Teaching the control-of-variables strategy: A meta-analysis.

Autor/inn/en	Schwichow, Martin Geert; Croker, Steve; Zimmerman, Corinne; Höffler, Tim Niclas; Härtig, Hendrik
Titel	Teaching the control-of-variables strategy: A meta-analysis.
Quelle	In: Developmental review, 39 (2016) 1, S. 37-63Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei (1); PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei (2) Link als defekt meldenVerfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0273-2297
DOI	10.1016/j.dr.2015.12.001
URN	urn:nbn:de:0111-pedocs-126966
Schlagwörter	Bildungsforschung; Metaanalyse; Curriculum; Experiment; Naturwissenschaftlicher Unterricht; Bildungsforschung; Datenanalyse; Entdeckendes Lernen; Leistungsmessung; Metaanalyse; Schülerleistung; Entdeckendes Lernen; Experiment; Curriculum; Datenanalyse; Naturwissenschaftliche Kompetenz; Naturwissenschaftlicher Unterricht; Leistungsmessung
Abstract	A core component of scientific inquiry is the ability to evaluate evidence generated from controlled experiments and then to relate that evidence to a hypothesis or theory. The control-of-variables strategy (CVS) is foundational for school science and scientific literacy, but it does not routinely develop without practice or instruction. This meta-analysis summarizes the findings from 72 intervention studies at least partly designed to increase students' CVS skills. By using the method of robust meta-regression for dealing with multiple effect sizes from single studies, and by excluding outliers, we estimated a mean effect size of g = 0.61 (95% CI = 0.53-0.69). Our moderator analyses focused on design features, student characteristics, instruction characteristics, and assessment features. Only two instruction characteristics - the use of cognitive conflict and the use of demonstrations - were significantly related to student achievement. Furthermore, the format of the assessment instrument was identified as a major source of variability between study outcomes. Implications for teaching and learning science process skills and future research are discussed.
Erfasst von	DIPF \| Leibniz-Institut für Bildungsforschung und Bildungsinformation, Frankfurt am Main
Update	2017/2