Pub Date : 2024-06-14DOI: 10.3102/00346543241255621
Feifei Wang, Alan C. K. Cheung, Amanda J. Neitzel, Ching Sing Chai
Given the importance of conversation practice in language learning, chatbots, especially ChatGPT, have attracted considerable attention for their ability to converse with learners using natural language. This review contributes to the literature by examining the currently unclear overall effect of using chatbots on language learning performance and comprehensively identifying important study characteristics that affect the overall effectiveness. We meta-analyzed 70 effect sizes from 28 studies, using robust variance estimation. The effects were assessed based on 18 study characteristics about learners, chatbots, learning objectives, context, communication/interaction, and methodological and pedagogical designs. Results indicated that using chatbots produced a positive overall effect on language learning performance ( g = 0.484), compared to nonchatbot conditions. Moreover, four characteristics (i.e., educational level, language level, interface design, and interaction capability) affected the overall effectiveness. In an in-depth discussion on how the 18 characteristics are related to the effectiveness, future implications for practice and research are presented.
{"title":"Does Chatting with Chatbots Improve Language Learning Performance? A Meta-Analysis of Chatbot-Assisted Language Learning","authors":"Feifei Wang, Alan C. K. Cheung, Amanda J. Neitzel, Ching Sing Chai","doi":"10.3102/00346543241255621","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241255621","url":null,"abstract":"Given the importance of conversation practice in language learning, chatbots, especially ChatGPT, have attracted considerable attention for their ability to converse with learners using natural language. This review contributes to the literature by examining the currently unclear overall effect of using chatbots on language learning performance and comprehensively identifying important study characteristics that affect the overall effectiveness. We meta-analyzed 70 effect sizes from 28 studies, using robust variance estimation. The effects were assessed based on 18 study characteristics about learners, chatbots, learning objectives, context, communication/interaction, and methodological and pedagogical designs. Results indicated that using chatbots produced a positive overall effect on language learning performance ( g = 0.484), compared to nonchatbot conditions. Moreover, four characteristics (i.e., educational level, language level, interface design, and interaction capability) affected the overall effectiveness. In an in-depth discussion on how the 18 characteristics are related to the effectiveness, future implications for practice and research are presented.","PeriodicalId":506584,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"76 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141338024","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-06-05DOI: 10.3102/00346543241255625
Aline Muff, Aviv Cohen, Tanya Hoshovsky
A growing amount of educational research employs participatory methods in which young people actively gather and analyze data in collaboration with the investigators. Considering the diverse use of the label “participatory,” we examined participatory studies with young people to understand how researchers justify using this approach and conceptualize its purposes and goals, as well as these studies’ contributions to scholarship and youth’s civic learning. We conducted an interpretive meta-ethnography of 95 studies, identifying four distinct types of participatory studies with youth: technical, capacity building, justice-oriented, and transformative. We conclude that research that labels itself “participatory” but does not benefit the participants and their communities puts the approach’s credibility at risk. To challenge structural inequalities and power relations between participants and researchers, academic studies should better align with the transformative approach that has the potential to support youth in becoming agents of change by engaging them in self-directed civic learning and activism.
{"title":"From Being a Workforce to Agents of Change: An Interpretive Meta-ethnography of Different Approaches to Participatory Research With Young People","authors":"Aline Muff, Aviv Cohen, Tanya Hoshovsky","doi":"10.3102/00346543241255625","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241255625","url":null,"abstract":"A growing amount of educational research employs participatory methods in which young people actively gather and analyze data in collaboration with the investigators. Considering the diverse use of the label “participatory,” we examined participatory studies with young people to understand how researchers justify using this approach and conceptualize its purposes and goals, as well as these studies’ contributions to scholarship and youth’s civic learning. We conducted an interpretive meta-ethnography of 95 studies, identifying four distinct types of participatory studies with youth: technical, capacity building, justice-oriented, and transformative. We conclude that research that labels itself “participatory” but does not benefit the participants and their communities puts the approach’s credibility at risk. To challenge structural inequalities and power relations between participants and researchers, academic studies should better align with the transformative approach that has the potential to support youth in becoming agents of change by engaging them in self-directed civic learning and activism.","PeriodicalId":506584,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141382859","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-03-04DOI: 10.3102/00346543241230064
Eva Vives, Céline Poletti, A. Robert, Fabrizio Butera, Pascal Huguet, I. Régner
The jigsaw classroom is a cooperative learning method designed in the late 1970s to improve the academic performance of minority children by reducing intergroup conflict and increasing self-evaluations. Despite its high popularity, the available evidence for the effectiveness of this method seems scant and mixed, with neither meta-analysis nor systematic review. To fill this gap, the authors conducted a systematic review of studies conducted from 1978 through 2022 to assess the effects of jigsaw on both academic performance and psychosocial variables (e.g., intergroup relationships, self-evaluations). Sixty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. This review revealed the research trends, research gaps, and issues of research integrity of the jigsaw literature. If the results indicate that the jigsaw classroom overall leads to positive effects, findings vary depending on the academic subjects and psychosocial variables measured. The authors discuss the challenges of jigsaw activities and the limitations of studies reviewed and conclude with practical recommendations in the context of digital education.
