural network reconfiguration. Science 334 , 1151–1153 (2011).

Strelzyk, F. et al. Tune it down to live it up? Rapid, nongenomic effects of cortisol on the human brain. J. Neurosci. 32 , 616–625 (2012).

Henckens, M. J., Hermans, E. J., Pu, Z., Joëls, M. & Fernández, G. Stressed memories: how acute stress affects memory formation in humans. J. Neurosci. 29 , 10111–10119 (2009).

Weymar, M., Schwabe, L., Löw, A. & Hamm, A. O. Stress sensitizes the brain: increased processing of unpleasant pictures after exposure to acute stress. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 24 , 1511–1518 (2011).

Strange, B. A. & Dolan, R. J. Β-adrenergic modulation of emotional memory-evoked human amygdala and hippocampal responses. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101 , 11454–11458 (2004).

van Stegeren, A. H., Wolf, O. T., Everaerd, W., Rombouts, S. A. R. B. in Progress in Brain Research (eds Ronald E., De Kloet M. S. O. & Eric V. ) Vol. 167 , 263–268 (Elsevier, 2007).

van Stegeren, A. H., Roozendaal, B., Kindt, M., Wolf, O. T. & Joels, M. Interacting noradrenergic and corticosteroid systems shift human brain activation patterns during encoding. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 93 , 56–65 (2010).

de Quervain, D. J. F., Roozendaal, B., Nitsch, R. M., McGaugh, J. L. & Hock, C. Acute cortisone administration impairs retrieval of long-term declarative memory in humans. Nat. Neurosci. 3 , 313–314 (2000).

Wiegert, O., Joëls, M. & Krugers, H. Timing is essential for rapid effects of corticosterone on synaptic potentiation in the mouse hippocampus. Learn. Mem. 13 , 110–113 (2006).

Henckens, M. J. et al. Dynamically changing effects of corticosteroids on human hippocampal and prefrontal processing. Hum. Brain Mapp. 33 , 2885–2897 (2012).

Henckens, M., van Wingen, G. A., Joels, M. & Fernandez, G. Time-dependent effects of corticosteroids on human amygdala processing. J. Neurosci. 30 , 12725–12732 (2010).

van Marle, H. J. F., Hermans, E. J., Qin, S. Z. & Fernandez, G. Enhanced resting-state connectivity of amygdala in the immediate aftermath of acute psychological stress. Neuroimage 53 , 348–354 (2010).

Cahill, L. & Alkire, M. T. Epinephrine enhancement of human memory consolidation: Interaction with arousal at encoding. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 79 , 194–198 (2003).

Cahill, L., Gorski, L. & Le, K. Enhanced human memory consolidation with post-learning stress: Interaction with the degree of arousal at encoding. Learn. Mem. 10 , 270–274 (2003).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Beckner, V. E., Tucker, D. M., Delville, Y. & Mohr, D. C. Stress facilitates consolidation of verbal memory for a film but does not affect retrieval. Behav. Neurosci. 120 , 518–527 (2006).

Roozendaal, B. & McGaugh, J. L. Amygdaloid nuclei lesions differentially affect glucocorticoid-induced memory enhancement in an inhibitory avoidance task. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 65 , 1–8 (1996).

Roozendaal, B., Okuda, S., De Quervain, D. J. F. & McGaligh, J. L. Glucocorticoids interact with emotion-induced noradrenergic activation in influencing different memory functions. Neuroscience 138 , 901–910 (2006).

Roozendaal, B., Okuda, S., Van der Zee, E. A. & McGaugh, J. L. Glucocorticoid enhancement of memory requires arousal-induced noradrenergic activation in the basolateral amygdala. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103 , 6741–6746 (2006).

Barsegyan, A., Mackenzie, S. M., Kurose, B. D., McGaugh, J. L. & Roozendaal, B. Glucocorticoids in the prefrontal cortex enhance memory consolidation and impair working memory by a common neural mechanism. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107 , 16655–16660 (2010).

McGaugh, J. L., Cahill, L. & Roozendaal, B. Involvement of the amygdala in memory storage: Interaction with other brain systems. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 93 , 13508–13514 (1996).

de Quervain, D. J. F., Roozendaal, B. & McGaugh, J. L. Stress and glucocorticoids impair retrieval of long-term spatial memory. Nature 394 , 787–790 (1998).

Quaedflieg, C. W., Schwabe, L., Meyer, T. & Smeets, T. Time dependent effects of stress prior to encoding on event-related potentials and 24 h delayed retrieval. Psychoneuroendocrinology 38 , 3057–3069 (2013).

Buchanan, T. W., Tranel, D. & Adolphs, R. Impaired memory retrieval correlates with individual differences in cortisol response but not autonomic response. Learn. Mem. 13 , 382–387 (2006).

Quesada, A. A., Wiemers, U. S., Schoofs, D. & Wolf, O. T. Psychosocial stress exposure impairs memory retrieval in children. Psychoneuroendocrinology 37 , 125–136 (2012).

Hupbach, A. & Fieman, R. Moderate stress enhances immediate and delayed retrieval of educationally relevant material in healthy young men. Behav. Neurosci. 126 , 819–825 (2012).

Schwabe, L. et al. Stress effects on declarative memory retrieval are blocked by a β-adrenoceptor antagonist in humans. Psychoneuroendocrinology 34 , 446–454 (2009).

Kuhlmann, S., Piel, M. & Wolf, O. T. Impaired memory retrieval after psychosocial stress in healthy young men. J. Neurosci. 25 , 2977–2982 (2005).

Schwabe, L. & Wolf, O. T. The context counts: congruent learning and testing environments prevent memory retrieval impairment following stress. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 9 , 229–236 (2009).

Tollenaar, M. S., Elzinga, B. M., Spinhoven, P. & Everaerd, W. Immediate and prolonged effects of cortisol, but not propranolol, on memory retrieval in healthy young men. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 91 , 23–31 (2009).

Roozendaal, B., Griffith, Q. K., Buranday, J., de Quervain, DJ-F & McGaugh, J. L. The hippocampus mediates glucocorticoid-induced impairment of spatial memory retrieval: dependence on the basolateral amygdala. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100 , 1328–1333 (2003).

De Quervain, D. J. F. et al. Glucocorticoid-induced impairment of declarative memory retrieval is associated with reduced blood flow in the medial temporal lobe. Eur. J. Neurosci. 17 , 1296–1302 (2003).

de Quervain, D. J., Aerni, A. & Roozendaal, B. Preventive effect of beta-adrenoceptor blockade on glucocorticoid-induced memory retrieval deficits. Am. J. Psychiatry 164 , 967–969 (2007).

Dudai, Y. The restless engram: consolidations never end. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 35 , 227–247 (2012).

Nader, K., Schafe, G. E. & Le Doux, J. E. Fear memories require protein synthesis in the amygdala for reconsolidation after retrieval. Nature 406 , 722–726 (2000).

Nader, K. & Hardt, O. A single standard for memory: the case for reconsolidation. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 10 , 224–234 (2009).

Schwabe, L., Nader, K. & Pruessner, J. C. Reconsolidation of human memory: brain mechanisms and clinical relevance. Biol. Psychiatry 76 , 274–280 (2014).

Schacter, D. L. & Loftus, E. F. Memory and law: what can cognitive neuroscience contribute? Nat. Neurosci. 16 , 119–123 (2013).

Sandrini, M., Censor, N., Mishoe, J. & Cohen, L. Causal role of prefrontal cortex in strengthening of episodic memories through reconsolidation. Curr. Biol. 23 , 2181–2184 (2013).

Cai, W.-H., Blundell, J., Han, J., Greene, R. W. & Powell, C. M. Postreactivation glucocorticoids impair recall of established fear memory. J. Neurosci. 26 , 9560–9566 (2006).

Wang, X.-Y., Zhao, M., Ghitza, U. E., Li, Y.-Q. & Lu, L. Stress impairs reconsolidation of drug memory via glucocorticoid receptors in the basolateral amygdala. J. Neurosci. 28 , 5602–5610 (2008).

Bos, M. G., Schuijer, J., Lodestijn, F., Beckers, T. & Kindt, M. Stress enhances reconsolidation of declarative memory. Psychoneuroendocrinology 46 , 102–113 (2014).

Coccoz, V., Maldonado, H. & Delorenzi, A. The enhancement of reconsolidation with a naturalistic mild stressor improves the expression of a declarative memory in humans. Neuroscience 185 , 61–72 (2011).

Schwabe, L. & Wolf, O. T. Stress impairs the reconsolidation of autobiographical memories. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 94 , 153–157 (2010).

Loftus, E. F. & Palmer, J. C. Reconstruction of automobile destruction: an example of the interaction between language and memory. J. Verbal Learning Verbal Behav. 13 , 585–589 (1974).

Article   Google Scholar  

Hoscheidt, S. M., LaBar, K. S., Ryan, L., Jacobs, W. J. & Nadel, L. Encoding negative events under stress: High subjective arousal is related to accurate emotional memory despite misinformation exposure. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 112 , 237–247 (2014).

Schmidt, P.-I., Rosga, K., Schatto, C., Breidenstein, A. & Schwabe, L. Stress reduces the incorporation of misinformation into an established memory. Learn. Mem. 21 , 744–747 (2014).

Wingard, J. C. & Packard, M. G. The amygdala and emotional modulation of competition between cognitive and habit memory. Behav. Brain Res. 193 , 126–131 (2008).

Poldrack, R. A. & Packard, M. G. Competition among multiple memory systems: Converging evidence from animal and human brain studies. Neuropsychologia 41 , 245–251 (2003).

Schwabe, L. & Wolf, O. T. Stress and multiple memory systems: from ‘thinking’ to ‘doing’. Trends Cogn. Sci. 17 , 60–68 (2013).

Schwabe, L., Wolf, O. T. & Oitzl, M. S. Memory formation under stress: quantity and quality. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 34 , 584–591 (2010).

Packard, M. G. & Teather, L. A. Amygdala modulation of multiple memory systems: hippocampus and caudate-putamen. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 69 , 163–203 (1998).

Packard, M. G. & Wingard, J. C. Amygdala and ‘emotional’ modulation of the relative use of multiple memory systems. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 82 , 243–252 (2004).

Schwabe, L., Schachinger, H., de Kloet, E. R. & Oitzl, M. S. Corticosteroids operate as a switch between memory systems. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 22 , 1362–1372 (2010).

Vogel, S., Fernández, G., Joëls, M. & Schwabe, L. Cognitive adaptation under stress: a case for the mineralocorticoid receptor. Trends Cogn. Sci. 20 , 192–203 (2016).

Elliott, A. E. & Packard, M. G. Intra-amygdala anxiogenic drug infusion prior to retrieval biases rats towards the use of habit memory. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 90 , 616–623 (2008).

Schwabe, L. et al. Stress modulates the use of spatial versus stimulus-response learning strategies in humans. Learn. Mem. 14 , 109–116 (2007).

Schwabe, L. & Wolf, O. T. Stress increases behavioural resistance to extinction. Psychoneuroendocrinology 36 , 1287–1293 (2011).

Schwabe, L. & Wolf, O. T. Stress modulates the engagement of multiple memory systems in classification learning. J. Neurosci. 32 , 11042–11049 (2012).

Vogel, S. et al. Blocking the mineralocorticoid receptor in humans prevents the stress-induced enhancement of centromedial amygdala connectivity with the dorsal striatum. Neuropsychopharmacology 40 , 947–956 (2015).

Schwabe, L., Tegenthoff, M., Höffken, O. & Wolf, O. T. Mineralocorticoid receptor blockade prevents stress-induced modulation of multiple memory systems in the human brain. Biol. Psychiatry 74 , 801–808 (2013).

Balleine, B. W. & Dickinson, A. The role of incentive learning in instrumental outcome revaluation by sensory-specific satiety. Anim. Learn. Behav. 26 , 46–59 (1998).

Schwabe, L., Tegenthoff, M., Höffken, O. & Wolf, O. T. Concurrent glucocorticoid and noradrenergic activity shifts instrumental behaviour from goal-directed to habitual control. J. Neurosci. 30 , 8190–8196 (2010).

Schwabe, L., Höffken, O., Tegenthoff, M. & Wolf, O. T. Preventing the stress-induced shift from goal-directed to habit action with a β-adrenergic antagonist. J. Neurosci. 31 , 17317–17325 (2011).

Schwabe, L., Tegenthoff, M., Höffken, O. & Wolf, O. T. Simultaneous glucocorticoid and noradrenergic activity disrupts the neural basis of goal-directed action in the human brain. J. Neurosci. 32 , 10146–10155 (2012).

Seehagen, S., Schneider, S., Rudolph, J., Ernst, S. & Zmyj, N. Stress impairs cognitive flexibility in infants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112 , 12882–12886 (2015).

Braun, S. & Hauber, W. Acute stressor effects on goal-directed action in rats. Learn. Mem. 20 , 700–709 (2013).

Vanaelst, B. et al. Prevalence of negative life events and chronic adversities in european pre- and primary-school children: Results from the idefics study. Arch. Public Health 70 , 26 (2012).

Valizadeh, L., Farnam, A. & Rahkar Farshi, M. Investigation of stress symptoms among primary school children. J. Caring Sci. 1 , 25–30 (2012).

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Joëls, M. Corticosteroid effects in the brain: U-shape it. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 27 , 244–250 (2006).

Smith, A., Brice, C., Collins, A., McNamara, R. & Matthews, V. . Scale of Occupational Stress: A Further Analysis of the Impact of Demographic Factors and Type of Job . HSE, (2000).

