Conference Program

The main objectives of this work are two: the first is to present the results of an experiment conducted in Italy which shows the significant advantages for the teaching of reading deriving from the use of a phono-syllabic, progressive, explicit and systematic method (Calvani et al., 2022); the second is to underline the need to take into account the evidence obtained from research and to avoid pursuing methodologies that are superficially attractive but less effective, if not downright harmful, in such a significant field of early school education (Dehaene, 2009).

The methodology adopted is based on a quasi-experimental design, with an experimental group and a control group, organized by cluster (school classes). Twenty-three schools located in seven different regions participated, with 30 classes for a total of 467 children for the experimental group and 21 classes for a total of 325 children for the control group. The experimental classes followed the program called ALFABETO140 (Ventriglia, 2016) which is based on a structured and explicit phono-syllabic approach (Morais, 1989; Goswami, Gombert, Barrera, 1998). Evaluation tests were administered at the beginning (Cornoldi, Miato, Molin, Poli, 2009; Miranda, Montesano, 2021) and at the end (Frith, 1985; Stella, Apolito, 2004; Franceschi, Savelli, Stella, 2011; Caldarola, Perini, Cornoldi, 2012) of the school year to measure the reading and writing skills of the children involved.

The experimental group performed significantly better than the control group in all exit tests, showing a time advantage ranging between 2 and 5 months. Furthermore, the number of children at risk of dyslexia identified at the end of the year was reduced to less than a fifth in the experimental group, while it remained around half in the control group. The teachers who tested the program expressed high satisfaction and strong motivation for the method and its results.

In conclusion, the experimentation conducted provides further confirmation of what has already been highlighted by evidence-based research, namely that in a transparent language like the Italian one, a method based on letter-sound correspondence, syllabic decoding and phonological awareness is undoubtedly the more effective and more motivating solution for all children and not just those at risk of dyslexia (Calvani, Damiani, Ventriglia, 2023). The attention of the institutions is therefore drawn to their responsibilities in this regard and to the need to reject unfounded beliefs that support “creative” methods and school texts without scientific foundations.

paola.damiani@unimore.it>

The German Youth Institute (“Deutsches Jugendinstitut e.V.”) has been monitoring and evaluating federal government programs aimed at countering right-wing extremism, racism, and anti-Semitism since 2001. Currently, the second phase of the federal program “Live Democracy!” (from 2020 to 2024) is being evaluated. The scope of the program includes activities at the municipal, state, and national levels. Structures and pilot projects aim to promote democracy, foster diversity, and prevent extremism. In addition to the formative evaluation of activities at different levels and in various fields of action, the federal program as a whole is also undergoing an "overall evaluation" (“Gesamtevaluation”).

The "Gesamtevaluation" must particularly consider the fact that “Live Democracy!” is multicentric, encompasses multiple levels, and is highly heterogeneous in terms of goals, methods, target groups, and institutional contexts. Under these conditions, proving impact—understood as change and stabilization processes that can be attributed (with a certain probability) to specific measures—is a particular challenge. To address this challenge, we employ a diverse methodological approach and utilize both quantitative and qualitative instruments.

An example of this approach is regional comparative studies: In nine selected regions, we empirically demonstrate the effects of the practical implementation of the federal program “Live Democracy!” with regard to its three core goals (promoting democracy, fostering diversity, and preventing extremism). Through this, we identify central factors influencing their achievement. We conducted 62 guideline-based individual and group interviews and evaluated them using content analysis, based on the documentary method and incorporating quantitative data. Additionally, we carried out social network analyses in several of the regions examined. These regional analyses are based on the assumption that comparative case studies of this nature not only reveal specific effects at the regional level and insights into corresponding causal relationships but also, in conjunction with other data, enable generalizations regarding the federal program as a whole. To capture outcomes "ex post" as effects in complex environments, we utilized "outcome harvesting" (Wilson-Grau 2018) and the contribution analysis approach (Mayne 2012).

The purpose of this input is to stimulate discussion within the panel regarding the opportunities and limitations of regional case studies for demonstrating the effects of actors' actions in a federal program such as “Live Democracy!” and for making empirically reliable statements about the program's effectiveness. To this end, two regions from the study will be presented as examples and contrasted. Additionally, the discussion should encompass the validation of results in the field and the implications that evaluation reports have on structures and projects aimed at promoting democracy, fostering diversity, and preventing extremism.

