Raising educational outcomes for students with special educational needs and disabilities: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract This systematic review and meta‐analysis examined randomised controlled trials and quasi‐experimental design studies targeting interventions to improve educational outcomes for students with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND). It identified 467 studies with 2891 outcomes for the narrative review, and 349 studies with 1758 outcomes were included in the meta‐analysis. Outcomes included in the meta‐analysis related to reading ( n = 1139), writing ( n = 279), maths ( n = 284), science ( n = 3) and general attainment ( n = 53). While there was substantial variability, targeted interventions for specific SEND groups improved educational outcomes by an average of 5 months compared to control groups, with positive impacts on reading, maths and writing. The setting (mainstream vs. special education) did not affect reading or writing outcomes, but interventions with students in mainstream settings showed larger gains in maths. Intervention effects were consistent regardless of delivery method, implementor or control group type. We discuss the implications of the findings for theory and practice, the research gaps identified and future directions. Context and implications Rationale for this study: Students with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) often require targeted interventions to support their educational outcomes. Previous evaluations of targeted interventions have often focussed on one specific group of SEND or one specific outcome. Why the new findings matter: This review included randomised controlled and quasi‐experimental trials that evaluated targeted interventions across all categories of SEND. Across educational outcomes, pupils improved by an average of 5 months, with large variation evident. However, there were no consistent differences regarding delivery method, implementor or control group type. Implications for practitioners and policy makers: Despite gaps in the evidence, this review demonstrates that school setting and stage of education moderate the effectiveness of targeted interventions, with these effects varying across educational outcomes. These findings highlight the need for context‐sensitive approaches rather than one‐size‐fits‐all solutions. By clarifying how contextual factors influence intervention success, the review offers actionable insights, supporting evidence‐informed decisions to improve outcomes for students with SEND.