Thorne, K. J., Andrews, J. J. W. & Nordstokke, D. Relations among children's coping strategies and anxiety: the mediating role of coping efficacy. J. Gen. Psychol. 140 , 204–223 (2013).

McGaugh, J. L. Making lasting memories: remembering the significant. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110 Suppl 2, 10402–10407 (2013).

Ochsner, K. N. Are affective events richly recollected or simply familiar? The experience and process of recognizing feelings past. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 129 , 242–261 (2000).

Godden, D. R. & Baddeley, A. D. Context-dependent memory in two natural environments: On land and underwater. Br. J. Psychol. 66 , 325–331 (1975).

Pacak, K. et al. Heterogeneous neurochemical responses to different stressors: a test of Selye’s doctrine of nonspecificity. Am. J. Physiol. Regul. Integr. Comp. Physiol. 275 , R1247–R1255 (1998).

Schwabe, L., Dalm, S., Schachinger, H. & Oitzl, M. S. Chronic stress modulates the use of spatial and stimulus-response learning strategies in mice and man. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 90 , 495–503 (2008).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the University of Hamburg. Both authors are supported by the University of Hamburg.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Cognitive Psychology, Institute of Psychology, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

Susanne Vogel & Lars Schwabe

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

S.V. drafted the manuscript and L.S. provided critical revisions. Both authors approved the final version of the manuscript for submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lars Schwabe .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Vogel, S., Schwabe, L. Learning and memory under stress: implications for the classroom. npj Science Learn 1 , 16011 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/npjscilearn.2016.11

Download citation

Received : 01 February 2016

Revised : 08 April 2016

Accepted : 12 April 2016

Published : 29 June 2016

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/npjscilearn.2016.11

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Alternation of social behaviors for zebrafish (danio rerio) in response to acute cold stress.

• Sian-Tai Liu
• Chun-Yung Chang
• Ming-Yi Chou

Fish Physiology and Biochemistry (2024)

Exploration of the external and internal factors that affected learning effectiveness for the students: a questionnaire survey

• Ding-Ping Chen
• Su-Wei Chang
• Pi-Yueh Chang

BMC Medical Education (2023)

Stress-related cellular pathophysiology as a crosstalk risk factor for neurocognitive and psychiatric disorders

• Iryna S. Palamarchuk
• George M. Slavich
• Tarek K. Rajji

BMC Neuroscience (2023)

Understanding underperformance in a high-stakes clinical-based simulation assessment in physiotherapy: a descriptive analysis

• Brooke Flew
• Belinda Judd
• Lucy Chipchase

Anxiety and functional impairment affects undergraduate psychology students’ learning in remote emergency teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic

• Vitor Rabelo de Sá
• Paula Victoria Sozza Silva Gulá
• Fernando E. Padovan-Neto

Scientific Reports (2023)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Psychology Research Methods: Creating a Research Question

• Creating a Research Question
• Search Terms
• Search Strategies
• Recording Your Research
• Finding Articles
• Finding Books
• Journal Articles
• Books & Other Sources
• Publisher URL

Choosing a Topic

Sometimes the most difficult part of the research process is choosing a topic.  Here are some tips for selecting a research question that you will enjoy learning about and will ultimately lead to a good grade.

• Read through your assignment.   Professors design an assignment outline for a reason.  Make sure your topic can and will adhere to their requirements and guidelines.
• Choose a topic you are interested in.   If you don't like what you're researching, chances are you won't learn a whole lot or enjoy the process.  And really, what's the point of that?  
• Browse resources that relate to your course work.  Look through a newspaper, magazine, or database for current events or hot topics.  Browsing can spark a lot of great ideas and can help you refine your topic.
• Ask for help!   There is nothing wrong with asking your professor or a librarian to help you brainstorm ideas.

Where to Start

The links below are great places to start in developing a research question.  Browsing current events and hot topics can spark your interest and inspire a topic.

• Alvernia's "Opposing Viewpoints" Collection
• Alvernia's Reference Collection
• Google Trends
• Health & Medicine
• Hot Paper Topics
• Hot Topics for Research Papers
• National Library of Medicine
• New York Times
• NPR Research News
• Pew Research Center
• Psychology Encyclopedias - eBooks
• Psychology Encyclopedias - print
• Public Agenda's Programs and Reports
• MedLinePlus This link opens in a new window
• Opposing Viewpoints in Context This link opens in a new window

APA PsycINFO Guides

These APA PsycINFO guides include suggested subject terms to aid you in your research.

• Behavioral Economics
• Child Development
• Computers & the Internet
• Gerontology
• Grief & Trauma Counseling
• Integrative Medicine
• Marketing & Advertising
• Military Psychology
• Neuroscience
• Psychology and The Law
• Public Health
• Religion & Spirituality
• Sexuality & Gender Identity
• Social Work

Helpful Tools

• bubbl.us - Brainstorming Made Simple
• Critical Thinking Model
• Glean Comparison Search
• Thesis Builder

How to Formulate an Answerable Clinical Question

P opulation/patients

I ntervention/indicator

C omparator/control

• P I C O: Formulate an Answerable Question
• Formulating Answerable Clinical Questions

Developing your Research Question

• Creating a Research Question Helps you to write a narrow, focused research question.

Try asking yourself these questions to help develop a research question:

Topic:  Obesity

Who?  teenagers

What?  consumption of high fat foods

Where?  school cafeterias

Question :  How does the consumption of high fat foods in school cafeterias contribute to teenager obesity?

Topic: Smoke Exposure

Who?   children exposed to smoke

What?   developmental abilities

Question :  How does smoke exposure alter the developmental abilities of children?

Below is worksheet which will help illustrate how a research question develops from a broad topic to a focused question.  This could be a helpful resource for you during the process of creating your research question.

Translating Your Research Question into a Search

Research Question:

Does the rate of medication compliance change when the number of prescribed medications increase for older adults?

1. Identify the main concepts

   Does the rate of  medication compliance  change when the  number  of prescribed medications increase for  older adults ?

2. Add related terms or synonyms 

    Things to consider        Example  

   synonyms                  drugs OR medications

   antonyms                   adherence OR nonadherence

• Use terms you would expect professionals to use in published articles
• Browse psychology encyclopedia articles for terms
• Check PsycINFO Guides

3. Connect related terms with OR.  Connect concepts with AND

(medication OR drugs) AND (compliance OR adherence OR nonadherence) AND (multiple OR polypharmacy) AND (elderly OR aged)

• << Previous: Research Help
• Next: Search Terms >>
• Last Updated: Aug 18, 2023 3:22 PM
• URL: https://alvernia.libguides.com/psychology_research

33 What Is Learning?

[latexpage]

Learning Objectives

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Explain how learned behaviors are different from instincts and reflexes
• Define learning
• Recognize and define three basic forms of learning—classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and observational learning

Birds build nests and migrate as winter approaches. Infants suckle at their mother’s breast. Dogs shake water off wet fur. Salmon swim upstream to spawn, and spiders spin intricate webs. What do these seemingly unrelated behaviors have in common? They all are unlearned behaviors. Both instincts and reflexes are innate behaviors that organisms are born with. Reflexes are a motor or neural reaction to a specific stimulus in the environment. They tend to be simpler than instincts, involve the activity of specific body parts and systems (e.g., the knee-jerk reflex and the contraction of the pupil in bright light), and involve more primitive centers of the central nervous system (e.g., the spinal cord and the medulla). In contrast, instincts are innate behaviors that are triggered by a broader range of events, such as aging and the change of seasons. They are more complex patterns of behavior, involve movement of the organism as a whole (e.g., sexual activity and migration), and involve higher brain centers.

Both reflexes and instincts help an organism adapt to its environment and do not have to be learned. For example, every healthy human baby has a sucking reflex, present at birth. Babies are born knowing how to suck on a nipple, whether artificial (from a bottle) or human. Nobody teaches the baby to suck, just as no one teaches a sea turtle hatchling to move toward the ocean. Learning, like reflexes and instincts, allows an organism to adapt to its environment. But unlike instincts and reflexes, learned behaviors involve change and experience: learning is a relatively permanent change in behavior or knowledge that results from experience. In contrast to the innate behaviors discussed above, learning involves acquiring knowledge and skills through experience. Looking back at our surfing scenario, Julian will have to spend much more time training with his surfboard before he learns how to ride the waves like his father.

Learning to surf, as well as any complex learning process (e.g., learning about the discipline of psychology), involves a complex interaction of conscious and unconscious processes. Learning has traditionally been studied in terms of its simplest components—the associations our minds automatically make between events. Our minds have a natural tendency to connect events that occur closely together or in sequence. Associative learning occurs when an organism makes connections between stimuli or events that occur together in the environment. You will see that associative learning is central to all three basic learning processes discussed in this chapter; classical conditioning tends to involve unconscious processes, operant conditioning tends to involve conscious processes, and observational learning adds social and cognitive layers to all the basic associative processes, both conscious and unconscious. These learning processes will be discussed in detail later in the chapter, but it is helpful to have a brief overview of each as you begin to explore how learning is understood from a psychological perspective.

In classical conditioning, also known as Pavlovian conditioning, organisms learn to associate events—or stimuli—that repeatedly happen together. We experience this process throughout our daily lives. For example, you might see a flash of lightning in the sky during a storm and then hear a loud boom of thunder. The sound of the thunder naturally makes you jump (loud noises have that effect by reflex). Because lightning reliably predicts the impending boom of thunder, you may associate the two and jump when you see lightning. Psychological researchers study this associative process by focusing on what can be seen and measured—behaviors. Researchers ask if one stimulus triggers a reflex, can we train a different stimulus to trigger that same reflex? In operant conditioning, organisms learn, again, to associate events—a behavior and its consequence (reinforcement or punishment). A pleasant consequence encourages more of that behavior in the future, whereas a punishment deters the behavior. Imagine you are teaching your dog, Hodor, to sit. You tell Hodor to sit, and give him a treat when he does. After repeated experiences, Hodor begins to associate the act of sitting with receiving a treat. He learns that the consequence of sitting is that he gets a doggie biscuit ( [link] ). Conversely, if the dog is punished when exhibiting a behavior, it becomes conditioned to avoid that behavior (e.g., receiving a small shock when crossing the boundary of an invisible electric fence).

Observational learning extends the effective range of both classical and operant conditioning. In contrast to classical and operant conditioning, in which learning occurs only through direct experience, observational learning is the process of watching others and then imitating what they do. A lot of learning among humans and other animals comes from observational learning. To get an idea of the extra effective range that observational learning brings, consider Ben and his son Julian from the introduction. How might observation help Julian learn to surf, as opposed to learning by trial and error alone? By watching his father, he can imitate the moves that bring success and avoid the moves that lead to failure. Can you think of something you have learned how to do after watching someone else?

All of the approaches covered in this chapter are part of a particular tradition in psychology, called behaviorism, which we discuss in the next section. However, these approaches do not represent the entire study of learning. Separate traditions of learning have taken shape within different fields of psychology, such as memory and cognition, so you will find that other chapters will round out your understanding of the topic. Over time these traditions tend to converge. For example, in this chapter you will see how cognition has come to play a larger role in behaviorism, whose more extreme adherents once insisted that behaviors are triggered by the environment with no intervening thought.

Instincts and reflexes are innate behaviors—they occur naturally and do not involve learning. In contrast, learning is a change in behavior or knowledge that results from experience. There are three main types of learning: classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and observational learning. Both classical and operant conditioning are forms of associative learning where associations are made between events that occur together. Observational learning is just as it sounds: learning by observing others.

Review Questions

Which of the following is an example of a reflex that occurs at some point in the development of a human being?

• child riding a bike
• teen socializing
• infant sucking on a nipple
• toddler walking

Learning is best defined as a relatively permanent change in behavior that ________.

• occurs as a result of experience
• is found only in humans
• occurs by observing others

Two forms of associative learning are ________ and ________.

• classical conditioning; operant conditioning
• classical conditioning; Pavlovian conditioning
• operant conditioning; observational learning
• operant conditioning; learning conditioning

In ________ the stimulus or experience occurs before the behavior and then gets paired with the behavior.

• associative learning
• observational learning
• operant conditioning
• classical conditioning

Critical Thinking Questions

Compare and contrast classical and operant conditioning. How are they alike? How do they differ?

Both classical and operant conditioning involve learning by association. In classical conditioning, responses are involuntary and automatic; however, responses are voluntary and learned in operant conditioning. In classical conditioning, the event that drives the behavior (the stimulus) comes before the behavior; in operant conditioning, the event that drives the behavior (the consequence) comes after the behavior. Also, whereas classical conditioning involves an organism forming an association between an involuntary (reflexive) response and a stimulus, operant conditioning involves an organism forming an association between a voluntary behavior and a consequence.

What is the difference between a reflex and a learned behavior?

A reflex is a behavior that humans are born knowing how to do, such as sucking or blushing; these behaviors happen automatically in response to stimuli in the environment. Learned behaviors are things that humans are not born knowing how to do, such as swimming and surfing. Learned behaviors are not automatic; they occur as a result of practice or repeated experience in a situation.

Personal Application Questions

What is your personal definition of learning? How do your ideas about learning compare with the definition of learning presented in this text?

What kinds of things have you learned through the process of classical conditioning? Operant conditioning? Observational learning? How did you learn them?

Share This Book

• Increase Font Size

Chapter 2: Getting Started in Research

Generating good research questions, learning objectives.

• Describe some common sources of research ideas and generate research ideas using those sources.
• Describe some techniques for turning research ideas into empirical research questions and use those techniques to generate questions.
• Explain what makes a research question interesting and evaluate research questions in terms of their interestingness.

