Working memory training shows short-term near-transfer gains but no compelling evidence of consistent long-term academic achievement gains¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Working memory training programs produce some short-term gains on tasks similar to the training activities, but evidence does not support consistent long-term gains in reading, mathematics, and spelling. → Andrew C. Butler & Shana K. Carpenter 2015

Evidence¶

Andrew C. Butler & Shana K. Carpenter 2015¶

Andrew C. Butler & Shana K. Carpenter. (2015). Separating Myth from Reality in Education: Introduction to the Special Issue. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9344-0

q2 · i? · review · r2

The editorial reports, citing Redick et al. (2015), a review of evidence on working memory training's efficacy for children's academic and intellectual achievement; the practical implication drawn is that "caution should be exercised" in implementing such interventions.

"they conclude that these programs appear to produce some short-term gains on tasks that are similar to the training activities, but they find no compelling evidence of consistent long-term gains on academic achievement in reading, mathematics, and spelling"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Working Memory — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Spatial Training Improves Math Performance — related
• Isolated EF interventions show robust near-term EF gains but poor transfer, including to early mathematics — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Digitalised task training shows highly inconsistent evidence, appearing particularly suited to improving working memory — a narrower finding that bears on this claim