{"title":"概念图对学生科学成绩的影响:元分析","authors":"Dimitris Anastasiou, Clare Nangsin Wirngo, Pantelis Bagos","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09877-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of concept maps on science achievement among elementary and secondary education students, including low-achieving students. A systematic search located 55 studies about concept mapping in science achievement published in peer-reviewed journals and dissertations between 1980 and 2020. We extracted 58 independent standardized mean difference effect sizes from 55 eligible studies involving 5,364 students from Grade 3 to Grade 12 who used concept maps for learning in physics/earth science, chemistry, and biology that met the specified design criteria. A random-effects model meta-analysis revealed that the mean effect size was moderate for overall science (<i>g</i> = 0.776). The mean effect sizes varied from moderate to large based on the subject area (<i>g</i> = 0.671 for biology; <i>g</i> = 0.590 for chemistry; <i>g</i> = 1.040 for physics and earth science); these differences between groups were not statistically significant (<i>p</i> = 0.220). Concept maps were generally associated with increased science learning across several learning and teaching conditions, and methodological features (low-achieving students, higher teaching guidance, intermediate grades, low- or middle-income countries, journal publications, and late year of publication). However, we found significant heterogeneity in most subsets. Implications for future research and practice recommendations are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effectiveness of Concept Maps on Students’ Achievement in Science: A Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Dimitris Anastasiou, Clare Nangsin Wirngo, Pantelis Bagos\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10648-024-09877-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of concept maps on science achievement among elementary and secondary education students, including low-achieving students. A systematic search located 55 studies about concept mapping in science achievement published in peer-reviewed journals and dissertations between 1980 and 2020. We extracted 58 independent standardized mean difference effect sizes from 55 eligible studies involving 5,364 students from Grade 3 to Grade 12 who used concept maps for learning in physics/earth science, chemistry, and biology that met the specified design criteria. A random-effects model meta-analysis revealed that the mean effect size was moderate for overall science (<i>g</i> = 0.776). The mean effect sizes varied from moderate to large based on the subject area (<i>g</i> = 0.671 for biology; <i>g</i> = 0.590 for chemistry; <i>g</i> = 1.040 for physics and earth science); these differences between groups were not statistically significant (<i>p</i> = 0.220). Concept maps were generally associated with increased science learning across several learning and teaching conditions, and methodological features (low-achieving students, higher teaching guidance, intermediate grades, low- or middle-income countries, journal publications, and late year of publication). However, we found significant heterogeneity in most subsets. Implications for future research and practice recommendations are discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48344,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Psychology Review\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09877-y\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09877-y","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究旨在评估概念图对中小学生(包括成绩较差的学生)科学学习成绩的影响。通过系统检索,我们找到了 1980 年至 2020 年间发表在同行评审期刊和学位论文上的 55 项有关概念图对科学成绩影响的研究。我们从 55 项符合条件的研究中提取了 58 个独立的标准化均值差异效应大小,这些研究涉及 5364 名三年级至十二年级的学生,他们使用概念图学习物理/地球科学、化学和生物,这些研究符合特定的设计标准。随机效应模型荟萃分析显示,总体科学的平均效应大小为中等(g = 0.776)。根据学科领域的不同,平均效应大小从中等到较大不等(生物的 g = 0.671;化学的 g = 0.590;物理和地球科学的 g = 1.040);这些组间差异在统计学上并不显著(p = 0.220)。在几种学习和教学条件以及方法特征(成绩较差的学生、较高的教学指导、中等成绩、低收入或中等收入国家、期刊发表以及发表年份较晚)中,概念图与科学学习的提高普遍相关。然而,我们在大多数子集中发现了明显的异质性。本文讨论了未来研究的意义和实践建议。
The Effectiveness of Concept Maps on Students’ Achievement in Science: A Meta-Analysis
This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of concept maps on science achievement among elementary and secondary education students, including low-achieving students. A systematic search located 55 studies about concept mapping in science achievement published in peer-reviewed journals and dissertations between 1980 and 2020. We extracted 58 independent standardized mean difference effect sizes from 55 eligible studies involving 5,364 students from Grade 3 to Grade 12 who used concept maps for learning in physics/earth science, chemistry, and biology that met the specified design criteria. A random-effects model meta-analysis revealed that the mean effect size was moderate for overall science (g = 0.776). The mean effect sizes varied from moderate to large based on the subject area (g = 0.671 for biology; g = 0.590 for chemistry; g = 1.040 for physics and earth science); these differences between groups were not statistically significant (p = 0.220). Concept maps were generally associated with increased science learning across several learning and teaching conditions, and methodological features (low-achieving students, higher teaching guidance, intermediate grades, low- or middle-income countries, journal publications, and late year of publication). However, we found significant heterogeneity in most subsets. Implications for future research and practice recommendations are discussed.
期刊介绍:
Educational Psychology Review aims to disseminate knowledge and promote dialogue within the field of educational psychology. It serves as a platform for the publication of various types of articles, including peer-reviewed integrative reviews, special thematic issues, reflections on previous research or new research directions, interviews, and research-based advice for practitioners. The journal caters to a diverse readership, ranging from generalists in educational psychology to experts in specific areas of the discipline. The content offers a comprehensive coverage of topics and provides in-depth information to meet the needs of both specialized researchers and practitioners.