Good research must begin with a good research question. Yet coming up with good research questions is something that novice researchers often find difficult and stressful. One reason is that this is a creative process that can appear mysterious—even magical—with experienced researchers seeming to pull interesting research questions out of thin air. However, psychological research on creativity has shown that it is neither as mysterious nor as magical as it appears. It is largely the product of ordinary thinking strategies and persistence (Weisberg, 1993) [1] . This section covers some fairly simple strategies for finding general research ideas, turning those ideas into empirically testable research questions, and finally evaluating those questions in terms of how interesting they are and how feasible they would be to answer.

Finding Inspiration

Research questions often begin as more general research ideas—usually focusing on some behaviour or psychological characteristic: talkativeness, learning, depression, bungee jumping, and so on. Before looking at how to turn such ideas into empirically testable research questions, it is worth looking at where such ideas come from in the first place. Three of the most common sources of inspiration are informal observations, practical problems, and previous research.

Informal observations include direct observations of our own and others’ behaviour as well as secondhand observations from nonscientific sources such as newspapers, books, blogs, and so on. For example, you might notice that you always seem to be in the slowest moving line at the grocery store. Could it be that most people think the same thing? Or you might read in a local newspaper about people donating money and food to a local family whose house has burned down and begin to wonder about who makes such donations and why. Some of the most famous research in psychology has been inspired by informal observations. Stanley Milgram’s famous research on obedience to authority, for example, was inspired in part by journalistic reports of the trials of accused Nazi war criminals—many of whom claimed that they were only obeying orders. This led him to wonder about the extent to which ordinary people will commit immoral acts simply because they are ordered to do so by an authority figure (Milgram, 1963) [2] .

Practical problems can also inspire research ideas, leading directly to applied research in such domains as law, health, education, and sports. Does taking lecture notes by hand improve students’ exam performance? How effective is psychotherapy for depression compared to drug therapy? To what extent do cell phones impair people’s driving ability? How can we teach children to read more efficiently? What is the best mental preparation for running a marathon?

Reading in print? Scan this QR code to view the video on your mobile device. Or go to https://youtu.be/nXNztCLYgxc

Probably the most common inspiration for new research ideas, however, is previous research. Recall that science is a kind of large-scale collaboration in which many different researchers read and evaluate each other’s work and conduct new studies to build on it. Of course, experienced researchers are familiar with previous research in their area of expertise and probably have a long list of ideas. This suggests that novice researchers can find inspiration by consulting with a more experienced researcher (e.g., students can consult a faculty member). But they can also find inspiration by picking up a copy of almost any professional journal and reading the titles and abstracts. In one typical issue of  Psychological Science , for example, you can find articles on the perception of shapes, anti-Semitism, police lineups, the meaning of death, second-language learning, people who seek negative emotional experiences, and many other topics. If you can narrow your interests down to a particular topic (e.g., memory) or domain (e.g., health care), you can also look through more specific journals, such as  Memory & Cognition  or  Health Psychology .

Generating Empirically Testable Research Questions

Once you have a research idea, you need to use it to generate one or more empirically testable research questions, that is, questions expressed in terms of a single variable or relationship between variables. One way to do this is to look closely at the discussion section in a recent research article on the topic. This is the last major section of the article, in which the researchers summarize their results, interpret them in the context of past research, and suggest directions for future research. These suggestions often take the form of specific research questions, which you can then try to answer with additional research. This can be a good strategy because it is likely that the suggested questions have already been identified as interesting and important by experienced researchers.

But you may also want to generate your own research questions. How can you do this? First, if you have a particular behaviour or psychological characteristic in mind, you can simply conceptualize it as a variable and ask how frequent or intense it is. How many words on average do people speak per day? How accurate are our memories of traumatic events? What percentage of people have sought professional help for depression? If the question has never been studied scientifically—which is something that you will learn in your literature review—then it might be interesting and worth pursuing.

If scientific research has already answered the question of how frequent or intense the behaviour or characteristic is, then you should consider turning it into a question about a statistical relationship between that behaviour or characteristic and some other variable. One way to do this is to ask yourself the following series of more general questions and write down all the answers you can think of.

• What are some possible causes of the behaviour or characteristic?
• What are some possible effects of the behaviour or characteristic?
• What types of people might exhibit more or less of the behaviour or characteristic?
• What types of situations might elicit more or less of the behaviour or characteristic?

In general, each answer you write down can be conceptualized as a second variable, suggesting a question about a statistical relationship. If you were interested in talkativeness, for example, it might occur to you that a possible cause of this psychological characteristic is family size. Is there a statistical relationship between family size and talkativeness? Or it might occur to you that people seem to be more talkative in same-sex groups than mixed-sex groups. Is there a difference in the average level of talkativeness of people in same-sex groups and people in mixed-sex groups? This approach should allow you to generate many different empirically testable questions about almost any behaviour or psychological characteristic.

If through this process you generate a question that has never been studied scientifically—which again is something that you will learn in your literature review—then it might be interesting and worth pursuing. But what if you find that it has been studied scientifically? Although novice researchers often want to give up and move on to a new question at this point, this is not necessarily a good strategy. For one thing, the fact that the question has been studied scientifically and the research published suggests that it is of interest to the scientific community. For another, the question can almost certainly be refined so that its answer will still contribute something new to the research literature. Again, asking yourself a series of more general questions about the statistical relationship is a good strategy.

• Are there other ways to operationally define the variables?
• Are there types of people for whom the statistical relationship might be stronger or weaker?
• Are there situations in which the statistical relationship might be stronger or weaker—including situations with practical importance?

For example, research has shown that women and men speak about the same number of words per day—but this was when talkativeness was measured in terms of the number of words spoken per day among university students in the United States and Mexico. We can still ask whether other ways of measuring talkativeness—perhaps the number of different people spoken to each day—produce the same result. Or we can ask whether studying elderly people or people from other cultures produces the same result. Again, this approach should help you generate many different research questions about almost any statistical relationship.

Evaluating Research Questions

Researchers usually generate many more research questions than they ever attempt to answer. This means they must have some way of evaluating the research questions they generate so that they can choose which ones to pursue. In this section, we consider two criteria for evaluating research questions: the interestingness of the question and the feasibility of answering it.

Interestingness

How often do people tie their shoes? Do people feel pain when you punch them in the jaw? Are women more likely to wear makeup than men? Do people prefer vanilla or chocolate ice cream? Although it would be a fairly simple matter to design a study and collect data to answer these questions, you probably would not want to because they are not interesting. We are not talking here about whether a research question is interesting to us personally but whether it is interesting to people more generally and, especially, to the scientific community. But what makes a research question interesting in this sense? Here we look at three factors that affect the  interestingness  of a research question: the answer is in doubt, the answer fills a gap in the research literature, and the answer has important practical implications.

First, a research question is interesting to the extent that its answer is in doubt. Obviously, questions that have been answered by scientific research are no longer interesting as the subject of new empirical research. But the fact that a question has not been answered by scientific research does not necessarily make it interesting. There has to be some reasonable chance that the answer to the question will be something that we did not already know. But how can you assess this before actually collecting data? One approach is to try to think of reasons to expect different answers to the question—especially ones that seem to conflict with common sense. If you can think of reasons to expect at least two different answers, then the question might be interesting. If you can think of reasons to expect only one answer, then it probably is not. The question of whether women are more talkative than men is interesting because there are reasons to expect both answers. The existence of the stereotype itself suggests the answer could be yes, but the fact that women’s and men’s verbal abilities are fairly similar suggests the answer could be no. The question of whether people feel pain when you punch them in the jaw is not interesting because there is absolutely no reason to think that the answer could be anything other than a resounding yes.

A second important factor to consider when deciding if a research question is interesting is whether answering it will fill a gap in the research literature. Again, this means in part that the question has not already been answered by scientific research. But it also means that the question is in some sense a natural one for people who are familiar with the research literature. For example, the question of whether taking lecture notes by hand can help improve students’ exam performance would be likely to occur to anyone who was familiar with research on notetaking and the ineffectiveness of shallow processing on learning.

A final factor to consider when deciding whether a research question is interesting is whether its answer has important practical implications. Again, the question of whether taking notes by hand improves learning has important implications for education, including classroom policies concerning technology use. The question of whether cell phone use impairs driving is interesting because it is relevant to the personal safety of everyone who travels by car and to the debate over whether cell phone use should be restricted by law.

Feasibility

A second important criterion for evaluating research questions is the feasibility  of successfully answering them. There are many factors that affect feasibility, including time, money, equipment and materials, technical knowledge and skill, and access to research participants. Clearly, researchers need to take these factors into account so that they do not waste time and effort pursuing research that they cannot complete successfully.

Looking through a sample of professional journals in psychology will reveal many studies that are complicated and difficult to carry out. These include longitudinal designs in which participants are tracked over many years, neuroimaging studies in which participants’ brain activity is measured while they carry out various mental tasks, and complex nonexperimental studies involving several variables and complicated statistical analyses. Keep in mind, though, that such research tends to be carried out by teams of highly trained researchers whose work is often supported in part by government and private grants. Keep in mind also that research does not have to be complicated or difficult to produce interesting and important results. Looking through a sample of professional journals will also reveal studies that are relatively simple and easy to carry out—perhaps involving a convenience sample of university students and a paper-and-pencil task.

A final point here is that it is generally good practice to use methods that have already been used successfully by other researchers. For example, if you want to manipulate people’s moods to make some of them happy, it would be a good idea to use one of the many approaches that have been used successfully by other researchers (e.g., paying them a compliment). This is good not only for the sake of feasibility—the approach is “tried and true”—but also because it provides greater continuity with previous research. This makes it easier to compare your results with those of other researchers and to understand the implications of their research for yours, and vice versa.

Key Takeaways

• Research ideas can come from a variety of sources, including informal observations, practical problems, and previous research.
• Research questions expressed in terms of variables and relationships between variables can be suggested by other researchers or generated by asking a series of more general questions about the behaviour or psychological characteristic of interest.
• It is important to evaluate how interesting a research question is before designing a study and collecting data to answer it. Factors that affect interestingness are the extent to which the answer is in doubt, whether it fills a gap in the research literature, and whether it has important practical implications.
• It is also important to evaluate how feasible a research question will be to answer. Factors that affect feasibility include time, money, technical knowledge and skill, and access to special equipment and research participants.
• Practice: Generate five research ideas based on each of the following: informal observations, practical problems, and topics discussed in recent issues of professional journals.
• Practice: Generate five empirical research questions about each of the following behaviours or psychological characteristics: long-distance running, getting tattooed, social anxiety, bullying, and memory for early childhood events.
• Practice: Evaluate each of the research questions you generated in Exercise 2 in terms of its interestingness based on the criteria discussed in this section.
• Practice: Find an issue of a journal that publishes short empirical research reports (e.g.,  Psychological Science ,  Psychonomic Bulletin and Review , Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin ). Pick three studies, and rate each one in terms of how feasible it would be for you to replicate it with the resources available to you right now. Use the following rating scale: (1) You could replicate it essentially as reported. (2) You could replicate it with some simplifications. (3) You could not replicate it. Explain each rating.
• Weisberg, R. W. (1993). Creativity: Beyond the myth of genius . New York, NY: Freeman. ↵
• Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioural study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67 , 371–378. ↵
• Research Methods in Psychology. Authored by : Paul C. Price, Rajiv S. Jhangiani, and I-Chant A. Chiang. Provided by : BCCampus. Located at : https://opentextbc.ca/researchmethods/ . License : CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike
• How to Develop a Good Research Topic. Authored by : KStateLibraries. Located at : https://youtu.be/nXNztCLYgxc . License : CC BY: Attribution

Privacy Policy

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

How the Psychology of Education Contributes to Research With a Social Impact on the Education of Students With Special Needs: The Case of Successful Educational Actions

Elena duque.

1 Department of Theory and History of Education, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

Regina Gairal

2 Department of Pedagogy, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain

Silvia Molina

Esther roca.

3 Departament of Comparative Education and Education History, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain

Associated Data

The datasets generated for this study are available on request to the corresponding author.

One current challenge in the psychology of education is identifying the teaching strategies and learning contexts that best contribute to the learning of all students, especially those whose individual characteristics make their learning process more difficult, as is the case for students with special needs. One main theory in the psychology of education is the sociocultural approach to learning, which highlights the key role of interaction in children’s learning. In the case of students with disabilities, this interactive understanding of learning is aligned with a social model of disability, which looks beyond individual students’ limitations or potentialities and focuses on contextual aspects that can enhance their learning experience and results. In recent years, the interactive view of learning based on this theory has led to the development of educational actions, such as interactive groups and dialogic literary gatherings, that have improved the learning results of diverse children, including those with disabilities. The aim of this paper is to analyze the social impact achieved by a line of research that has explored the benefits of such successful educational actions for the education of students with special needs. National and European research projects based on the communicative methodology of research have been conducted. This methodology entails drawing on egalitarian dialogue with the end-users of research – including teachers, students with and without disabilities, students’ relatives and other community members – to allow an intersubjective creation of knowledge that enables a deeper and more accurate understanding of the studied reality and its transformative potential. This line of research first allowed the identification of the benefits of interactive learning environments for students with disabilities educated in mainstream schools; later, it allowed the spreading of these actions to a greater number of mainstream schools; and more recently, it made it possible to transfer these actions to special schools and use these actions to create shared learning spaces between mainstream and special schools. The improvement of the educational opportunities for a greater number and greater diversity of students with special needs evidences the social impact of research based on key contributions of the psychology of education.

