Comparing How Different Inquiry-based Approaches Impact Learning Outcomes

IF 0.6 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning Pub Date : 2020-06-01 DOI:10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28624
A. Tawfik, Woei Hung, P. Giabbanelli
{"title":"Comparing How Different Inquiry-based Approaches Impact Learning Outcomes","authors":"A. Tawfik, Woei Hung, P. Giabbanelli","doi":"10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28624","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To date, there are currently many variations of inquiry-based instruction including problem-based learning (PBL), lecture prior to problem solving, and case-based learning (CBL). While each claim to support problem-solving, they also include different levels of studentcenteredness and instructor support. From an educational perspective, further clarity is needed to determine which model best supports learning outcomes such as conceptual knowledge, causal reasoning, and self-efficacy. While various meta-analyses have been conducted to ascertain how inquiry-based instruction compares with lecture-based approaches, there are few studies that directly compare these methods. To address this gap, this study looked at the effects of PBL, lecture prior to problem-solving, and CBL on students conceptual knowledge, causal reasoning, and self-efficacy (N = 96). While no significant difference was found on self-efficacy, the results found that learners in the PBL group performed highest on conceptual knowledge. In terms of causal reasoning, the PBL group outperformed other conditions on correctly identified connections. However, the PBL condition also had the highest number of incorrectly identified concepts. Implications for theory and practice are also discussed.","PeriodicalId":46380,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28624","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

To date, there are currently many variations of inquiry-based instruction including problem-based learning (PBL), lecture prior to problem solving, and case-based learning (CBL). While each claim to support problem-solving, they also include different levels of studentcenteredness and instructor support. From an educational perspective, further clarity is needed to determine which model best supports learning outcomes such as conceptual knowledge, causal reasoning, and self-efficacy. While various meta-analyses have been conducted to ascertain how inquiry-based instruction compares with lecture-based approaches, there are few studies that directly compare these methods. To address this gap, this study looked at the effects of PBL, lecture prior to problem-solving, and CBL on students conceptual knowledge, causal reasoning, and self-efficacy (N = 96). While no significant difference was found on self-efficacy, the results found that learners in the PBL group performed highest on conceptual knowledge. In terms of causal reasoning, the PBL group outperformed other conditions on correctly identified connections. However, the PBL condition also had the highest number of incorrectly identified concepts. Implications for theory and practice are also discussed.
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
比较不同的基于探究的方法如何影响学习成果
迄今为止,基于探究的教学有多种形式,包括基于问题的学习(PBL)、先讲后解决问题和基于案例的学习(CBL)。虽然每个都声称支持解决问题,但它们也包括不同程度的以学生为中心和教师支持。从教育的角度来看,需要进一步明确哪种模型最能支持学习成果,如概念知识、因果推理和自我效能。虽然已经进行了各种元分析,以确定基于探究的教学与基于讲座的教学方法的比较,但很少有研究直接比较这些方法。为了解决这一差距,本研究考察了PBL、先讲后解决问题和CBL对学生概念知识、因果推理和自我效能的影响(N = 96)。结果发现,PBL组的学生在概念知识方面的表现最高,而在自我效能感方面无显著差异。在因果推理方面,PBL组在正确识别连接方面的表现优于其他条件。然而,PBL条件也有最多的错误识别概念。对理论和实践的启示也进行了讨论。
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
Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning
Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
32 weeks
期刊介绍: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning (IJPBL) will be a global outlet for PBL scholarship, representing excellence in discovery and promoting transformative educational pedagogy. IJPBL will provide access to the most current research and practice related to PBL pedagogy, thus enhancing efforts of both PBL scholars and practitioners. The mission of IJPBL is to Publish rigorous research, representing a variety of disciplines, related to problem-based learning Engage key and emerging scholars in significant discussion of key issues facing PBL researchers and practitioners Provide up-to-date information to scholars and practitioners who are new to PBL research and pedagogy, enabling them to address current gaps in the literature and/or to transform current learning environments and practices.
期刊最新文献
Introduction to Special Issue “Research Methodologies for Studying Problem-based and Project-based Learning Problem-based Learning, a Tool to Develop Critical Thinking Skills of Undergraduate Veterinary Students Design and Implementation of a Problem-Based Learning Module in a Clinical Radiography Course to Foster Image Critique Skills: An Evaluative Case Study Networks Supporting Problem-Based Invention Education Impact of The NTN Design on Academic Outcomes
×
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
×
提示
确定
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