Claims

PBL has a high positive effect on science academic achievement compared to traditional instruction (random-effects g = 1.009)

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i3 Across 55 experimental study datasets, PBL in science education produced a high average effect size on academic achievement relative to traditional instruction (Hedges's g = 1.009, 95% CI 0.805–1.213). → Ufuk Uluçınar 2022

Evidence

Ufuk Uluçınar 2022

Ufuk Uluçınar. (2022). The Effect of Problem-Based Learning in Science Education on Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analytical Study. Science Education International, 34(2), 72-85. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v34.i2.1

q3 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r3

Experiment-effectiveness meta-analysis of 55 datasets from experimental control-group studies in science lessons, analyzed in CMA V3. The random effects model was chosen because the distribution was heterogeneous (Q = 508.460; I² = 89.38%), and the "average effect size is 1.009", a high effect under Cohen's classification.

"According to the random effects model, the effect size's lower and upper limit values vary between 0.805 and 1.213 in the 95% confidence interval. The average effect size is 1.009."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.