Introduction

Access to mainstream, inclusive and quality education for children with disabilities has not yet been fully achieved. Children with disabilities are still being educated in special schools in most countries, with varying percentages depending on the country, and therefore these schools attend diverse special needs ( World Health Organization, 2011 ). In addition, students with disabilities and special needs tend to leave school without adequate qualifications ( European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2017 ). Therefore, the appropriate inclusion of children with disabilities into the general education system is part of the European Disability Strategy 2010–2020 ( European Commission, 2010 ). In this context, one current challenge of the psychology of education is to identify the teaching strategies and learning contexts that best contribute to the education of students with special needs. In this endeavor, research in the psychology of education is focused on the strategies, actions and practices that enhance the learning of these students, taking into account their individual characteristics, however, importantly, research is also focused on the strategies, actions and programs that benefit the learning of all students, including those whose individual characteristics make the learning process more difficult, so that shared learning environments that promote successful learning for all can be created.

Instrumental learning, especially in regards to difficulties in reading and literacy, is one of the main concerns of research on the psychology of education ( Lloyd et al., 2009 ; Alanazi, 2017 ; Alenizi, 2019 ; Auphan et al., 2019 ; Hughes et al., 2018 ). Numerous programs for improving reading and/or reading difficulty prevention have emerged from research on reading and literacy from the perspective of the psychology of education, and their impact on improving children’s learning has been analyzed ( Vellutino and Scanlon, 2002 ; Papadopoulos et al., 2004 ; Hatcher et al., 2006 ). There are also specific studies about reading and literacy programs and their success with students with special needs ( Holliman and Hurry, 2013 ) and/or with students at risk for reading disabilities ( Lovett et al., 2017 ). Strategies to promote the learning of mathematics in children with special educational needs and disabilities have also been studied ( Pitchford et al., 2018 ), and programs based on these strategies have been developed ( Montague et al., 2014 ).

Research has also explored the association between learning difficulties and behavior problems ( Roberts et al., 2019 ), showing that lower academic achievement is a risk factor for developing behavior difficulties among students with special educational needs and disabilities ( Oldfield et al., 2017 ). The study of the learning context and the school environment, which facilitates or hinders learning, has shown that the expectations from teachers and their attitudes toward children with special needs are some of the most influential elements ( Anderson et al., 2014 ; Wilson et al., 2016 ; Bowles et al., 2018 ). Research has also found that teachers can have an important influence on the social acceptance of peers with special needs ( Schwab et al., 2016 ), which is important because the social exclusion of children can affect their learning difficulties and behavior problems ( Krull et al., 2018 ). The efficacy of peer network interventions for improving the social connections of students with severe disabilities has been highlighted ( Asmus et al., 2017 ), and programs and educational actions based on peer interaction, such as cooperative learning ( Velázquez Callado, 2012 ), have been developed to improve the school climate. Importantly, there are effective programs for improving peer acceptance and a positive coexistence related to curricular learning ( Law et al., 2017 ; Vuorinen et al., 2019 ), which is a key issue in facilitating inclusive education.

This body of research on effective actions and programs to enhance the learning and inclusion of students with disabilities and special needs shows the capacity that research in the psychology of education has for improving the education of these students. It also shows the importance that the learning context has, regarding both instruction and social relations, on the academic and social performance of students with special needs. This resonates with the social model of disability, an approach that has been claimed, from the perspective of human rights, to shift the focus from non-disabled centrism and to transcend the traditional and individualistic perspective of disabilities to focus on the improvement of educational experiences for these students ( Chun Sik Min, 2010 ; Park, 2015 ). This perspective assumes not only that children with disabilities should be included in mainstream education but also that inclusive education can be more effective ( Lindsay, 2007 ). This interactive understanding of learning allows seeing beyond individual students’ limitations or potentialities and focusing on contextual aspects that can enhance their learning experience and results ( Goodley, 2001 ; Haegele and Hodge, 2016 ).

The classical psychology of education already emphasized the importance of the social context for children’s learning. In particular, the sociocultural approach of learning developed by Vygotsky and Bruner highlighted the key role of interaction in children’s learning and development. Both authors agreed that what a child learns has been shared with other persons first, emphasizing the social construction of knowledge. While Vygotsky (1980) stated that in children’s development, higher psychological functions appear first on the interpsychological level and then on the intrapsychological level, Bruner (1996) refers to a social moment where there is interaction and then an individual moment when interiorization occurs.

Bruner evolved from a more cognitivist perspective of learning centered on individuals’ information processing ( Bruner, 1973 ) to a more sociocultural and interactive perspective ( Bruner, 1996 ) within the framework of which he conceptualized the idea of “scaffolding,” which enables novice learning in interaction with an expert, and “subcommunities of mutual learners,” where “learners help each other learn” and “scaffold for each other” ( Bruner, 1996 , p. 21). For Bruner, “It is principally through interacting with others that children find out what the culture is about and how it conceives of the world” (1996, p. 20); therefore, learning occurs through interaction within a community.

Vygotsky stated that learning precedes development, not the other way around, and he conceptualized the zone of proximal development (ZPD), which represents the opportunity that learning interactions with adults and more capable peers have to advance children’s development ( Vygotsky, 1980 ); beyond the actual level of development, the ZPD emphasizes the importance of interactions with others to solve problems and learn. He emphasized that this interaction is especially important for children with disabilities: “Precisely because retarded children, when left to themselves, will never achieve well elaborated forms of abstract thought, the school should make every effort to push them in that direction and to develop in them what is intrinsically lacking in their own development” ( Vygotsky, 1980 , p. 89). In this regard, he warned of the risks of working with children with disabilities from a perspective centered on biological processes and basic dysfunctions instead of working with higher psychological functions ( Vygotsky, 2018 ). Vygotsky’s focus on interaction provides new opportunities for learning and development for children with special needs to develop these higher psychological processes.

The sociocultural approach of learning developed by Vygotsky and Bruner has continued inspiring theory and research in the psychology of education to today. According to Dainez and Smolka (2014) , Vygotsky’s concept of compensation in relation to children with disabilities implies a social formation of mind and therefore the social responsibility of organizing an appropriate educational environment for these children. Vygotsky’s approach has been taken into account in studies about how peer mediation increases learning, especially when peers have different cognitive levels ( Tzuriel and Shamir, 2007 ), and research on children with disabilities, for instance, cerebral palsy, has been conducted based on Vygotsky’s contributions and showed improvements in these children’s spatial abilities, social interaction, autonomy, and participation in class activities ( Akhutina et al., 2003 ; Heidrich and Bassani, 2012 ).

In recent years, the interactive view of learning has led to the development of educational actions that have improved the learning results of diverse children, including those with disabilities. INCLUD-ED ( Flecha, 2006-2011 ) was an integrated project funded by the European Union under its 6th Framework Programme with the main objective of achieving both academic success and social cohesion for all children and communities in Europe, regardless of their socioeconomic status and/or ethnic background. INCLUD-ED identified successful educational actions (SEAs), that is, actions that can improve school success and contribute to social cohesion in every context where they are implemented ( Flecha, 2015 ). Some of the SEAs that have demonstrated improvements in reading, mathematics and peer relationships include interactive groups (IG) and dialogic literary gatherings (DLG). IG ( Valls and Kyriakides, 2013 ) consists of organizing classrooms in small heterogeneous groups that work on instrumental learning activities drawing on mutual support and dynamized by adult volunteers from the community; DLG ( Soler, 2015 ; Lopez de Aguileta, 2019 ) consists of reading and discussing classical works of literature based on the principles of dialogic learning, reaching deeper understanding of the texts as a result of sharing the participants’ interpretations and meanings. In both actions, learning interactions, as the main tool to promote learning, are facilitated among diverse persons in accordance with the contributions of the sociocultural theory of learning. In this regard, previous research has identified that Vygotsky’s and Bruner’s contributions are at the basis of these SEAs ( Elboj and Niemelä, 2010 ; Garcia et al., 2010 ).

Materials and Methods

The objective of this paper is to analyze the social impact achieved by a line of research that has explored the benefits of SEAs on the improvement of the education of students with special needs. For this purpose, the following data collection methods were used. First, existing data from case studies conducted within the four projects that compose this line of research have been analyzed to identify the impact of SEAs on students with special needs. These projects studied the benefits of SEAs for diverse students at different specific levels (i.e., school and classroom organization, community participation, interactions). In this paper, we aim to go beyond these specific aspects to understand in a more integrated and comprehensive manner how these different levels contribute to the impact that SEAs have, specifically on students with special needs. Second, new data were collected through in-depth interviews with teachers involved in the implementation of these actions in their schools as a consequence of this line of research. These interviews allowed the analysis of the subsequent impacts achieved as a result of conducting research on this topic from the perspective of the agents involved in the implementation of the results of this line of research.

All participants (teachers, volunteers, families, and children) agreed to provide researchers access to relevant data for the purpose of the study. Prior to data collection, they were informed of the nature of the research, and written informed consent was obtained. In the case of minors, informed consent was obtained from their parents or guardians. All participants were informed that their participation was anonymous and voluntary and that data would be treated confidentially and used solely for research purposes. Ethical requirements were addressed following the Ethics Review Procedure established by the European Commission (2013) for EU research, the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2000/C 364/01). The study was fully approved by the Ethics Board of the Community of Researchers on Excellence for All (CREA) 1 .

Case Studies

The line of research that we analyze in terms of social impact is composed of four national and European research projects in which the authors have participated in the last 15 years. In these projects, a total of 36 case studies were conducted. Of these cases, 10 included data on the participation of students with special needs in SEAs (see Table 1 ), and these were analyzed for the purposes of this paper. These cases fulfilled two criteria: (1) the schools were implementing SEAs and (2) students with special needs participated in SEAs with their classmates. Overall, 60 data collection techniques were used in the 10 case studies. These included 36 interviews, 14 with class teachers (3 of them were also special education teachers), 4 with special education teachers, 3 with volunteers, 8 with students, and 7 with students’ relatives; 13 focus groups, 5 with teachers, 8 with students, and 1 with students’ relatives; and 10 observations, 9 in classrooms and 1 in a teachers’ meeting (see more details in Table 1 ).

Summary of the data collection instruments and participants in the project case studies.

The different projects focused on different aspects of the SEAs and therefore entailed different layers of analysis throughout this line of research, which has allowed a comprehensive view of the benefits of SEAs for diverse students and specifically for students with special needs.

The doctoral project funded by the Catalan Government ( Molina, 2003-2007 ) was the first research to specifically focus on the inclusion of students with special needs in SEAs, and particularly analyzed the type of classroom interactions that facilitate students’ inclusion when classrooms are organized in IG. The project’s main objective was to analyze the influence that students’ participation in IG has on their educational inclusion. The main categories of analysis were peer interactions and community participation as components of IG and learning , participation and social inclusion as components of educational inclusion.

INCLUD-ED ( Flecha, 2006-2011 ) aimed to identify educational actions that contributed to overcoming segregation and promoted the inclusion of all students in schools across Europe, with a special focus on vulnerable groups of students. INCLUD-ED clarified the distinction between mixture, streaming and inclusion ( INCLUD-ED Consortium, 2009 ) as different ways of organizing student diversity and human resources with different consequences on students; distinguished different forms of family and community participation; identified educative, decisive, and evaluative forms of participation as those that had more impact on students’ success; and identified successful educational actions. The contribution of this project to this line of research was an analysis of SEAs at the level of school organization, resource management and community engagement. The main objective of the case studies within this project was to analyze components from educational practices that decrease the rates of school failure and those of the practices that increase them. The main categories of analysis were inclusive practices and community participation .

MIXSTRIN ( Valls, 2008-2011 ), as a continuation of the INCLUD-ED research in the Spanish context, deepened the analysis of the different forms and consequences of mixture, streaming and inclusion from a mixed methods approach. Thus, this project focused on analyzing SEAs at the level of classroom organization. The main objective of the case studies was to identify how different ways of grouping students are related to students’ learning results. The main categories of analysis were practices of mixture, streaming , and inclusion .

Finally, INTER-ACT ( Garcia-Carrion, 2018-2020 ) analyzes how SEAs are being implemented with students with disabilities in both mainstream schools and special schools, with the aim of transferring these actions and their benefits to new schools. The project’s focus of analysis is the interactions that occur in IG and DLG in both types of schools. The main objective of the case study conducted was to analyze in depth successful cases of schools implementing IG and DLG with students with disabilities to identify the best conditions for increasing the impact on the improvement of learning, development and relationships. The main categories of analysis were characteristics of the interactive learning environment and improvements achieved.

Within the different research projects, using the case study as a methodological approach has allowed understanding the reality of the object of study in context. Following Stake (2006) , case studies were selected based on what information they could provide about the issue explored, in this case, the increase in the educational quality provided to students in SEAs, especially to those with special needs. In this regard, case studies were instrumental in providing insight into this issue. As a sum of individual research projects, the line of research presented here constitutes multicase research ( Stake, 2006 ), where cases share similarities – e.g., data collection techniques, the population object of study and purpose – and allow understanding from the singularity of each case of the broader phenomenon that all of them are part of.

In-Depth Interviews

Five interviews were conducted with teachers who fulfilled two criteria: (1) they were implementing SEAs with their students, including students with special needs, and (2) they had started to implement these actions as a consequence of the research line on SEAs and special needs, that is, after becoming aware of the evidence obtained on the benefits of SEAs for these students. Two of the interviewees were teachers at one school where one of the case studies was conducted while the other interviews were not related to the case studies. The interviews were conducted by one of the researchers at the end of the 2018–2019 school year, and at that time, the participants had been implementing SEAs for a period of 4–6 years (see Table 2 ). The interviews lasted between 20 and 55 min and were conducted at times and in places that were convenient for the participants. We introduced the interviews as follows: “In the last 15 years, a line of research has been conducted on the educational inclusion of students with special needs through SEAs. We are interested in gathering information on the social impact of this line of research.” Sample questions were as follows: “Can you identify some of those impacts (e.g., improvements in the learning of students with special needs or improvements in the schools’ approach to responding to students’ diversity)?”; “How has the line of research led/contributed to such impacts?”; “Have these impacts been transferred to different contexts or students with different characteristics?”; and “Have the impacts been sustained over time?” All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim for subsequent analysis.