{"title":"Learning With Jigsaw: A Systematic Review Gathering All the Pieces of the Puzzle More Than 40 Years Later","authors":"Eva Vives, Céline Poletti, A. Robert, Fabrizio Butera, Pascal Huguet, I. Régner","doi":"10.3102/00346543241230064","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241230064","url":null,"abstract":"The jigsaw classroom is a cooperative learning method designed in the late 1970s to improve the academic performance of minority children by reducing intergroup conflict and increasing self-evaluations. Despite its high popularity, the available evidence for the effectiveness of this method seems scant and mixed, with neither meta-analysis nor systematic review. To fill this gap, the authors conducted a systematic review of studies conducted from 1978 through 2022 to assess the effects of jigsaw on both academic performance and psychosocial variables (e.g., intergroup relationships, self-evaluations). Sixty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. This review revealed the research trends, research gaps, and issues of research integrity of the jigsaw literature. If the results indicate that the jigsaw classroom overall leads to positive effects, findings vary depending on the academic subjects and psychosocial variables measured. The authors discuss the challenges of jigsaw activities and the limitations of studies reviewed and conclude with practical recommendations in the context of digital education.","PeriodicalId":506584,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"29 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140265952","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-19DOI: 10.3102/00346543241228185
Xiuhong Tong, Liyan Yu, S. Deacon
Theories of reading comprehension have widely predicted a role for syntactic skills, or the ability to understand and manipulate the structure of a sentence. Yet, these theories are based primarily on English, leaving open the question of whether this remains true across typologically different languages such as English versus Chinese. There are substantial differences in the sentence structures of Chinese versus English, making the comparison of the two particularly interesting. We conducted a meta-analysis contrasting the relation between syntactic skills and reading comprehension in first language readers of English versus Chinese. We test the influence of languages as well as the influence of the grade and the metrics on the magnitude of this relation. We identified 59 studies published between 1986 and 2021, generating 234 effect sizes involving 15,212 participants from kindergarten to high school and above. The magnitude of effects was remarkably similar for studies of English (r = .54) and Chinese (r = .54) readers, with similarities at key developmental points and syntactic tasks. There was also some evidence of modulation by grade levels and the nature of syntactic tasks. These findings confirm theory-based predictions of the importance of syntactic skills to reading comprehension. Extending these predictions, demonstrating these effects for both English and Chinese suggests a universal influence of syntactic skills on reading comprehension.
{"title":"A Meta-Analysis of the Relation Between Syntactic Skills and Reading Comprehension: A Cross-Linguistic and Developmental Investigation","authors":"Xiuhong Tong, Liyan Yu, S. Deacon","doi":"10.3102/00346543241228185","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241228185","url":null,"abstract":"Theories of reading comprehension have widely predicted a role for syntactic skills, or the ability to understand and manipulate the structure of a sentence. Yet, these theories are based primarily on English, leaving open the question of whether this remains true across typologically different languages such as English versus Chinese. There are substantial differences in the sentence structures of Chinese versus English, making the comparison of the two particularly interesting. We conducted a meta-analysis contrasting the relation between syntactic skills and reading comprehension in first language readers of English versus Chinese. We test the influence of languages as well as the influence of the grade and the metrics on the magnitude of this relation. We identified 59 studies published between 1986 and 2021, generating 234 effect sizes involving 15,212 participants from kindergarten to high school and above. The magnitude of effects was remarkably similar for studies of English (r = .54) and Chinese (r = .54) readers, with similarities at key developmental points and syntactic tasks. There was also some evidence of modulation by grade levels and the nature of syntactic tasks. These findings confirm theory-based predictions of the importance of syntactic skills to reading comprehension. Extending these predictions, demonstrating these effects for both English and Chinese suggests a universal influence of syntactic skills on reading comprehension.","PeriodicalId":506584,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"81 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140449750","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-19DOI: 10.3102/00346543241227236
Ray Breed, R. Lindsay, A. Kittel, M. Spittle
Effective teaching pedagogies and curriculum frameworks in school physical education have been regularly changing and widely debated. However, teachers have predominately used technical and sport-based approaches, but tactical game-centered approaches (TGAs) are becoming more common when teaching games in physical education. This review systematically described the content and the quality of research that compared TGAs with other teaching approaches within school physical education. All 24 studies that were found compared a technical approach (TA) or control group with a TGA, and most originated from Western Europe. Studies were conducted equally in primary and secondary schools, most research was mixed-gender, and the majority incorporated a single sport to compare teaching approaches. The quality of reporting was mostly low with a moderate to serious risk of bias. Studies commonly showed that TGAs improved student outcomes in tactical skill; skill execution; affective, procedural knowledge and/or physical activity; and TAs improved skill execution and technical skill.
