Details

Published: 13 November 2025

Hits: 628

(1) Is memory training good for education performance? 

“Do memory training programs improve the learning of academic skills?

Statement of the problem

Many students have difficulty maintaining information in working memory (WM) long enough and with sufficient clarity to make use of it. They may also struggle to sustain task-oriented attention. 

Proposed solution/intervention 

There are numerous (usually) computer-based WM training programs intended to stimulate general cognitive change by addressing WM and attention. The programs include tasks designed to be enjoyable while training and testing individuals’ WM. Item difficulty is normally increased incrementally, according to the students’ performance. 

The theoretical rationale

Adequate WM is seen as a pre-condition for higher order cognition. Thus, the potential benefits of directly training under-developed WM are worth investigating, although attempts to train a range of underlying processes in order to boost academic skills have not been productive. The WM training approach is predicated upon the brain’s neuroplasticity, such that the stimulation caused by the repeated practice on relevant tasks produces beneficial changes in the brain’s neural structure and function. It is proposed that these changes improve WM, intelligence, concentration, endurance, impulse control and emotional regulation. It is also expected that these changes will generalise to other tasks and settings, such as those required in academic and professional domains. It is critical that any training benefits transfer to other tasks measuring non-trained cognitive functions important in everyday life. 

What does the research say? What is the evidence for its efficacy?

WM training programs have been shown to improve WM on trained tasks and, to a lesser extent, on tasks similar to those taught, but the benefits have not been demonstrated to generalise to academic learning, or be maintained over long periods. Even positive results have been inconsistent within and across studies. The few studies with positive findings have been criticized on a number of methodological grounds, including measurement instrument difficulties, a lack of control groups (especially active controls), small sample sizes, and non-random subject assignment. There is also a concern that the proposed mechanism for producing improvement has not been clearly demonstrated to have caused improvement beyond what might have resulted from a placebo effect. To provide ineffective interventions has serious negative implications for struggling students. Even if an intervention is benign, there is an opportunity cost for students (and often a financial cost to parents), and a residue of negative emotion for both.

Conclusion

Not enough supportive research on this type of intervention currently meets the scientific standards that would justify claims of effectiveness.”

__________________________________________________________

The Effectiveness of Working Memory Training on Iranian Students' Academic Performance (2025)

Introduction:

“In the past several years, increasing interest has been in working memory training as a cognitive intervention to improve students’ academic performance. Despite the considerable interest in this topic, empirical support for the real efficacy of such interventions has been mixed and sometimes contradictory. This meta-analysis seeks to provide a systematic, evidence-based review of the functional effectiveness of working memory training. 

Methods: For this purpose, we systematically searched all existing pertinent randomized controlled trials. The search was carried out both in major international academic databases, such as ScienceDirect, Elsevier, Wiley, Springer, Taylor & Francis, Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar, and reliable national databases, such as IranDoc, MagIran, SID, Noormags, and Civilica. This research produced 20 qualifying studies with 628 subjects. Results: The findings manifested a high heterogeneity among the studies and an indication of publication bias. The overall effect size of the impact of working memory training on academic performance was computed as g=1.01 (95% CI [0.05, 1.98]), indicating a statistically significant effect. However, the observed heterogeneity and possible bias in different studies render the interpretation difficult and cast doubt on the external validity of the findings. 

Discussion: 

These results highlight the necessity for additional research employing more rigorous and better-controlled methodologies to more effectively establish the efficacy of working memory interventions in school settings.”