Profiles of the participants in the in-depth interviews.

Communicative Methodology

This line of research has been conducted based on the communicative methodology ( Gómez et al., 2011 ). The data collection and analysis of the social impact achieved has also been conducted based on this methodology. The communicative methodology entails drawing on egalitarian dialogue with the end-users of the research – including teachers, students with and without disabilities, students’ relatives and other community members – to allow an intersubjective creation of knowledge that enables a deeper and more accurate understanding of the studied reality and its transformative potential ( Gómez et al., 2012 ), therefore enabling greater social impact. Different studies have demonstrated the suitability of this methodology when researching vulnerable groups ( Puigvert et al., 2012 ; Gómez et al., 2019 ), as well as the social impact that this methodology produces.

Following the communicative methodology, in this line of research, data collection techniques were aimed not only at gathering the individuals’ experiences and perceptions but also to discussing these experiences and perceptions with them in light of previous scientific knowledge on the issue and with the purpose of identifying both the exclusionary and transformative components of the reality studied. While exclusionary components refer to the barriers encountered by certain persons or collectives, for instance, educational barriers encountered by persons with disabilities, transformative components are those elements that contribute to overcoming these barriers, for instance, certain types of classroom organization or learning interactions. The objective of the dialogues held with end-users and other stakeholders in the research process is to agree upon these exclusionary and transformative components, which strengthens the validity of the research results and its potential social impact.

Data Analysis

For this paper, the different case studies have been analyzed together to understand in an integrated manner how the different layers analyzed previously (school and classroom organization, community participation, interactions) contribute to the social impact of the implementation of SEAs with students with special needs. For this purpose, the existing data of the case studies were analyzed with a new set of categories that was created to examine this social impact. Taking into account that the main challenges in the education of children with special needs are their limited participation in normalized learning environments ( World Health Organization, 2011 ), their lower educational levels achieved ( European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2017 ) and their higher risk of being socially marginalized and bullied ( UNESCO, 2017 ), the improvements in these domains constitute the social impact of the educational intervention aimed at students with special needs; therefore, the following were the basis for creating the categories for the analysis of the social impact of SEAs:

• (1) Impact on students’ participation: characteristics of the successful educational actions that enable the participation of students with special needs.
• (2) Impact on the cognitive dimension: improvements achieved in instrumental learning and cognitive development.
• (3) Impact on the socioemotional dimension: improvements achieved in social cohesion and emotional/affective development.

The newly conducted interviews on the social impact of the line of research were analyzed with categories that take into account the social impact criteria identified by IMPACT-EV (European Commission FP7, 2014-2017) and used in SIOR ( Flecha et al., 2015 ) regarding improvements, sustainability and transference. The fourth category emerged inductively from the data:

• (1) Impact on students with special needs: improvements and sustainability,
• (2) Impact on schools: improvements and sustainability,
• (3) Transference to new contexts, and
• (4) Factors supporting social impact.

The themes present in the transcripts were coded by the researchers on a line-by-line basis. A deductive, flexible approach was used for the coding to identify subthemes within the categories. Categories of analysis were applied to the transcripts by two independent coders to enhance the validity of the results. Consensus for the coding was achieved through discussion.

In the following, the social impact of the line of research is presented, which includes evidence on the benefits of SEAs for students with special needs and how such SEAs led to a new social impact on different schools, students, teachers and contexts. Three types of social impact are presented: (1) impact on students with special needs and their opportunities to participate, learn and have positive relationships in SEAs; (2) impact on schools’ and teachers’ approaches to meeting students’ special needs; and (3) the replicability of SEAs to new types of educational contexts and student populations. The factors that have enabled the achievement of these impacts are also reported.

Social Impact 1: Enhanced Participation, Learning Opportunities, and Group Cohesion for Students With Special Needs in Successful Educational Actions

The social impact of seas.

Previous analyses of the case studies showed that SEAs entail a more efficient organization of classrooms and schools, allowing a more inclusive education for a diverse student body, including students with special needs, who can benefit from enhanced access to the content of the general curriculum in a shared learning environment ( Christou and Molina, 2009 ; Molina and Ríos, 2010 ). A key feature of the inclusive learning environments promoted in the SEAs is the diverse interactions promoted around learning among, on the one hand, students, as they are organized in heterogeneous groups and, on the other hand, relatives and other members of the community, who are welcome to participate in the students’ learning activities. These interactions are key components of the SEAs that have created new learning opportunities for students with special needs in mainstream schools and, more recently, in special schools ( García-Carrión et al., 2016 , 2018 ).

The analysis of the social impact of SEAs on students with special needs shows positive impacts in terms of the participation, learning and social inclusion of these students. Regarding student participation, the supportive peer interactions promoted within the SEAs and the participation of volunteers from the community, who ensured that these supportive interactions were implemented and provided assistance themselves when necessary, facilitated normalized and active participation in learning activities and natural support within the student group, which progressively made specific, individualized support less necessary ( Molina, 2003-2007 ). For this to occur, the case studies showed the importance of the activities that students worked on in the IG being the same for all of them and of students with special needs not being given different activities in any case. The same occurred with DLG: all students participating in the gathering read the same book. The analysis showed that this was important because both IG and DLG work based on interactions and, if one student was given an activity or a book that was different than that of the other students, interaction of this student with the group would be easily broken. In some cases, adaptations were made regarding the way students accessed the material, interacted with it or produced an output or regarding the level of complexity required. However, the learning content was always the same to allow the maximum benefit from interaction and the highest possible level of attainment. Across the case studies, teachers reported that supportive interactions within heterogeneous groups in successful educational actions had been more effective than differentiated individual attention separated from the class, even in the cases when additional human resources were used. Therefore, SEAs have prevented reducing learning opportunities related to the segregation and individualization of educational measures often aimed at these students ( Valls, 2008-2011 ; Flecha, 2015 ).

In terms of learning and cognitive development, the possibility of asking questions when necessary and constantly seeing and listening to peers working on the activity and talking about it helped students with special needs stay connected to the activity, understand it and do it ( Molina, 2003-2007 ; Valls, 2008-2011 ). Learning progress was more evident in instrumental learning subjects (literacy, math), which are prioritized in IG and DLG. Specifically, due to the interactive and dialogical nature of both IG and DLG, communicative ability is one learning and development area in which students show a clear improvement. In this regard, for these children, DLG have meant the opportunity to broaden their vocabulary and gain a better understanding of the language structure, as they are able to listen more proficient children and adults, who also model language and help the students with special needs express themselves better ( Garcia-Carrion, 2018-2020 ).

Regarding the social impact of SEAs on the social inclusion of students with special needs and group cohesion, it was observed that the participation of these students in regular class activities that IG and DLG facilitated contributed to considering these students as “one of the class” and not a “part-time student” who only shares part of their time and activities with their classmates. Beyond participation, SEAs gave students opportunities to interact with their peers and therefore to come to know better each other, ultimately building new friendships. Peer support and friendship that were learned in IG and DLG often extended beyond the class and beyond the context of school, creating new opportunities for both cognitive and social development, for instance, when students with special needs had the opportunity to share their doubts with their classmates when doing homework via telephone or social networks or to meet them at birthday parties ( Valls, 2008-2011 ; Garcia-Carrion, 2018-2020 ).

Extending Improvements to More Schools and Students

The case studies showed ways in which the education of students with special needs improved in SEAs, as well as key components of these actions that explained the results. Both findings were crucial to extend these actions and their benefits to more children with special needs and thus for the social impact of the research.

The first time that primary schools were transformed into learning communities and implemented SEAs was in 1995 in Spain. There were five schools at that time. Ten years later, in 2005, there were 22 schools. After 10 more years, in 2015, the number reached 120 schools in different countries ( Flecha, 2015 ). Today, 225 schools in Spain 2 , 49 schools in other European countries 3 , and 411 schools in Latin America 4 , each with diverse populations, have become learning communities through the application of successful educational actions. These data show that the INCLUD-ED project (2006–2011) was a turning point in the spread of SEAs in schools. The spread of the project also meant that these actions could reach more diverse students with special needs. The applicability of the SEAs with these students was usually a topic of debate among the teachers that incorporated these actions in their schools. When the knowledge of the evidence provided by the line of research reached the new schools, both teachers and the rest of community became more confident when including students with disabilities in IG, DLG, and other shared learning activities in the school. The different teachers interviewed explained that the implementation of SEAs in their schools has increased over time and so has the participation of students with special needs, which reaches 100% in some cases. As one teacher explained, the participation in SEAs prevents the need for individual support outside the classroom: “Out of all the classes, there is not any child that gets out of the classroom [to receive individual support] when they work on SEAs” (Sandra). The implementation of SEAs with students with special needs – as well as with the general population of students – has not only been sustained but has increased, as, for teachers, it is an efficient way to respond to these – and other – students’ needs:

In the school, almost all students with special needs participate in SEAs (.) From my experience I can tell you that I used to do an SEA session per week, then I did two, this year I have done three, and now I cannot imagine less than three, every time I need to do it more and more. (Carmen)

The benefits observed by research in the case studies then started to spread to more children in other schools. Two examples can illustrate these improvements. First, the case of a child with a severe neurological deficit, for whom participating in SEAs made it possible to transform the expectations that were imposed on his learning possibilities:

The neurologist said that he could not learn almost anything. literacy and all the learning, they saw it as impossible. but he has learnt to read (…) if we hadn’t known about it, that evidence about interactions… Last year we did 6 sessions [of IG] per week, plus DLG, we did as much as we could, and it is amazing what he has learnt. (Sandra)

Research has already shown that being able to participate and learn in IG and DLG changes the self-concept and learning expectations of the children with special needs as well as the concept and expectations their peers and adults have of them. In these interactive learning environments, students were often able to solve tasks that they could not solve alone or read books that could not read alone, going beyond teachers’ and families’ expectations for their learning ( Flecha, 2015 ). When SEAs reached new schools and students, these higher expectations, which create new learning opportunities, were created there too.

The second example is of a child with Down syndrome who could benefit from a more normalized learning environment where he could make progress in both learning and group belonging; this shows how the benefits that research had identified in group cohesion were replicated in other cases like this:

We had another child with a disability who was very isolated from the group, he did not have an emotional bond either, and the attention he received was too individualized; with the special education teacher, the speech therapist, he did not feel he belonged to the group. And when we started implementing SEAs, work in IG, DLG, the group changed very much, (…) and the child, who had Down syndrome, started to belong to the group: worked on the same activities as the others, and the others counted on that child. It was a huge change. (…) We achieved a lot of things. (Carmen)

Both teachers, Sandra and Carmen, clearly attributed the improvements observed to the students’ participation in IG and DLG. In some cases, looking for the participation of these children in SEAs has made teachers look for adaptations that enabled their participation. This was the case for a child in Irene’s school. He had not developed oral language, which made it difficult to participate in DLG, but the teachers adapted the book to pictograms and facilitated him in using a tablet with the pictograms and synthesized voice software installed so that he could communicate in the group. This had several impacts: first, the child could follow the reading, think of an idea to share and structure the idea; second, he could share the idea with the group and contribute to the gathering; third, the other children could realize that their classmate wanted and was able to communicate with the others, and even “heard his voice” for the first time; fourth: new opportunities for communication and the sharing of knowledge, experiences and thoughts appeared in the group. These changes did not occur until the teachers considered how they could improve the child’s participation in DLG, so it was the SEA that encouraged teachers to mobilize the resources that enabled the child’s participation and made these changes possible.

Importantly, the improvements achieved have been sustained and even increased through time as the implementation of SEAs also increased. Awareness of improvements has spread in their communities and that has led, in some cases, to an increased demand to enroll students with special needs in these schools, as Sandra explains in the quote below; this is another way in which the participation and learning opportunities of students with special needs in SEAs have been enhanced:

More families are coming with children with special needs that attended other schools. (…) Here, in the town, all the families know each other. (…) They talk and explain their experiences… and therefore many are requesting a change of school. (Sandra)

Social Impact 2: Transforming Schools’ Approaches to Meeting Students’ Diversity in Terms of Special Needs

The education of students with special needs has changed not only because of increased opportunities to participate in SEAs but also because the dialogic, interactive and transformative approach behind the SEAs has been assumed by the teachers and the entire community to change the way they approach the education of these students at every moment – within and outside SEAs – now being more dialogic, interactive and transformative as well.

Before implementing SEAs, schools tended to respond to students’ special needs through individual attention, often outside the classroom and based on low expectations; they understood the students’ disabilities as an indicator of what the students could achieve. The participation of students with special needs in SEAs has meant a turning point in the schools’ approach to diversity.

