Unveiling alternative schools: A systematic review of cognitive and social-emotional development in different educational approaches.

• Potential benefits of alternative schools on child development are reviewed. • Montessori and Waldorf are the main schools studied. • Most studies focus on executive function, creativity, and academics achievement. • Limited focus on emotional and social development. • Alternative schools show benefits or no difference with conventional schools. Alternative schools such as Montessori, Reggio Emilia or Waldorf emerged on the educational scene over a century ago but have proliferated internationally in the last 15–20 years. In addition to being considered as educational alternatives to conventional approaches, these schools are often associated with enhanced benefits in cognitive, social, emotional, and personal development of attending children. This assumption stems from the fact that these approaches are aligned with the basic principles of child development, especially because in these schools, daily practices are organized according to children's developmental strengths and considering individual learning rhythms. However, empirical research on this assumption is scarce and little is known about the type of schools studied and the aspects of development analyzed. Thus, this systematic review aims to address two objectives: to identify which types of alternative schools have captured the interest of researchers and to explore the most studied areas of cognitive and socioemotional development during childhood, along with the main findings. The review includes studies conducted in the last decade that compare the effects of attending alternative schools versus conventional preschools, elementary schools, or high schools. Twenty-four articles were included, most of them focused on Montessori and, to a lesser extent, Waldorf schools. Other types of alternative schools (democratic, Freinet) had limited representation. Executive function, creativity and academic achievement have received more attention in research compared to well-being, social competence, or independence. Overall, the results show a better performance in children from alternative schools or no differences with their counterparts in conventional schools. However, this study provides a critical perspective on these findings, highlighting limitations that should be considered when interpreting them and guiding future research endeavors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]