A comprehensive review of 20 randomized controlled trials that met moderate to high standards of methodological quality provides strong evidence supporting the positive impact of working memory training on student academic performance. Students demonstrate the most significant improvements from working memory training in their performance on mathematics, reading, and writing tasks. The average effect size, measured using Hedges’ g = 1.01; 95% CI: The calculated range for Hedges’ g from 0.05 to 1.98 demonstrates that the academic performance impact of working memory training is statistically significant. The statistical analysis demonstrated high heterogeneity among studies, evidenced by an I2 value of 96.4 and an H2 value of 27.79. The considerable variation observed appears to result from multiple factors, including how programs are structured alongside variations in sample demographics and cultural environments, and the different tools used for evaluation. The meta regression investigated several factors, including sample size, year of publication, gender, and publication location, but found no significant effect size moderators among them. The findings of the present meta analysis underscore the critical role of working memory (WM) capacity as a significant predictor and enhancer of students’ academic performance. These results are consistent with established cognitive frameworks that conceptualize working memory (WM) as a dynamic system acting as an intermediary between short-term and long-term memory, enabling the simultaneous maintenance and processing of complex information (Cowan, 2008). Strengthening this cognitive component through targeted educational interventions not only enhances core cognitive processes, such as attention, problem-solving, 

Discussion 

A comprehensive review of 20 randomized controlled trials that met moderate to high standards of methodological quality provides strong evidence supporting the positive impact of working memory training on student academic performance. Students demonstrate the most significant improvements from working memory training in their performance on mathematics, reading, and writing tasks. The average effect size, measured using Hedges’ g = 1.01; 95% CI: The calculated range for Hedges’ g from 0.05 to 1.98 demonstrates that the academic performance impact of working memory training is statistically significant. The statistical analysis demonstrated high heterogeneity among studies, evidenced by an I2 value of 96.4 and an H2 value of 27.79. The considerable variation observed appears to result from multiple factors, including how programs are structured alongside variations in sample demographics and cultural environments, and the different tools used for evaluation. The meta regression investigated several factors, including sample size, year of publication, gender, and publication location, but found no significant effect size moderators among them. The findings of the present meta analysis underscore the critical role of working memory (WM) capacity as a significant predictor and enhancer of students’ academic performance. These results are consistent with established cognitive frameworks that conceptualize working memory (WM) as a dynamic system acting as an intermediary between short-term and long-term memory, enabling the simultaneous maintenance and processing of complex information (Cowan, 2008). Strengthening this cognitive component through targeted educational interventions not only enhances core cognitive processes, such as attention, problem-solving, and information organization, but also significantly impacts academic achievement. Neuropsychological evidence has identified the involvement of specific brain regions, including the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), and parietal areas, in regulating various working memory (WM) components and cognitive control mechanisms (Kim et al., 2015a, 2015b; Osaka et al., 2003). Dysfunction in these neural structures, particularly within the phonological subsystem, has been significantly associated with learning disorders such as difficulties in reading and mathematics (Rosselli et al., 2006; Wilson and Swanson, 2001). Thus, designing educational interventions that specifically target the activation and reinforcement of these brain regions may offer a solid scientific foundation for improving cognitive and academic outcomes. From these meta-analytic findings, working memory (WM) training produces the strongest and most reliable effects in the near transfer field, where improvements are predominantly restricted to the proximally related task, training structure, and content domains. In contrast, far transfer, the broader generalization of such improvement to novel or task-irrelevant learning situations, continues to be sporadic, and, across most cases, of small magnitude. This pattern resembles the larger global WM literature, where meta-analyses and systematic reviews (Melby-Lervåg and Hulme, 2013; Sala and Gobet, 2019) consistently show impressive short-term, task-specific improvements but more restricted and heterogeneous cross-domain transfers. Such convergence underscores the necessity of a more mechanism-sensitive research program that informs the cognitive and environmental moderators of transfer and the particular situations under which such transfer is most likely to be obtained.

Mahdavi, A., Hejazi, E., Saviz, M., Heidari, Y., & Ghoraeian, H. (2025, September). The Effectiveness of Working Memory Training on Iranian Students' Academic Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 10, p. 1456583). Frontiers.

__________________________________________________________

Key references

Melby-Lervåg, M., Redick, T. S., & Hulme, C. (2016). Working memory training does not improve performance on measures of intelligence or other measures of far transfer: Evidence from a meta-analytic review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(4), 512–534. 