There is mounting evidence on how non-cognitive skills (or psychosocial resources) play a crucial role in supporting students throughout their educational journey and are crucial for social, scholastic, and personal adjustment (Heckman & Rubinstein, 2001). However, compared to other countries, this topic has received little attention from Italian researchers (Pisanu & Fraccaroli, 2022). Similarly, Italian policy also lags in paying attention to such evidence. Only recently have some ministerial reforms sought to promote the knowledge, application, and discussion of supporting non-cognitive skills in Italian educational settings. In this study, we delve into non-cognitive skills, focusing on the underestimated role of loneliness (i.e., the unpleasant feeling that emerges when individuals perceive their social network as qualitatively and/or quantitatively scarce; Asher & Paquette, 2003). It has been shown that loneliness is negatively associated with mental health and positively correlated with symptoms of anxiety and depression (Houghton et al., 2022). Furthermore, a recent study by Sette et al. (2023) found a negative link between loneliness and students’ positive academic self-perceptions. However, the literature still offers few studies on the associations between loneliness, psychosocial resources, and objective measures of academic achievement. Therefore, in this project, we examined the link between loneliness, math anxiety, and academic achievement in mathematics among 15-year-old Italian adolescents using the PISA 2022 survey data. Drawing on previous literature on the effect of loneliness on academic self-perceptions, we hypothesized and tested a model in which math anxiety mediates the relationship between loneliness and math achievement. We analyzed data from 10552 Italian students (50.8% girls). Structural Equation Models were used to test our hypothesized model. In addition, covariates (i.e., gender, indices of economic, social, and cultural status, cooperation, experiences of being bullied, quality of student-teacher relationships, and expected occupation status) were included in the analysis. To operationalize loneliness, we used a latent variable composed of three items from the sense of belonging scale consistent with the items in a widely used loneliness questionnaire (i.e., Asher & Wheeler, 1985). Math anxiety was measured by a latent variable composed of 6 items. Finally, math achievement was measured through a single indicator, which reflected the “Plausible Value 1” in PISA 2022. The model fitted the data well according to commonly used criteria (CFI and TLI > .90; RMSEA < .06; SRMR < .08). Concerning parameters of interests, we found that (a) loneliness significantly and positively affected math anxiety, and the latter significantly and negatively affected math achievement; (b) the direct effect of loneliness on math achievement was not significant (albeit the latent zero-order correlation was negative and significant) and constraining this parameter to be zero did not significantly worse the fit of the model; (c) bootstrap analysis (5000 resamplings) showed that the 95% bias-corrected confidence interval of the indirect effect was significantly different from 0. This analysis provides a first attempt to empirically unravel the relationship between two underestimated non-cognitive aspects (loneliness and math anxiety) and their impact on math achievement, thus offering potential insights for future longitudinal studies and practical interventions at school.

Summer learning loss has emerged as a significant concern within the educational community, affecting students' academic progress across primary and secondary education levels. This phenomenon is especially pronounced in mathematics, a subject where the erosion of skills during the summer break poses a notable challenge to educational outcomes (Raudenbush & Eschmann, 2015; Lynch et al., 2023). Historically rooted in research from the United States (Heyns, 1978; Von Hippel and Hamrock, 2018), the exploration of summer learning loss has been limited outside North America, with exceptions such as the studies by Siewert (2013) and Holtmann and Bernardi (2019) in the Central and Northern Europe. In the Southern Europe, where summer breaks are among the longest, there are few experimental studies, among which Sabella's (2014) work in Italy stands out. Nonetheless, research on summer learning loss has produced compelling evidence, showing that when schools are closed, levels of learning typically decrease, with this decrease being more pronounced among pupils from disadvantaged families and ethnic minorities (Atteberry and McEachin, 2016).

Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, learning loss has gained an increased interest. In this vein, a vast amount of experimental studies have been conducted to measure the impact of school closures on student achievement, as well synthesized in recent reviews (Moscoviz & Evans, 2022). Although the evidence from these studies provides more knowledge on the factors influencing learning loss, the unique conditions of school closure during the Covid-19 pandemic do not allow for direct extrapolation of these results to the broader phenomenon of summer learning loss.

The present paper reports a systematic review study aimed at synthesizing existing research on summer learning loss in mathematics at the primary and secondary school levels, focusing specifically on uncovering the extent, methodologies, and geographical distribution of these studies. By identifying gaps in the current literature and analysing the methodologies employed in existing studies, this review advocates for a more structured and evidence-based approach to researching summer learning loss, with particular attention to countries like Italy which experience the longest summer breaks (about 12-13 weeks).

The systematic review underscores the need for educational policies and interventions that mitigate the adverse effects of summer breaks on student learning outcomes.