The effectiveness of a school-based planning program for first year students in secondary school: A cluster randomized controlled trial
International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 134, pp. 102820
Abstract
• Iterative co-design led to the Planning of Schoolwork (PLOS) intervention • PLOS-extra offered individual modular skills training beyond the preventive class-based skills training PLOS-basic • Cluster RCT tested PLOS-extra vs. practice-as-usual in students with planning problems • No added benefit found for PLOS-extra over practice-as-usual on key outcomes • Findings reveal challenges in feasible school-based training despite co-design In secondary education, many students have difficulties planning their schoolwork. These difficulties may not only lead to short-term consequences such as lower grades, but also to long-term psychosocial, professional and financial challenges. To support students with planning problems, we developed a school-based program (Planning of Schoolwork (PLOS)) using an iterative development approach. PLOS includes two phases: PLOS-basic, a six-lesson preventive program with in-class skills training and PLOS-extra, a six-session, individual, modular skills training for students who still need support after PLOS-basic. This cluster randomized controlled trial compares the short- and long-term effects of PLOS-extra to practice-as-usual (PAU) with 213 first year students (aged 11-14, 78.9% male) who still had planning problems after PLOS-basic. Primary outcomes were homework problems and planning skills. Secondary outcomes included school motivation, classroom behavior, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) behaviors and school grades. We found no significant short- or long-term between-group differences on either the primary or the secondary outcome measures. Some significant improvements over time were present for both the PLOS-extra and the PAU group. The lack of effects of PLOS-extra may be attributed to a natural improvement of planning skills, the moderate severity of planning problems in our sample or the design of the program. Furthermore, the schools faced challenges in securing the necessary resources to implement the program effectively. Although PLOS-extra was developed in collaboration with end-users, these challenges demonstrate the complexity of developing training programs that are feasible within the educational context. School professionals and policymakers must decide whether to invest time, effort and resources into implementing evidence-based planning programs or in developing and testing new programs that offer support throughout daily academic life.
Authors 4
-
Affiliation as printed
KU Leuven, Faculty of Psychology, Parenting and Special Education, Tiensestraat 102, BE-3000 Leuven, Belgium
-
Affiliation as printed
Ohio University, Department of Psychology, Athens, OH 45701, United States
-
University Medical Center Groningen · University of Groningen · Accare
Affiliation as printed
Accare Child Study Center, Lubeckweg 2, 9723 HE Groningen, the Netherlands
The Research School of Behavioural and Cognitive Neurosciences, University of Groningen, Ant. Deuusinglaan 1, 9713 AV Groningen, the Netherlands
University of Groningen, Department of Clinical Psychology and Experimental Psychopathology, Grote Kruisstraat 2/1, 9712 TS Groningen, the Netherlands
University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ Groningen, the Netherlands
-
Leiden University · University of Amsterdam
Affiliation as printed
Leiden University, Department of Developmental & Educational Psychology, Wassenaarseweg 52, 2333 AK Leiden, the Netherlands
University of Amsterdam, Department of Clinical Developmental Psychology, Valckenierstraat 59, 1018 XE Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Cited by 0 stored of 0
No patents citing this paper on Lens.org (checked 2026-10-11).