Sala, G., & Gobet, F. (2017). Working memory training in typically developing children: A meta-analysis of the available evidence. Developmental Psychology, 53(4), 671-685. 

Schwaighofer, M., Fischer, F., & Bühner, M. (2015). Does working memory training transfer? A meta-analysis including training conditions as moderators. Educational Psychologist, 50(2), 138–166. 

Simons, D.J., Boot, W.R., Charness, N., Gathercole, S.E., Chabris, C.F., Hambrick, D.Z., & Stine-Morrow, E.A.L. (2016). Do “brain-training” programs work? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 17(3), 103–186. 

Further references: https://tinyurl.com/y7ayrtop 

Hempenstall, K. (2019). Do memory programs training improve the learning of academic skills. Nomanis Notes. Issue 8, October. Retrieved from 81f204_acbebceff650470c967fae3345e99c1f.pdf

Or https://www.nomanis.com.au/single-post/2019/10/28/Issue-8-October-2019

__________________________________________________________

(2) Does music training enhance intelligence and learning to read (Hempenstall)?

Statement of the problem 

Learning to read written English is difficult for many children. There have been numerous attempts to find innovative means to improve this situation. 

Proposed solution/intervention 

Many people, including children, find listening to music pleasurable. If it could be shown that learning music, an intellectual skill, transfers to intelligence and/or reading development, then music education may become an attractive curriculum option in school settings, and for parents seeking to enhance their children’s development. It would have even more appeal if it could promote reading achievement among young readers struggling with literacy. 

The theoretical rationale 

Learning and playing music is an intellectually demanding activity, and some research has suggested other language and cognitive abilities may be enhanced. It is accepted that repeatedly engaging in any intellectual activity will evoke detectable brain changes. Some of these brain changes may be helpful to reading and intellectual development. For example, increased phonological awareness skills have been associated with music training, as have a variety of auditory skills, such as improved sense of pitch and rhythm. Given the association between phonological awareness and reading, a causal link is feasible, though perhaps restricted to beginning readers. Further, some suggest that training has an even broader impact, including on general cognitive functioning. Of course, there are numerous types and durations of musical instruction and it is unclear whether they would all have a similar effect. Additionally, any effect would be presumably predicated on students’ motivation to maintain the training input and

What does the research say? What is the evidence for its efficacy? 

Numerous studies have found a correlation between the two pursuits, but it has yet to be shown that music training can actually cause reading or IQ improvement. The explanation for the association may be simply that brighter individuals are more likely to engage in music programs, and there is evidence that this is so. Unfortunately, many of these supportive studies are not well designed, and research reviews have found an inverse relationship between the reported effect sizes of the music training on reading skills and the methodological quality of the study design. So, high quality research reports little or no evidence for the transfer effect. To date, there have been too few randomized control trials (RCTs) to clarify if, and under what conditions, music training might cause reading skill or IQ enhancement. More recent reviews and meta analyses have found little or no far transfer. As to reading effects, future studies of a high enough quality may show some benefits from some music training programs.

Conclusion 

Music-training programs have numerous cultural benefits for participants. However, if the purpose for their introduction is to have a direct and significant impact on academic outcomes, music training is not recommended based on current evidence. 

Key references 

Dumont, E., Syurina, E.V., Feron F.J.M., & van Hooren, S. (2017). Music interventions and child development: A critical review and further directions. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 694 

Gordon, R.L., Fehd, H.M., & McCandliss, B.D. (2015). Does music training enhance literacy skills? A meta-analysis. Frontiers of Psychology, 6, 1777. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01777

Further references: https://tinyurl.com/ycf3x9aa

Hempenstall, K. (2019). Does music training enhance intelligence and learning to read. Nomanis Notes, Issue 9, April 2019. Retrieved from: https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/81f204_fce6288603674960a2e624a1b702b3f7.pdf

__________________________________________________________

The role of music education in enhancing cognitive flexibility, memory, and academic performance. (2025)

