A Pilot Meta-Analysis of Computer-Based Scaffolding in STEM Education

This paper employs meta-analysis to determine the influence of computer-based scaffolding characteristics and study and test score quality on cognitive outcomes in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education at the secondary, college, graduate, and adult levels. Results indicate that...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEducational technology & society Vol. 18; no. 1; pp. 183 - 197
Main Authors Belland, Brian R, Walker, Andrew E, Olsen, Megan Whitney, Leary, Heather
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Palmerston North International Forum of Educational Technology & Society 01.01.2015
Subjects
Coding
Computer applications
Computer Assisted Instruction
Computer based modeling
Computers
Confidence interval
Educational aspects
Educational environment
Educational programs
Educational research
Educational technology
Effect Size
Fading
Full Length Articles
Higher Education
Literature Reviews
Mathematics Education
Meta Analysis
Metacognition
Methods
Outcomes of Education
Pilot Projects
Problem based learning
Problem solving
Regression (Statistics)
Regression analysis
Reliability
Research Design
Research Methodology
Scaffolding
Scaffolding (Teaching Technique)
Scaffolds
Science education
Scores
Secondary Education
STEM Education
Studies
Technical education
Technology application
Test scores
Validity
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:This paper employs meta-analysis to determine the influence of computer-based scaffolding characteristics and study and test score quality on cognitive outcomes in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education at the secondary, college, graduate, and adult levels. Results indicate that (a) computer-based scaffolding positively influences learning (g= 0.53), (b) studies with zero threats to internal validity had lower effect sizes than studies with two threats, (c) studies with one threat to external validity had higher effect sizes than studies with zero threats, (d) studies with no fading had higher effect sizes than studies with fixed fading, and (e) students performed better when using conceptual scaffolds than with metacognitive scaffolds. There were no differences based on study design, generic vs. specific, paired intervention, assessment level, or intended learning outcome. Meta-regression indicated that fading or lack thereof explained 30% of the variability in outcomes. The significance of this paper lies in its potential to steer scaffold designers away from fixed fading and metacognitive scaffolds, and toward studying scaffolding in authentic contexts, rather than laboratories. Furthermore, this study indicates that a more comprehensive scaffolding meta-analysis is warranted.
ISSN:1176-3647
1436-4522
1436-4522