Computer-based scaffolding produces consistently strong within-subject (pre–post) cognitive gains in STEM education across student populations, disciplines, and assessment levels¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Scaffolding has a consistently strong effect on cognitive pre–post gains across student populations, STEM disciplines, and assessment levels. → Belland Brian R. 2017

Evidence¶

Belland Brian R. 2017¶

Belland Brian R., Walker Andrew E., Kim Nam Ju. (2017). A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis to Synthesize the Influence of Contexts of Scaffolding Use on Cognitive Outcomes in STEM Education. Review of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317723009

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Bayesian network meta-analysis of within-subject (pre–post) differences from scaffolding in 56 studies, with posterior distributions generated from 20,000 MCMC samples. The article reports that "Scaffolding has a consistently strong effect across student populations, STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) disciplines, and assessment levels."

"Scaffolding has a consistently strong effect across student populations, STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) disciplines, and assessment levels, and a strong effect when used with most problem-centered instructional models"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Scaffolding produces strong pre–post gains across all assessment levels (concept ḡ = 0.87 to application ḡ = 0.74), with only minor differences among levels — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• 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 — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• 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) — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Mathematics and technology show the highest pre–post scaffolding effect sizes among STEM disciplines (ḡ = 1.29 and ḡ = 1.06) — 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 improves learning — related
• Scaffolding shows a moderate positive effect on conceptual learning outcomes in STEM pedagogical interventions other than direct instruction — related
• 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