ABSTRACT

“This research study investigates how music education fosters both cognitive and non-cognitive domains and how these contribute to student performance. The general purpose was to evaluate the effectiveness of music education in relation to academic achievement and learning outcomes, with an emphasis on cognitive flexibility, working memory, language, mathematics, self-regulation, cooperation, phonological processing, time management, emotional regulation and attitudes. A longitudinal quantitative design was employed, using structured questionnaires to measure academic and cognitive indicators. The sample comprised 440 university students, of which 387 valid responses were analysed statistically using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) was applied to explore the direct and indirect effects of music education on academic performance. The results revealed that music education significantly enhances both cognitive and non-cognitive skills, with a positive correlation to improved academic outcomes. Among these, cognitive flexibility and working memory showed the most pronounced improvements, particularly in subjects requiring memorisation and problem solving. The findings highlight music education's ability to strengthen learning capacities beyond traditional subject boundaries. By integrating cognitive, behavioural and emotional processes, this study provides evidence of music education's long-term positive impact on academic achievement and underscores its value as a holistic educational tool.”

Zhang, Y. (2025). The role of music education in enhancing cognitive flexibility, memory, and academic performance. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2025.2544858

__________________________________________________________

References

Adams, M.J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking & learning about print. Cambridge, M.A: MIT Press.

Allington R.L. (1984). Content coverage & contextual reading in reading groups. Journal of Reading Behaviour, 16, 85-96.

Anderson, R.C., Hiebert, E.H., Scott, J.A. & Wilkinson, I.A.G. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers: The report of the Commission on reading. Champaign. Il: The Centre for the Study of Reading.

Badger, L. (1984). Providing experiences for reading development. In Education Department of South Australia. Early literacy inservice course. South Australia.

Ball, E.W.(1993). Phonological awareness: What's important and to whom? Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 5, 141-159.

Ball, E.W., & Blachman, B.A. (1991). Does phonemic awareness training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition & developmental spelling. Reading Research Quarterly, 25, 49-66.

Bateman, B. (1991). Teaching word recognition to slow learning children. Reading, Writing and Learning Disabilities, 7, 1-16.

Blachman, B. (1991). Early intervention for children's reading problems: Clinical applications of the research in phonological awareness. Topics in Language Disorders. 12(1),51-65.

Bruck, M. (1988). The word recognition and spelling of dyslexic children. Reading Research Quarterly. 23, 51-69.

Bryant, P., & Bradley, L. (1985). Children's reading problems: Psychology & education. UK: Basil Blackwell.

Byrne, B. (1991). The role of phonological awareness in reading acquisition. Australian Journal of Reading,2, 133-139.

Byrne, B. & Fielding - Barnsley, R. (1989). Phonemic awareness and letter knowledge in the child's acquisition of the alphabetic principle. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 313-321.

Byrne, B., & Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1991). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic awareness to young children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83,451-455.

Cambourne, B. (1979). How important is theory to the reading teacher? Australian Journal of Reading, 2, 78-90.

Castle, J.M., Riach,J., & Nicholson, T. (1994). Getting off to a better start in reading and spelling: The effects of phonemic awareness instruction within a whole language program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 350-359.

Chall, J.S. (1987). Reading & early childhood education: The critical issues. Principal, 66, 6-9.

Chall, J.S. (1989). Learning to read: The great debate 20 years later - a response to "Debunking the great phonics myth. Phi Delta Kappan, 70, 521-538.

Chaney, C. (1990). Evaluating the Whole Language approach to language arts: The pros and cons. Language, Speech, and Hearing in Schools, 21,244-249.

Delpit, L.D. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people's children. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 280-298.

Education Department of South Australia. (1984). Early literacy inservice course. South Australia.

Eldredge, J.L., Quinn, B. & Butterfield, D.D. (1990). Causal relationships between phonics, reading comprehension, and vocabulary achievement in the second grade. Journal of Educational Research, 83, 201-214.