A Focus on Interactions to Enhance Students’ Learning Opportunities

Knowing SEAs and their scientific and theoretical bases, especially the relevance of interactions for learning, has meant that teachers who have incorporated SEAs in their schools focus on the interactions they promote. In mainstream schools, the more diverse and rich interactions students found in SEAs was an element that convinced teachers to include the participation of students with special needs and to do the necessary material adaptations to allow that interaction. They could observe improvements in typically developing children, both in learning and coexistence, as a consequence of participating in SEAs, which also encouraged them to include students with special needs and extend these benefits to them, overcoming previous ideas about special education, as Irene explained:

We were intoxicated with the idea that [mainstream] students make progress, but those with special needs need different things, need that we adapt to their learning level… But we have advanced in inclusion as we have been implementing SEAs, because we realized that children with special needs can participate too, and interactions with peers are positive for them to progress, besides self-esteem, seeing they are capable, and that they can improve. (Irene)

In the context of special schools, interactions are also a topic of discussion now, which helps teachers focus on providing their students with the best learning environment possible. For the professionals working there, this has meant an opportunity to give their students richer learning opportunities within their segregated placement:

In our school program, we include what the students will learn, but we also consider and talk very much about the interactions they will have, which is a topic we had never discussed before knowing about SEAs. We focus on the type of interactions they have, if they are quality interactions, if they can have more quality, how we can promote them through SEAs, IG, DLG… (Marta)

Evidence, the SEAs, which explain what is best for our students, give us confidence in our work. We know our way to advance in giving the best results to our students. Therefore, we think of interactions; since they are segregated, we consider which type of interactions we should offer to them. (Ana)

Development of Scientific Thinking About Education

Another consequence of being aware of the benefits of SEAs for students with special needs, as demonstrated by research, has been the development of a more scientific way of thinking among the teaching staff. The teachers interviewed, as well as other teachers in their schools, read scientific publications emerging from or related to this line of research and discussed them in dialogic pedagogical gatherings. This helped them become familiar with research and scientific evidence, and they now look for this evidence when they must make decisions on their students’ education:

Now we say: “But is there evidence for it? Let’s see who has written about that” (…) for instance, when we are working on autism, [we want to know] if what we implement is based on scientific evidence or not, and what the most recent research about autism says. It has emerged from having implemented evidence and talking about evidence. (Marta)

Once the teachers learned that there is scientific evidence behind the success achieved by SEAs, they looked for evidence-based actions, practices or programs in any aspect of their professional activity, which increased their chances of enhancing students’ education, not only when the students participate in SEAs but at any moment they are at school. SEA participation therefore increases the potential social impact that other research in education and psychology of education can have, as these teachers look for the evidence of previous improvements achieved and reported by this research to transfer them to their own context and achieve similar improvements.

Changing Teachers’ Minds and Talk About Students With Special Needs

In relation to the scientific view of education, teachers have changed the way they think and talk about their students, focusing not on the students’ disabilities but on what the teachers can do to transform the educational context and improve the education of such students. These teachers do not ask whether students with special needs can participate in SEAs; they start from the premise they can, and they think on the way they can facilitate their students’ participation through, for instance, necessary adaptations. These teachers believe that this way of thinking about their students has made them improve as teachers, as their professional performance is permeated by language of possibilities:

We realize that we have a different approach, I mean, [we think about] how are we going to include these students or how are we going to promote interactions with them. And we did not have this perspective before. As a school, having had scientific evidence within reach made us improve our teaching practice, reconsider many things, and find meaning. (Marta)

At the personal level, we have improved our dialogues about what is best for our students. We are advancing in this direction, always putting the focus on the students, on what we will achieve, on the fact that this is the best for them. (Ana)

Rethinking and Reorganizing Specialized Support Within and Beyond SEAs

Implementing SEAs with students with special needs entailed rethinking the role of special education teachers, speech therapists and other specialized support. While these professionals used to work outside the class to provide individualized support to students with special needs, usually based on different curricular material of lower academic level, when SEAs started to be implemented, teachers agreed with these specialists that students with special needs would not leave the classroom. Instead, these professionals started to enter the classroom to support students in IG. When the class was not organized in IG, teachers kept the criteria of organizing heterogeneous groups of students to facilitate the inclusion of students with special needs, and specialists also provided support there. Speech therapists, who, in some cases, were more reluctant to change their role into a more inclusive role, also agreed to participate in SEAs by preparing activities for IG or supporting students in DLG.

One of the first things we were clear about was that these students would not leave the classroom and would be distributed within the classroom in heterogeneous groups, and at the same time, we started working in IG and DLG. (…) In my school, all of them used to leave the classroom and had different curricular materials. Objectives were set with very low expectations, low academic objectives, and then we engaged in debates and there were several changes. (…) On the one hand, the role of the speech therapist changed, and this was difficult to achieve because they felt they had lost their identity, their role, (…) but now we work and plan children’s learning together. (Sandra)

In some cases, reading and discussing research publications, such as INCLUD-ED results ( INCLUD-ED Consortium, 2009 ), helped in organizing students and supporting them in a more inclusive way when working in SEAs and beyond, which supported the decision to maintain students with special needs in the class when SEAs were implemented:

Little by little, we saw that all students improved, and we started to do pedagogic gatherings. For instance, I remember that we discussed INCLUD-ED “Actions for success in schools in Europe,” and we emphasized the topic of groupings with the teaching staff because the special education teachers had the idea that they had to take the students with special needs out of the classroom. So, we agreed that when we worked in SEAs, these students would stay in the classroom so that they could participate in the same activities as everyone else. (Ines)

Higher Expectations and Enhanced Learning: Teachers Recovering Meaning in Their Profession

Being aware of SEAs and the improvements promoted and having the opportunity to discuss them and implement them in their school facilitated teachers’ enhanced belief about their students’ potential and, at the same time, gave them the tools to make that potential real; as teachers’ expectations were raised, students’ performances also raised and even surpassing these expectations. This has had an impact on students but also teachers, as some of the teachers reported rediscovering meaning in their profession as a result of being better able to facilitate the learning of students with more difficulties:

I think that the teachers who implement SEAs with our students have found more meaning in teaching, because we see that they learn. We have had high expectations, and even with these high expectations, many times, they have surprised us. We’ve said “I never imagined it could but it happened”, even if we always had high expectations. Sometimes, unintentionally, working with disabilities, we think, “well, we have high expectations, but we will get there one day”, and we are already there. (Marta)

The higher expectations and the possibilities enabled by them has meant a shift, especially in the context of special education, where low expectations and low educational levels predominate, as Ana reflected:

I think that in special schools we can easily find the “happiness curriculum”, that is to say, “poor kids, they have enough with their disability, instead of trying to learn more [let’s make them happier]”. I have worked in several special schools, and I always found colleagues with this attitude. Then, I think that implementing SEAs, and now with the line of research, I think we have realized that we have to change our minds, through dialogue: Why expect less? Let’s go for high expectations, for the best of each student, and see what we can achieve. I think it has been something that has spread in the school, as a result of starting to work in this way with students and other colleagues seeing the results. (Ana)

Importantly, the higher expectations supported by the previous evidence of improvement achieved through SEAs have made it possible for teachers to take on challenges that they would not have taken on before. For instance, Carmen explained that once she learned about the SEAs and their impact at a conference, she decided to implement these actions with the most challenging group at her school. The groups with most challenging students are often those that teachers do not choose to work with and are assigned to the least experienced teachers or those who arrived most recently at the school; however, SEAs make teachers more confident in their ability to improve these students’ educations and, as occurred in the case of Carmen, make them wish to teach precisely the most difficult groups because they know they can make a difference in the education of those students:

I could not understand how it was possible to respond to the diversity we had in the classrooms. I remember that when I arrived at the school I couldn’t, I was overwhelmed, and I remember going at the international conference and seeing it crystal clear. I saw it so clear that I remember we had a class in the school with much diversity, a very special group, and I went to the principal’s office and said, “I need to take this group and implement what I know, what the evidence says that works, to ascertain that it works, and to transform this group”. (…) And the change was amazing. (…) Now I cannot see it in any other way, because now, I feel that any challenge I face, I will succeed. And now, I feel very much like taking the group most in need, the most vulnerable one. For me, it has been awesome working like this. (Carmen)

Social Impact 3: From Mainstream to Special Education Settings: The Transference of SEAs

The expansion of SEAs to new schools has entailed SEAs reaching new educational contexts, some of which are specific contexts in special education. Reaching these new contexts has entailed the opportunity for more inclusive, quality education.

SEAs as a Way to Include Students Segregated in Special Education Classes in the Mainstream Class

As the teachers reported, the inclusion of all students with special needs in SEAs has sometimes been a process, especially when the school serves students with severe disabilities, which directly affects areas of curricular learning. Irene’s school contains a specific classroom for students with language and communication disorders (a communication and language classroom) related to the autism spectrum disorder, which serves students from different municipalities. These students have little or no development of oral language, which makes it difficult for them to participate in actions such as IG and DLG, as such methods are based on dialogue and interaction. Teachers relied from the beginning on research evidence for including in SEAs other students with special needs who attended the mainstream classes. Subsequently, guided by the evidence of the improvements achieved with these students in the school, the students from the communication and language classroom also started to be included in the SEAs.

The students of mainstream classrooms started to participate first. (…) At the beginning, the students with autism, who had many difficulties, who could not speak, did not participate in SEAs; we had not thought about that yet. (…) We still had to break with the idea that we had to teach students with special needs outside the classroom. Then, when we started to include them in the classroom, especially by participating in SEAs, and we saw that the students with difficulties – but who could speak – improved, then we said, “And the other students? The most difficult ones? Let’s see if it is possible”. And it is possible. (Irene)

In this case, the teacher highlighted the importance of adapting some aspects of the development of the activity to facilitate the progressive participation of these students. In the case of students with autism and little language development, the readings for the DLG were prepared with pictograms so that the children could follow the story and express themselves. The teachers prepared the reading and the contribution for the gathering with their families ahead of time. In IG, the students started participating in only one activity, with additional support if necessary, and progressively participated in two or more activities of the IG session.

IG and DLG have made the participation of students who previously shared little learning time with their peers possible in the mainstream classroom, which means that SEAs have had an impact on their educational inclusion and learning opportunities. Furthermore, some of these students have left the communication and language classroom and are now enrolled full time in the mainstream classroom. SEAs have helped to make the possibilities for these students to learn in mainstream inclusive settings more visible and, as a consequence, some students have left open places in the communication and language classroom that can be occupied by students who are now attending special schools. Therefore, in this case, SEAs not only promote the inclusion of students within that school but also open possibilities for more inclusive trajectories for students in other schools.

Pau is a child who came to the communication and language classroom as a child with autism. Today, after having worked with him in the mainstream classroom of peers of the same age, participating in SEAs with interactions has improved his performance at the social level, and now this child is in the mainstream classroom and has left an available place in the communication and language classroom for other children with language difficulties at special schools. That is, we have achieved students who were schooled in the communication and language classroom now being in the mainstream classroom. (Ines)

Transference of SEAs in Special Schools

In the context of Spain, where the research was conducted, 17% of students with special needs are enrolled in special schools ( World Health Organization, 2011 ). According to national law 5 , these are students with disabilities whose special educational needs cannot be met in mainstream schools, the most frequent types of disabilities including intellectual disabilities (36%), multiple disabilities (24%) and pervasive developmental disorder (19%) 6 . Some special schools concerned with providing the best education to their students have also wondered about the possibility of bringing to their schools the educational actions that transformed the education of students with disabilities in mainstream schools. Today, there are 4 special schools that implement SEAs. In Marta and Ana’s school, when the teaching staff started to implement SEAs, no one there had previous experience with implementing SEAs in special schools, so they had to recreate the SEAs in the new context. To ensure proper implementation to achieve the benefits that had already been observed in mainstream schools, they implemented the SEAs progressively and assessed the ongoing results:

In our school, we started with one classroom, and little by little, the number of classrooms that implemented DLG increased. Today, not only has this implementation been sustained, but the number of participants has increased, both in DLG and IG. (…) The results are very positive, because in primary education, at the beginning, only one classroom participated and now 5 entire classrooms participate. (Ana)

The transference of SEAs in their special school was not only sustained but, in time, also increased: similarly to what occurred with mainstream schools, more SEAs have been implemented in more groups and with more diverse children: “We included first children with more speech ability, and little by little we included students with less speech ability to see how we could manage to guarantee that all of them could participate in the SEA” (Marta). “Now, when you look at the timetable for the next school year, you can see that it is full of SEAs” (Ana). This extension in the implementation of SEAs in the school cannot be separated from the students’ progress: it is the improvements such work has achieved that encourages teachers to extend IG and DLG to new groups, students and learning content.

In some cases, preparing the activity with the children ahead of time facilitated their incorporation into the SEA. According to the teachers, using such strategies has made it possible for approximately 80% of the students of preprimary and primary education to participate in IG, and approximately 40% of the students to participate in DLG. In this context of special education and with this group of students, SEAs have also demonstrated improved learning. Language is an area in which most of these students present difficulties, and it is the area of improvement that the teachers have highlighted most, along with an improved coexistence between students:

With the SEAs, new language structures appeared in the students that we never imagined before that they could develop, reasoning, argumentation, first with much help and modeling, but finally, it appeared spontaneously. Then, reading books, which we did not foresee either (…). Expanding their vocabulary. (…) With the SEAs they gain richer vocabulary too. (Marta)

The main results we have seen are improvements in language competence and the quality of their contributions, sentence structures of greater complexity, improvement in explaining their opinions, improved coherence of discourse, taking into account the topic of the debate. (…) Then, an increase in the number of participants in the DLG, better knowledge of the other participants, the creation of new bonds and friendships, and the reduction of coexistence problems. (Ana)

This evidence suggests that SEAs are not limited to a particular type of school or student population but can be effective with very different types of student diversity and educational contexts. According to the teachers, the research on SEAs and special needs had an influence on these improvements achieved in their school:

I think that we could not have achieved it if we would not have this line of research and impact. I mean, it has given us much robustness, a great deal of science to say, “Okay, it has been studied, it works,” and this robustness helped us to transfer, sometimes we say “to recreate,” the SEAs. (Marta)

Building Collaboration Between Special and Mainstream Schools

The replicability of SEAs in special schools was accompanied by the previously mentioned transformation of teachers’ understanding of the education of students with special needs. The focus on learning interactions that both IG and DLG have led teachers in these schools not only to ensure maximum diversity in the interactions within the school by, for instance, grouping students with different disabilities and with different capabilities together, but also to look for interactions with typically developing peers who are educated in mainstream schools. Sharing learning activities with these children in an inclusive learning context entailed new learning opportunities for the special school students in a more normalized environment that could eventually help them prepare for a transition from special education to combined (special-mainstream) education. As Ana explained, in her school, the idea of collaborating with mainstream schools emerged from the high expectations developed and the will to pursue more ambitious objectives for their students. Now, the teachers want to establish this beneficial experience as a regular collaboration and extend it from DLG to IG.