学校体育的有效教学法和课程框架一直在不断变化，并引起了广泛的讨论。然而，在体育教学中，教师主要采用技术和运动教学法，但以战术游戏为中心的教学法（TGA）在体育游戏教学中正变得越来越普遍。本综述系统地描述了在学校体育教学中比较 TGA 与其他教学方法的研究内容和质量。所有 24 项研究都将技术方法（TA）或对照组与 TGA 进行了比较，其中大部分研究来自西欧。研究同样在小学和中学进行，大多数研究是男女生混合进行的，而且大多数研究都采用单一运动项目来比较教学方法。报告的质量大多较低，存在中度至严重的偏倚风险。研究普遍表明，TGAs 提高了学生在战术技能、技能执行、情感、程序知识和/或体育活动方面的成绩；而 TAs 提高了技能执行和技术技能。
{"title":"Content and Quality of Comparative Tactical Game-Centered Approaches in Physical Education: A Systematic Review","authors":"Ray Breed, R. Lindsay, A. Kittel, M. Spittle","doi":"10.3102/00346543241227236","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241227236","url":null,"abstract":"Effective teaching pedagogies and curriculum frameworks in school physical education have been regularly changing and widely debated. However, teachers have predominately used technical and sport-based approaches, but tactical game-centered approaches (TGAs) are becoming more common when teaching games in physical education. This review systematically described the content and the quality of research that compared TGAs with other teaching approaches within school physical education. All 24 studies that were found compared a technical approach (TA) or control group with a TGA, and most originated from Western Europe. Studies were conducted equally in primary and secondary schools, most research was mixed-gender, and the majority incorporated a single sport to compare teaching approaches. The quality of reporting was mostly low with a moderate to serious risk of bias. Studies commonly showed that TGAs improved student outcomes in tactical skill; skill execution; affective, procedural knowledge and/or physical activity; and TAs improved skill execution and technical skill.","PeriodicalId":506584,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"21 20","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140450468","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-01-29DOI: 10.3102/00346543231221499
Janina Täschner, Theresa Dicke, Sarah Reinhold, D. Holzberger
A high level of teacher self-efficacy is considered to be important for a successful and healthy teaching career. This preregistered meta-analysis focuses on whether and to what degree interventions can promote teacher self-efficacy. We included 115 studies representing 11,284 pre-service and in-service teachers in our meta-analysis. Interventions had a significant, positive effect on the promotion of teachers’ self-efficacy ( g = 0.47, RVE SE = 0.04, 95% CI = [0.40, 0.54]) with no significant differences between pre- and in-service teachers. A fine-grained coding and systematic review of the targeted sources of self-efficacy according to Bandura’s sociocognitive theory revealed that overall interventions including mastery experiences did not significantly differ from those without. However, interventions targeting only mastery experiences were the most successful for pre-service teachers ( g = 0.62, RVE SE = 0.11, CI = [0.35, 0.88]). Based on further moderator analyses, we recommend interventions to integrate reflective elements. Finally, future research should apply stricter study designs and more detailed intervention descriptions.
高水平的教师自我效能感被认为对教师职业的成功和健康发展非常重要。这项预先登记的荟萃分析主要研究干预措施能否以及在多大程度上促进教师的自我效能感。我们在荟萃分析中纳入了代表 11,284 名职前和在职教师的 115 项研究。干预措施对提高教师自我效能感有明显的积极影响（g = 0.47，RVE SE = 0.04，95% CI = [0.40，0.54]），职前和在职教师之间无明显差异。根据班杜拉的社会认知理论，对自我效能感的目标来源进行了精细编码和系统审查，结果显示，包括掌握经验的干预措施与不包括掌握经验的干预措施没有显著差异。然而，对职前教师而言，仅以掌握经验为目标的干预最为成功（g = 0.62，RVE SE = 0.11，CI = [0.35, 0.88]）。根据进一步的调节因素分析，我们建议采取纳入反思元素的干预措施。最后，未来的研究应采用更严格的研究设计和更详细的干预说明。
{"title":"“Yes, I Can!” A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Intervention Studies Promoting Teacher Self-Efficacy","authors":"Janina Täschner, Theresa Dicke, Sarah Reinhold, D. Holzberger","doi":"10.3102/00346543231221499","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231221499","url":null,"abstract":"A high level of teacher self-efficacy is considered to be important for a successful and healthy teaching career. This preregistered meta-analysis focuses on whether and to what degree interventions can promote teacher self-efficacy. We included 115 studies representing 11,284 pre-service and in-service teachers in our meta-analysis. Interventions had a significant, positive effect on the promotion of teachers’ self-efficacy ( g = 0.47, RVE SE = 0.04, 95% CI = [0.40, 0.54]) with no significant differences between pre- and in-service teachers. A fine-grained coding and systematic review of the targeted sources of self-efficacy according to Bandura’s sociocognitive theory revealed that overall interventions including mastery experiences did not significantly differ from those without. However, interventions targeting only mastery experiences were the most successful for pre-service teachers ( g = 0.62, RVE SE = 0.11, CI = [0.35, 0.88]). Based on further moderator analyses, we recommend interventions to integrate reflective elements. Finally, future research should apply stricter study designs and more detailed intervention descriptions.","PeriodicalId":506584,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140487969","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：