Eldredge, L. (1991). An experiment with a modified whole language approach in first grade classrooms. Reading Research & Instruction, 30(3), 21-38.

Fields, B. A.,& Kempe, A. (1992). Corrective feedback in whole language teaching: Implications for children with learning problems. Australian Journal of Special Education, 16(2), 22-31.

Gersten, R. & Dimino, J. (1993). Visions & revisions: A special education perspective on the whole language controversy. Remedial & Special Education, 14(4), 5-13.

Gersten, R., Woodward, J. & Darch, C. (1986). Direct Instruction: A research based approach to curriculum design and teaching. Exceptional Children, 53(1), 17-31.

Good, T.L. & Brophy, J.E. (1987). Looking in Classrooms (4th ed). NY: Harper & Row.

Goodman, K.S. (1979). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. In H. Singer & R.B. Ruddell (Eds.) Theoretical models and processes of reading. Newark, D.E.: International Reading Association.

Goodman, K.S. (1986). What's whole in whole language. Richmond Hill, Ontario:Scholastic. 

Goodman, Y. M. (1991). Beginning to read: A critique by literacy professionals and a response by Marylin Jager Adams. The Reading Teacher, 44, 375-378

Groff, P. (1990). An analysis of the debate: Teaching reading without conveying phonics information. Interchange, 21(4), 1-14. 

Grossen, B. & Carnine, D. (1990). Translating research on initial reading instruction into classroom practice. Interchange, 21(4), 15-23. 

Hendrickson, J.M., & Frank A.R. (1993). Engagement & performance feedback: Enhancing the classroom achievement of students with mild mental disabilities. In. R.A. Gable & S.F. Warren (Eds.), Advances in mental retardation and developmental disabilities: Strategies for teaching students with mild to severe mental retardation. Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley.

Hornsby, D. Sukarna, D. & Parry, J. (1986). Read on: A conference approach to reading. Sydney: Martin Educational.

Heymsfeld, C.R., (1989). Filling the hole in whole language. Educational Leadership, March, 65-68.

Heymsfeld, C.R., (1992). The remedial child in the whole-language cooperative classroom. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties. 8, 257-273

Johnson, B., & Stone, E. (1991). Is whole language restructuring our classroom? Contemporary Education, 62, 102-104.

Kameenui, E.J., & Simmons, D.C. (1990). Designing instructional strategies: The prevention of academic learning problems. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill.

Klesius, J.P., Griffith, P.L., & Zielonka, P. (1991). A whole language and traditional instruction comparison: Overall effectiveness and development of the alphabetic principle. Reading Research & Instruction, 30(2), 47-61.

Liberman, I.Y., & Liberman, A.M. (1990). Whole language vs. code emphasis: Underlying assumptions and their implications for reading instruction. Annals of Dyslexia, 40, 51-76.

Mather, N. (1992) Whole language reading instruction for students with learning disabilities: Caught in the cross fire. Learning Disabilities Practice, 7, 87-95.

McCaslin, M.M. (1989). Whole language: Theory, instruction, and future implementation. The Elementary School Journal, 90, 223-229.

McGee, L.M., & Lomax, R.G. (1990). On combining apples & oranges: A response to Stahl & Miller. Review of Educational Research, 60, 133-140.

MacGinitie, W.H. (1991). Reading Instruction: Plus Ca Change....Educational Leadership, March, 55-58

Newman, J.M. (1991). Whole language: A changed universe. Contemporary Education, 62, 70-75.

Nicholson, T. (1985). Good readers don't guess. Reading Psychology, 6, 181-198.

Nicholson, T. (1986). Research revisited: Reading is not a guessing game - the great debate revisited. Reading Psychology, 7, 197-210.

Nicholson, T. (1991). Do children read words better in context or in lists? A classic study revisited. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 444-450.

Nicholson, T., Bailey, J. & McArthur, J. (1991). Context cues in reading: The gap between research & popular opinion. Reading, Writing & Learning Disabilities, 7, 33-41.