Since we started to work with DLG with our students, we have seen that our objectives in DLG are changing, the same way they are progressing and improving, there is an evolution. They start to structure sentences, ask questions, talk about the topic; then, we see the need to look for higher expectations, that is, there is always a bit more. Then, we thought that as we wanted a bit more, and the ones who could provide it as role models were students of their same age. We wanted them to participate in DLG in the most normalized way possible. (…) When we did it with the [mainstream] school it was a spectacular experience, because new dialogues emerged, our students participated very much spontaneously. (…) Then, the need to create these DLG as something periodical and systematic for the next years emerged, starting with DLG, and then we will continue with IG. Each time a bit more, more inclusion, more interactions, more communication, and more learning. (Ana)

According to the teachers’ experience, the students of both regular and mainstream schools benefited from this experience. The special education students could improve their language and academic learning and find new contexts where they could be accepted and respected, and the mainstream school students had the opportunity to learn more about people with disabilities, including their difficulties and capabilities and how to interact with them, which is learning for life. In one of the mainstream schools that had less experience in implementing DLG, students could even learn from the greater experience students from the special school had with DLG. For both groups of students, many of whom lived in the same town, this collaboration entailed the possibility of coming to know each other and creating bonds beyond the school context:

For the children of the mainstream school, it has brought the opportunity to know students with disabilities and learn how to interact with them; for instance, they live in the same municipality, and maybe they met in the street and they did not interact, they did not know how to talk to each other. The gatherings are above all respect, humanity, a climate of total acceptance, that many times we do not find in society. And our students were able to demonstrate what they knew and had no problem raising their hands and sharing what they knew. Although they needed help, they asked questions to their peers at the mainstream school. I mean, their concerns, their language improvement, I think that apart from the academic and the language improvement, regarding human values it is helping both the mainstream and the special school. (Ana)

The fact that SEAs have been replicated in special schools and there are therefore mainstream and special schools that implement SEAs in the same geographical context has made these collaborations and new learning opportunities for both groups of students possible.

Reaching Other Educational Contexts in the Community

The research on SEAs and students with special needs has also had an impact in other places of the community beyond the school context. An illustrative example explained by Sandra is an association dedicated to people with disabilities that offers activities for children with disabilities. The fact that SEAs are open to the community facilitated the president of the association participating in IG in Sandra’s school, showing how both learning and coexistence improve in IG. In addition, the mother of a child with special needs at Sandra’s school is an active member of the association. These connections with members of this association have caused a change in the association, which is now more oriented toward promoting academic learning among the children and is more impregnated with high expectations, creating new contexts where learning and inclusion can be enhanced:

This summer, the association is promoting instrumental learning for the first time; they are doing homework, which they had done never before, and they are very satisfied. And also, the issue of the evidence (…) she told me the other day that a girl with autism had come, the family explained that she had behaviors such as pulling hair, pushing, and she told them, “Don’t worry, we are changing it”, and the mother was very happy, and she was happy too (…) They are learning to read and write since preprimary, and the families are really satisfied… This has been a big change, because they did not think like this before. (Sandra)

Factors Supporting Social Impact

The interviews held with teachers about the impacts achieved have also shown several factors that contributed to these impacts, mainly via supporting the sustainability and replicability of the actions and the promoted improvements. It is important to summarize these factors here because taking them into account may contribute to an enhanced social impact of the research.

Teachers’ Permanent Training Based on Scientific Evidence

As mentioned above, a more scientific approach to education was one of the impacts achieved for teachers. This was translated into the practice of regularly reading scientific texts related to their profession, which, in turn, reinforced this scientific view. Some schools organized seminars in which the teaching staff debated these texts, and in other cases, teachers attended seminars or meetings with teachers from other schools. The texts that they read and debated included articles, books and reports resulting from this line of research and other scientific publications related to teaching and learning that could help them solve problems they encountered and improve their practice. According to the interviewed teachers, sharing this space of learning and debate has been a help in replicating the SEAs in new classes or schools and in bringing the SEAs to more students; it has also been a source of sustainability when the barriers found in the implementation of SEAs were shared and discussed:

Training is essential. As we read about the evidence and debated it, if we had a preconceived idea, we said, “No, this is true, it is as you say, this girl may be able to do that”. I think that training has been and still is essential for all this, because theory gives us a clue to put everything into practice. If we know the theory, then it is very easy. (…) We have to know first, we have to learn first. And then we see it very clearly. (Carmen)

Gaining confidence and feeling empowered to implement the actions that are supported by research has also been an effect of the teachers having access to scientific knowledge:

We emphasized very much that evidence says that children improve more with inclusion, that is, not taking them out of the classroom, if you do not group them separately… Then, you get empowered, and say, “This is really what we have to do; every time, if we could do that it would be ideal”. Then, you change your outlook a bit. (…) Because we came from another paradigm, we had another trajectory, and with the training we started to see things more clearly; we got empowered and said, “It has to be done this way, it is demonstrated that it is best, so let’s do it”. (Ines)

Teamwork and Networks of Support

Another facilitator of social impact highlighted by the teachers was the availability of a network of support among teachers and schools. The previously mentioned seminars are one place where some of these networks have been created. The previous experiences of other colleagues that are shared in these spaces have encouraged new teachers to implement SEAs and have also helped solve doubts and difficulties in the implementation of SEAs. These networks of support have made possible, for instance, collaborations between special and mainstream schools in sharing SEAs. Irene explained that this was an important factor in her case; the same way that special schools took the progress achieved in mainstream schools as a reference to replicate the SEAs in their context, Irene’s school took one special school as evidence of the possibilities for successfully implementing SEAs in her school:

The more positive, inclusive, rich, high expectations and interactions you have in more contexts with other professionals that are implementing SEAs in other schools and see that it is possible, that a special school is doing it and it is possible, and they improve… the more things like that you listen to throughout your professional life, and the more people you can share these spaces with, the more you empower yourself… and finally, you do it, because you believe it is true that it is possible and that you are going to make it. (Irene)

Recording Results and Being Aware of the Improvements Achieved

For teachers, it was also important to have a record of the students’ results related to the SEAs so that they could register progress and be fully aware of the improvements achieved. Some schools had more systematic records than others, and some of them were aware that they had to improve their recordkeeping, but all of them agreed on the importance of gathering this evidence, as it demonstrates teachers they are doing well and encourages the continuance of their work:

Results, because in daily life the inertia doesn’t let us see progress, but it is very important to talk about it with colleagues: “Look at what we have achieved,” “Look, this child could not do that and now he does”. When we verbalize it, we realize all we are achieving. (Carmen)

Sharing the Impact of SEAs With Families

When schools share the development and outcomes of SEAs not only among teachers but also with students’ families, the latter also become active supporters of these actions. This information can be shared in the schools’ seminars or assemblies that are open to families, in individual meetings with the family of a particular student, or while developing the SEAs if families participate, for example, as volunteers in IG. This information has led, for instance, to families not authorizing their children with special needs to receive support outside the classroom – because they know their children can progress further by participating in SEAs in their classroom—or agreeing that their child can stay in the school one more year so as to continue taking advantage of learning in SEAs.

Within education, I think that special education is the great forgotten area, and, with this research, I really believe that now is our time. I think that special education is starting to be visible and show that with them [students with disabilities], it is also possible. (…) I believe that it is our moment and I hope that this research helps all students and that finally, inclusion becomes a reality that we achieve between all. (Ana, teacher at a special school)

Ana, with these words, tried to synthesize what the actual and potential social impact of the line of research was for teachers such as her. Research conducted on SEAs and students with disabilities and other special educational needs allowed the identification of benefits that these educational actions entailed for these children in the schools that were already implementing them. Subsequently, this evidence has reached new schools, bringing these improvements to new student populations and improving teachers’ professional experiences, thus achieving a social impact that, as Ana said, is contributing to transforming special education.

This line of research is an example of the body of research in the psychology of education that studies several aspects of the education of students with special needs, creating interventions that improve their learning and coexistence with peers or bringing forth scientific evidence on which effective educational programs can be based. As interaction and dialogue are key components of SEAs, we argue that the evidence collected on the impact of SEAs on students with special needs shows the transformative potential of the sociocultural approach of learning ( Vygotsky, 1980 ; Bruner, 1996 ) for the education of these students. Because evidence on the social impact of this line of research was obtained from a limited number of interviews, conclusions must be cautiously made. However, there is evidence supporting the achievement of social impact. The criteria defined by SIOR 7 , the Social Impact Open Repository that aims at monitoring, evaluating and improving the impact of research, enables the analysis of how social impact is approached, as well as the limitations that can be addressed to further enhance social impact achievements.

• (1) Connection of research with the social priority goals of sustainable development. The line of research responds to UN Sustainable Development Goal 4 on Quality Education: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. Therefore, the research is aligned with one of the social priorities.
• (2) Percentage of improvement achieved regarding the departure situation. The interviews conducted allowed the collection of evidence on the improvements achieved in terms of the students’ learning and improved coexistence and the schools’ more efficient response to student diversity. However, an accurate and quantified record of the academic and/or social improvements of these students has not been systematized. Therefore, evidence of the social impact would be enhanced with a more systematic procedure to collect and quantify the improvements.
• (3) Transferability of the impact: the actions based on the project’s results have been successfully applied in more than one context. Transferability has been achieved in different directions: first, replicating the SEAs in mainstream schools with the participation of students with special needs in these schools; second, recreating the SEAs in special schools, thus transferring the actions to a new student population; and third, transferring the SEAs to other out-of-school educational contexts in the community.
• (4) Scientific, political, and social dissemination. The benefits of SEAs for students with disabilities and other special needs have been disseminated through scientific publications, conferences and training for teachers and schools. Importantly, this dissemination has been a key component for the transferability and sustainability of the impact, according to the evidence collected and is associated with the scientific training of teachers, who used such publications to learn from and discuss the evidence and transform their own professional practice.
• (5) Sustainability of the impact achieved. According to the evidence collected, in all the new contexts and new populations of students where SEAs have been transferred, the intensity of the implementation has not only been sustained but also increased, and the same occurred with the improvements achieved. Although an accurate quantification of the improvement is not yet available, the experience of the sample of teachers who were involved in the transference of the SEAs and still implement them in their own context points in this direction.

Taking this into account, further research on SEAs and students with special needs with social impact could cover four aspects. First, to analyze how SEAs put into practice contributions from theory in the psychology of education to support the learning and development of children with special needs more in depth. Second, to define a procedure to collect and quantify the improvements achieved by the students as a result of participating in SEAs. The INTER-ACT project, which is currently advancing this line of research, will contribute to quantifying this improvement and strengthening the evidence of the research’s social impact. Third, to support the transference of the SEAs and the improvements associated with them to new schools. Additional impact is foreseen in this regard, as the ongoing INTER-ACT project will transfer SEAs to new mainstream and special schools and will add further evidence on the key elements for the transferability of SEAs to new contexts with students with special needs and those without. Finally, to extend the interactive understanding of learning and development beyond schools and the teaching and learning contexts, reaching other related professionals and activities, such as evaluation, attention and counseling related to special needs; these areas of intervention are still very much impregnated with an individualistic perspective more aligned with the medical model than with the social model of disability, and students and schools would benefit from coordinated work based on the evidence of the benefits of the interactive approach of SEAs.

Data Availability Statement

Ethics statement.

The study was fully approved by the Ethics Board of the Community of Researchers on Excellence for All (CREA). The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author Contributions

SM conceived the original idea with the support of ER. ED conducted the literature review. SM with the support of RG analyzed the results of the line of research (case studies) from the perspective of social impact. ER coordinated the data collection (interviews) on social impact. SM conducted the interviews, and transcribed and analyzed them with the support of RG and ED. SM wrote a full draft of the manuscript. ED, ER, and RG revised it and included corrections. SM revised the final version of the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Funding. This work was supported by the INTER-ACT, Interactive Learning Environments for the Inclusion of Students With and Without Disabilities: Improving Learning, Development and Relationships. Spanish National Programme for Research Aimed at the Challenges of Society, Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness. Reference Number: EDU2017-88666-R.

1 The Ethics Board was composed of Dr. Marta Soler (president), who has expertise in the evaluation of projects from the European Framework Programme of Research of the European Union and of European projects in the area of ethics; Dr. Teresa Sordé, who has expertise in the evaluation of projects from the European Framework Programme of Research and is researcher in the area of Roma studies; Dr. Patricia Melgar, a founding member of the Catalan Platform Against Gender Violence and a researcher in the area of gender and gender violence; Dr. Sandra Racionero, a former secretary and member of the Ethics Board at Loyola University Andalusia (2016-2018) and a review panel member for COST action proposals in the area of health; Dr. Cristina Pulido, an expert in data protection policies and child protection in research and communication and a researcher in communication studies; Dr. Oriol Rios, a founding member of the “Men in Dialogue” association, a researcher in the area of masculinities, and the editor of “Masculinities and Social Change,” a journal indexed in WoS and Scopus; and Dr. Esther Oliver, who has expertise in the evaluation of projects from the European Framework Programme of Research and is a researcher in the area of gender violence.

