Scaffolding's effect was highest in project-based learning contexts; design-based learning was the only context not significantly greater than zero¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r? · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · checked against its sources 2026-10-18 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Scaffolding's effect size was higher in project-based learning than in modeling/visualization, problem solving, case-based learning, inquiry-based learning, design-based learning, and problem-based learning (all p < .01); design-based learning was the only context not significantly greater than zero. → Belland 2017

Evidence¶

Belland 2017¶

Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Kim, N. J., & Lefler, M. (2017). Synthesizing Results From Empirical Research on Computer-Based Scaffolding in STEM Education: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 87(2), 309-344. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316670999

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r?

Moderator analysis of context of scaffolding use (problem-based, case-based, design-based, project-based, inquiry-based, modeling/visualization, problem solving) across the 333-outcome corpus, reported with Figure 5. Project-based learning's estimate was ḡ = 1.33; design-based learning was not statistically greater than zero, p = .14.

"Scaffolding's effect size was higher when used in the context of project-based learning than when used in the context of modeling/visualization, z = 4.69, p < .01, problem solving, z = 5.09, p < .01, case-based learning, z = 5.36, p < .01, inquiry-based learning, z = 5.74, p < .01, design-based learning, z = 3.90, p < .01, and problem-based learning, z = 6.08, p < .01."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Minimal guidance is less effective for novices than explicit instruction — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Scaffolding improves learning — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Computer-based scaffolding shows a consistently positive effect on cognitive outcomes in STEM education — related
• Scaffolding's effect was greatest among adult learners, though based on a single outcome — related
• Scaffolding's influence was greater when measured at the principles assessment level than at the concept level — related
• Teacher-supported learning scaffolds show the largest effect (ES = 0.92), and longer intervention durations yield larger effects — related
• Teaching type, intervention duration, subject area, group size, and learning scaffold significantly moderate the effect of collaborative problem-solving on critical thinking — related
• Computer-based scaffolding counteracts the purported weakness of problem-centered instructional models at the concept level, producing strong gains across concept-, principles-, and application-level assessment — related
• Scaffolding yields strong pre–post gains with most problem-centered instructional models, with project-based learning highest (ḡ = 1.21), but exceptions for inquiry-based learning (ḡ = 0) and modeling/visualization (ḡ = 0.28) — related
• High teaching guidance in concept mapping yields larger effects than low guidance, though marginal after excluding influential studies — related