Nicholson, T., Lillas, C., Rzoska, M.A. (1988). Have we been mislead by miscues? The Reading Teacher, Oct., 6-10.

Pearson, P.D. (1989). Commentary: Reading the whole language movement. Elementary School Journal, 90, 231-241.

Prior, M., Sanson, A. Smart, D., & Oberklaid, F. (1994). Reading disability in an Australian community sample. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1989). The Psychology of reading. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Rosenshine, B. & Stevens, R. (1984). Classroom instruction in reading. In D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd. ed.), 376-391. NY: MacMillan.

Schatz, E.K. & Baldwin, R.S. (1986). Context clues are unreliable predictors of word meanings. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 451.

Share, D.L. (1990). Self correction rates in oral reading: Indices of efficient reading or artifact of text difficulty ? Educational Psychology, 10 , 181-186.

Schickedanz, J.A. (1990). The jury is still out on the effects of whole language and language experience approaches for beginning reading: A critique of Stahl & Miller's study. Review of Educational Research, 60, 127-131.

Singh, N.N. & Solman, R.T. (1990). A stimulus control analysis of the picture-word problem: The blocking effect. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis, 23, 525-532.

Smith, F. (1975). Comprehension and learning: A conceptual framework for teachers. NY: RIchard C. Owen.

Smith, P.G. (1991). A practical guide to whole language in the intermediate classroom. Contemporary Education, 62, 88-95.

Solman, R. & Stanovich, K. (1992). Information processing models. In N. Singh & I. Beale (Eds.), Learning disabilities: Nature, theory & Treatment. NY: Springer Verlag.

Solman, R.T. (1986). Teaching sight words. Set: Research information for teachers, (2). Melbourne: ACER.

Solman, R.T., Singh, N.N., & Kehoe, E.J. (1992). Pictures block the learning of sightwords. Educational Psychology, 12, 143-154.

Spiegel, D.L. (1992). Blending whole language and systematic direct instruction. The Reading Teacher, 46(1), 38-44.

Stahl, S.A., & Miller, P.D. (1989). Whole language & language experience approaches for beginning reading: A quantitative research synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 59, 87-116.

Stanovich, K.E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360-406.

Stanovich, K. (1994). Romance and reality. The Reading Teacher,47, 280-291. 

Stedman, L. & Kaestle, C. (1987). Literacy & reading performance in the United States, from 1880 to the present. Reading Research Quarterly, 23(1), 8-46.

Stone, J. E. (April 23, 1996). Developmentalism: An obscure but pervasive restriction on educational improvement. Education Policy Analysis Archives [On-line] 4, 1950 lines. Available: http://seamonkey.ed.asu.edu/epaa.

Sykes, S. (1991). A whole language perspective on reading & writing. Australian Journal of Remedial Education, 23(2), 23-27.

Tangel, D.M., & Blachman, B.A. (1992). Effect of phoneme awareness instruction on kindergarten children's invented spelling. Journal of Reading Behaviour, 24, 233-261.

Tunmer, W.E. & Hoover, W.A. (1993). Phonological recoding skill and beginning reading. Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 5, 161-179.

Uhry, J.K., & Shepherd, M.J., (1993). Segmentation/spelling instruction as part of a first-grade reading program: Effects on several measures of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 219-233.

Vellutino, F.R. (1991). Introduction to three studies on reading acquisition: Convergent findings on theoretical foundations of code-oriented versus whole-language approaches to reading instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 437-443.

Watson, D. (1989). Defining & describing whole language. Elementary School Journal, 90, 129-142.

Weaver, C. (1988). Reading process & practice: From socio-psycholinguistics to whole language. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Weir, R. (1990). Philosophy, cultural beliefs and literacy. Interchange, 21(4), 24-33.

Yates, G.C.R. (1988). Classroom research into effective teaching. Australian Journal of Remedial Education, 20(1), 4-9.

**********************************************************