A meta-analysis of effectiveness of chemical bonding-based intervention studies in improving academic performance†

IF 2.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Chemistry Education Research and Practice Pub Date : 2024-01-05 DOI:10.1039/D3RP00258F
Muammer Çalik, Neslihan Ültay, Hasan Bağ and Alipaşa Ayas
{"title":"A meta-analysis of effectiveness of chemical bonding-based intervention studies in improving academic performance†","authors":"Muammer Çalik, Neslihan Ültay, Hasan Bağ and Alipaşa Ayas","doi":"10.1039/D3RP00258F","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >The purpose of this study is to <em>meta</em>-analytically evaluate research that used chemical bonding-based interventions to improve academic performance. Through <em>meta</em>-analysis, the present study used several keyword patterns (<em>e.g.</em>, chemical bonding, experimental, chemistry education, science education) <em>via</em> relevant databases (<em>e.g.</em>, ERIC, Springer Link, Taylor &amp; Francis, Wiley Online Library Full Collection, and Scopus) to find chemical bonding-intervention studies. Thus, it included 50 chemical bonding-based intervention papers (15 dissertations, 32 articles, and 3 proceedings). The current <em>meta</em>-analysis found that the overall effect-size of chemical bonding-based intervention studies was 1.007, which shows a <em>large</em> effect. Findings regarding moderator analysis displayed non-significant differences between educational levels and a statistically significant difference between the intervention types. This <em>meta</em>-analysis reveals that the chemical bonding-based intervention studies are effective at improving the participants’ academic performance in terms of chemical bonding. Further, it denotes that when the abstract nature of chemical bonding is overlapped with the features of the intervention type, the interventions (<em>e.g.</em>, cooperative learning and enriched learning environment with different methods) result in better academic performance. Since this study, like all <em>meta</em>-analyses, points out consistent and inconsistent findings among published research, further <em>meta</em>-analysis studies should be undertaken to resolve any contradictory findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":69,"journal":{"name":"Chemistry Education Research and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chemistry Education Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2024/rp/d3rp00258f","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to meta-analytically evaluate research that used chemical bonding-based interventions to improve academic performance. Through meta-analysis, the present study used several keyword patterns (e.g., chemical bonding, experimental, chemistry education, science education) via relevant databases (e.g., ERIC, Springer Link, Taylor & Francis, Wiley Online Library Full Collection, and Scopus) to find chemical bonding-intervention studies. Thus, it included 50 chemical bonding-based intervention papers (15 dissertations, 32 articles, and 3 proceedings). The current meta-analysis found that the overall effect-size of chemical bonding-based intervention studies was 1.007, which shows a large effect. Findings regarding moderator analysis displayed non-significant differences between educational levels and a statistically significant difference between the intervention types. This meta-analysis reveals that the chemical bonding-based intervention studies are effective at improving the participants’ academic performance in terms of chemical bonding. Further, it denotes that when the abstract nature of chemical bonding is overlapped with the features of the intervention type, the interventions (e.g., cooperative learning and enriched learning environment with different methods) result in better academic performance. Since this study, like all meta-analyses, points out consistent and inconsistent findings among published research, further meta-analysis studies should be undertaken to resolve any contradictory findings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于化学键的干预研究在提高学习成绩方面的效果荟萃分析
本研究旨在对利用化学键干预提高学习成绩的研究进行元分析评估。通过元分析,本研究使用了几个关键词模式(如化学键、实验、化学教育、科学教育),通过相关数据库(如 ERIC、Springer Link、Taylor & Francis、Wiley Online Library Full Collection 和 Scopus)查找化学键干预研究。因此,它包括了 50 篇基于化学键干预的论文(15 篇论文、32 篇文章和 3 篇论文集)。本次荟萃分析发现,基于化学纽带的干预研究的总体效应大小为 1.007,显示出较大的效应。主持人分析结果显示,不同教育水平之间的差异不显著,而不同干预类型之间的差异在统计学上显著。这项荟萃分析表明,基于化学纽带的干预研究能有效提高参与者在化学纽带方面的学习成绩。此外,当化学键的抽象性质与干预类型的特征重叠时,干预(如合作学习和不同方法的丰富学习环境)会带来更好的学习成绩。由于本研究与所有元分析一样,指出了已发表研究中一致和不一致的结论,因此应进一步开展元分析研究,以解决任何相互矛盾的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
26.70%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal for teachers, researchers and other practitioners in chemistry education.
期刊最新文献
The Complexity of Chemistry Mindset Beliefs: A Multiple Case Study Approach Development of problem-solving skills supported by metacognitive scaffolding: Insights from students’ written work Fostering inclusive learning: customized kits in chemistry education and their influence on self-efficacy, attitudes and achievements Why do we assess students? Investigating General Chemistry Instructors’ Conceptions of Assessment Purposes and Their Relationships to Assessment Practices Assessing high school students’ chemical thinking using an essential questions-perspective framework
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1