Computer-based scaffolding improves cognitive outcomes in problem-based learning in STEM education with an overall effect of g = 0.385¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2018 · checked against its sources 2026-10-22 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i1 Students who used computer-based scaffolding within problem-based learning in STEM showed better learning performance than those who did not, with an overall effect of g = 0.385 (95% CrI 0.022 to 0.802). → Nam Ju Kim 2018

Evidence¶

Nam Ju Kim 2018¶

Nam Ju Kim, Brian R. Belland, & Andrew E. Walker. (2018). Effectiveness of Computer-Based Scaffolding in the Context of Problem-Based Learning for STEM Education: Bayesian Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9419-1

q3 · i1 · quant-synthesis · r2

Bayesian meta-analysis of 21 studies with 47 outcomes on computer-based scaffolding in PBL for STEM, using a random effects model and Hedges' g. The overall effect was "g = 0.385 (95% CrI = 0.022 to 0.802)", labeled small/moderate by Cohen (1988) in the discussion.

"The general effects of computer-based scaffolding compared to the group who did not receive any scaffolding was g = 0.385 (95% CrI = 0.022 to 0.802) based on 20,000 simulated iterations."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Expert modeling, feedback, hints, and multiple strategies improve cognitive outcomes, but question prompts show no evident difference from control — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Metacognitive and strategic scaffolding show larger effects in PBL-STEM than conceptual scaffolding — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Customized scaffolding (fading/adding) outperforms non-customized scaffolding in PBL-STEM, with fading/adding highest at g = 0.590 — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Scaffolding effects in PBL are higher in Engineering, Technology, and Mathematics than in Science, and relatively low in integrated STEM education — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Computer-based scaffolding shows a consistently positive effect on cognitive outcomes in STEM education — a broader claim this one bears on
• Scaffolding targeting analysis-level skills yields much larger effects (g = 0.537) than scaffolding targeting synthesis or evaluation — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Self-selected scaffolding customization yields higher effects than fixed time interval and performance-adapted customization — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Scaffolding improves learning — a broader claim this one bears on