2 Schools as Learning Communities in Spain: http://utopiadream.info/ca/centros-en-funcionamiento/caracteristicas/

3 Schools as Learning Communities in Europe: Successful Educational Actions for all (SEAS4ALL). ERASMUS + Programme. Record number: 2015-1-ES01-KA201-016327. https://seas4all.eu/ ; Social transformation through Educational Policies based on Successful Educational Actions (STEP4SEAS). ERASMUS + Programme. Record number: 11. 580432-EPP-1-2016-1-ES-EPPKA3-IPI-SOC-IN. https://www.step4seas.eu/

4 2018 Report of the Schools as Learning Communities network in Latin America https://www.comunidaddeaprendizaje.com.es/uploads/materials/579/352de6fce741a0d1e6d17c67944cec2c.pdf

5 Ley Orgánica de Educación [Organic Law of Education] (LOE), of 2006, amended by the Ley Orgánica para la Mejora de la Calidad Educativa [Organic Law for the Improvement of Quality of Education] (LOMCE), of 2013.

6 Spanish Ministry of Education and Vocational Training. Statistics on Education. School year 2017-2018. https://www.educacionyfp.gob.es/servicios-al-ciudadano/estadisticas/no-universitaria/alumnado/matriculado/2017-2018-rd.html

7 https://sior.ub.edu/indicators

• Akhutina T., Foreman N., Krichevets A., Matikka L., Narhi V., Pylaeva N., et al. (2003). Improving spatial functioning in children with cerebral palsy using computerized and traditional game tasks. Disabil. Rehabil. 25 1361–1371. 10.1080/09638280310001616358 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alanazi M. S. (2017). Use of flashcards in dealing with reading and writing difficulties in SEN students. Multidiscip. J. Educ. Res. 7 53–87. 10.17583/remie.2017.2211 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alenizi M. A. (2019). Effectiveness of a program based on a multi-sensory strategy in developing visual perception of primary school learners with learning disabilities: a contextual study of Arabic learners. Int. J. Educ. Psychol. 8 72–104. 10.17583/ijep.2019.3346 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson D. L., Watt S. E., Shanley D. C. (2014). A multi-dimensional model of the origins of attitude certainty: teachers’ attitudes toward attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 17 19–50. 10.1007/s11218-013-9235-5 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Asmus J. M., Carter E. W., Moss C. K., Biggs E. E., Bolt D. M., Born T. L., et al. (2017). Efficacy and social validity of peer network interventions for high school students with severe disabilities. Am. J. Intellect. Dev. Disabil. 122 118–137. 10.1352/1944-7558-122.2.118 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Auphan P., Ecalle J., Magnan A. (2019). Computer-based assessment of reading ability and subtypes of readers with reading comprehension difficulties: a study in French children from G2 to G9. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 34 641–643. 10.1007/s10212-018-0396-7 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bowles D., Radford J., Bakopoulou I. (2018). Scaffolding as a key role for teaching assistants: perceptions of their pedagogical strategies. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 88 499–512. 10.1111/bjep.12197 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bruner J. S. (1973). Beyond the Information Given: Studies in the Psychology of Knowing. New York, NY: WW Norton. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bruner J. S. (1996). The Culture of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Christou M., Molina S. (2009). Educational inclusion and critical pedagogy. Teor. Educ. 10 31–55. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chun Sik Min (2010). Cultural discourse on special education’s identity. J. Intellect. Disabil. 12 213–229. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dainez D., Smolka A. L. (2014). The concept of compensation in the dialogue of Vygotsky with Adler: human development, education and disability. Educ. Pesqui. 40 1093–1108. 10.1590/S1517-97022014071545 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elboj C., Niemelä R. (2010). Sub-communities of Mutual Learners in the Classroom: The case of Interactive groups. Rev. Psicodidáctica 15 177–189. [ Google Scholar ]
• European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (2017). Early School Leaving and Learners with Disabilities and/or Special Educational Needs: Final Summary. Available online at: https://www.european-agency.org/resources/publications/early-school-leaving-and-learners-disabilities-andor-special-educational-1 (accessed March 3, 2020). [ Google Scholar ]
• European Commission (2010). European Disability Strategy 2010-2020: A Renewed Commitment to a Barrier-Free Europe. Brussels: European Commission. Available online at: https://ec.europa.eu/eip/ageing/standards/general/general-documents/european-disability-strategy-2010-2020_en (accessed March 3, 2020). [ Google Scholar ]
• European Commission (2013). Ethics for Researchers. Facilitating Research Excellence in FP7. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/fp7/89888/ethics-for-researchers_en.pdf (accessed March 3, 2020). [ Google Scholar ]
• Flecha R. (2015). Successful Educational Action for Inclusion and Social Cohesion in Europe. Berlin: Springer; 10.1007/978-3-319-11176-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Flecha R., Soler-Gallart M., Sordé T. (2015). Social impact: Europe must fund social sciences. Nature 528 : 193 . 10.1038/528193d [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Flecha R. (2006-2011). INCLUD-ED. Strategies for inclusion and social cohesion in Europe from Education. 6th Framework Programme. Brussels: European Commission. [ Google Scholar ]
• Garcia R., Mircea T., Duque E. (2010). Socio-cultural transformation and the promotion of learning. Rev. Psicodidáctica 15 207–222. [ Google Scholar ]
• García-Carrión R., Molina Roldán S., Grande López L. A., Buslón Valdez N. (2016). Análisis de las interacciones entre alumnado y diversas personas adultas en actuaciones educativas de éxito: hacia la inclusión de todos y todas. Rev. Latinoam. Educ. Incl. 10 115–132. 10.4067/S0718-73782016000100007 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garcia-Carrion R. (2018-2020). INTER-ACT. Interactive Learning Environments for the Inclusion of Students with and Without Disabilities: Improving Learning, Development and Relationships. R+D Plan. Madrid: Spanish Ministry of Science. [ Google Scholar ]
• García-Carrión R., Molina Roldán S., Roca E. (2018). Interactive Learning Environments for the Educational Improvement of Students with Disabilities in Special Schools. Front. Psychol. 9 : 1744 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01744 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gómez A., Padrós M., Ríos O., Mara L. C., Pukepuke T. (2019). Reaching social impact through communicative methodology. Researching with rather than on vulnerable populations: the Roma case. Front. Educ. 4 : 9 10.3389/feduc.2019.00009 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gómez A., Puigvert L., Flecha R. (2011). Critical communicative methodology: informing real social transformation through research. Qual. Inq. 17 235–245. 10.1177/1077800410397802 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gómez A., Siles G., Tejedor M. (2012). Contributing to social transformation through Communicative Research Methodology. Qual. Res. Educ. 1 36–57. 10.4471/qre.2012.02 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goodley D. (2001). ‘Learning Difficulties’, the social model of disability and impairment: challenging epistemologies. Disabil. Soc. 16 207–231. 10.1080/09687590120035816 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haegele J. A., Hodge S. (2016). Disability discourse: overview and critiques of the medical and social models. Quest 68 193–206. 10.1080/00336297.2016.1143849 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hatcher P. J., Goetz K., Snowling M. J., Hulme C., Gibbs S., Smith G. (2006). Evidence for the effectiveness of the Early Literacy Support programme. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 76 351–367. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Heidrich R., Bassani P. (2012). Inclusive design - assistive technology for people with cerebral palsy. Work 41 4762–4766. 10.3233/WOR-2012-0028-4762 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Holliman A. J., Hurry J. (2013). The effects of Reading Recovery on children’s literacy progress and special educational needs status: a three-year follow-up study. Educ. Psychol. 33 719–733. 10.1080/01443410.2013.785048 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hughes C., Foley S., White N., Devine R. T. (2018). School readiness in children with special educational needs and disabilities: psychometric findings from a new screening tool, the Brief Early Skills, and Support Index. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 88 606–627. 10.1111/bjep.12206 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• INCLUD-ED Consortium (2009). Actions for Success in Schools in Europe. Brussels: European Commission. [ Google Scholar ]
• Krull J., Wilbert J., Hennemann T. (2018). Does social exclusion by classmates lead to behaviour problems and learning difficulties or vice versa? A cross-lagged panel analysis. Eur. J. Spec. Needs Educ. 33 235–253. 10.1080/08856257.2018.1424780 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Law Y., Lam S., Law W., Tam Z. W. Y. (2017). Enhancing peer acceptance of children with learning difficulties: classroom goal orientation and effects of a storytelling programme with drama techniques. Educ. Psychol. 37 537–549. 10.1080/01443410.2016.1214685 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lindsay G. (2007). Educational psychology and the effectiveness of inclusive education/mainstreaming. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 77 1–24. 10.1348/000709906X156881 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lloyd J. E. V., Irwin J. G., Hertzman C. (2009). Kindergarten school readiness and fourth-grade literacy and numeracy outcomes of children with special needs: a population-based study. Educ. Psychol. 29 583–602. 10.1080/01443410903165391 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lopez de Aguileta G. (2019). Developing school-relevant language and literacy skills through dialogic literary gatherings. Int. J. Educ. Psychol. 8 51–71. 10.17583/ijep.2019.4028 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lovett M. W., Frijters J. C., Wolf M., Steinbach K. A., Sevcik R. A., Morris R. D. (2017). Early intervention for children at risk for reading disabilities: the impact of grade at intervention and individual differences on intervention outcomes. J. Educ. Psychol. 109 889–914. 10.1037/edu0000181 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Molina S., Ríos O. (2010). Including students with disabilities in learning communities. Psychol. Soc. Educ. 2 1–9. [ Google Scholar ]
• Molina S. (2003-2007). Interactive Groups: A Practice of the Learning Communities for the Inclusion of Students with Disabilities. Ph.D. thesis, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona. [ Google Scholar ]
• Montague M., Krawec J., Enders C., Dietz S. (2014). The effects of cognitive strategy instruction on math problem solving of middle-school students of varying ability. J. Educ. Psychol. 106 469–481. 10.1037/a0035176 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Oldfield J., Humphrey N., Hebron J. (2017). Risk factors in the development of behaviour difficulties among students with special educational needs and disabilities: a multilevel analysis. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 87 146–169. 10.1111/bjep.12141 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Papadopoulos T. C., Charalambous A., Kanari A., Loizou M. (2004). Kindergarten cognitive intervention for reading difficulties: the PREP remediation in Greek. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 19 79–105. 10.1007/BF03173238 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Park N. (2015). A study on disabilities human rights education in social studies from the viewpoint of disability studies. J. Hum. Rights Law Relat. Educ. 8 1–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pitchford N. J., Kamchedzera E., Hubber P. J., Chigeda A. L. (2018). Interactive apps promote learning of basic mathematics in children with special educational needs and disabilities. Front. Psychol. 9 : 262 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00262 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Puigvert L., Christou M., Holford J. (2012). Critical communicative methodology: including vulnerable voices in research through dialogue. Camb. J. Educ. 42 513–526. 10.1080/0305764X.2012.733341 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roberts G. J., Cho E., Garwood J. D., Goble G. H., Robertson T., Hodges A. (2019). Reading interventions for Students with reading and behavioral difficulties: a meta-analysis and evaluation of co-occurring difficulties. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 32 17–47. 10.1007/s10648-019-09485-1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schwab S., Huber C., Gebhardt M., Goble G. H., Robertson T., Hodge A. (2016). Social acceptance of students with Down syndrome and students without disability. Educ. Psychol. 36 1501–1515. 10.1080/01443410.2015.1059924 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Soler M. (2015). Biographies of “Invisible” people who transform their lives and enhance social transformations through dialogic gatherings. Qual. Inq. 21 839–842. 10.1177/1077800415614032 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stake R. E. (2006). Multiple Case Study Analysis. New York, NY: Guilford. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tzuriel D., Shamir A. (2007). The effects of peer mediation with young children (PMYC) on chldren’s cognitivie modificability. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 77 143–165. 10.1348/000709905x84279 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• UNESCO (2017). School Violence and Bullying. Global Status Report. Available online at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000246970 (accessed March 3, 2020). [ Google Scholar ]
• Valls R., Kyriakides L. (2013). The power of Interactive Groups: how diversity of adults volunteering in classroom groups can promote inclusion and success for children of vulnerable minority ethnic populations. Camb. J. Educ. 43 17–33. 10.1080/0305764X.2012.749213 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Valls R. (2008-2011). MIXTRIN. Ways of Grouping Students Together and How this is Related to Success at School: Mixture, Streaming and Inclusion. R+D Plan. Madrid: Spanish Ministry of Science. [ Google Scholar ]
• Velázquez Callado C. (2012). Analysis of the effects of the implementation of cooperative learning in physical education. Qual. Res. Educ. 1 80–105. 10.4471/qre.2012.04 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vellutino F. R., Scanlon D. M. (2002). The Interactive Strategies approach to reading intervention. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 27 573–635. 10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00002-4 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vuorinen K., Erikivi A., Uusitalo-Malmivaara L. (2019). A character strength intervention in 11 inclusive Finnish classrooms to promote social participation of students with special educational needs. J. Res. Spec. Educ. Needs 19 45–57. 10.1111/1471-3802.12423 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vygotsky L. (2018). Compensatory processes in the development of the retarded child. Educ. Pesqui. 44 : e44003001 10.1590/S1678-4634201844003001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vygotsky L. S. (1980). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilson C., Woolfson L. M., Durkin K., Elliott M. A. (2016). The impact of social cognitive and personality factors on teachers’ reported inclusive behaviour. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 86 461–480. 10.1111/bjep.12118 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• World Health Organization (2011). World Report on Disability. Geneva: World Health Organization. [ Google Scholar ]