Analysis of Constructivist Learning Model’s Effects on Student Outcomes: A Second Order Meta-Analysis

Abstract

The effects of the constructivist-learning model on student outcomes are analyzed in this research study. For this purpose, results of 19 meta-analysis researches focusing on the effects of constructivist learning models on student outcomes are combined with the second-order meta-analysis method. The research included in the process had been carried out between the years 2015 and 2021. At the end of the research process, it is determined that the effect of constructivist learning models on student outcomes is medium-level. On the other hand, it is determined that the effect of constructivist learning models on student thinking skills and academic success is high-level. Besides, it is found that the effect of constructivist learning models on student attitudes is medium-level. At the end of the moderator analysis based on location, it is observed that the effects of constructivist learning models on student outcomes vary. Atelier studies can be carried out in education zones to develop teaching skills about the application of constructivist learning models. On the other hand, it is seen that studies on the issue mostly focus on academic success and attitude. Following this, the effects of constructivist learning models on the other student outcomes can be analyzed.

Keywords

• Academic achievement
• constructivist learning model
• thinking skills
• second order meta-analysis.

References

1. Akın, P. (2009). İlköğretim 5. Sınıf matematik dersi için probleme dayalı öğrenme yönteminin öğrenci başarısına etkisi (unpublished master thesis), Ege Üniversitesi, İzmir.
2. Aktamış, H., Hiğde, E., & Özden, B. (2016). Effects of the inquiry-based learning method on students’ achievement, science process skills and attitudes towards science: A meta-analysis science. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 13(4), 248-261.
3. Akyol, M. (2006). Oluşturmacı yaklaşımın matematik başarısına etkileri. (unpublished master thesis),, Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi, Van.
4. Ayaz, M. F., & Söylemez, M. (2015). The Effect of the project-based learning approach on the academic achievements of the students in science classes in turkey: A Meta-analysis study. Education & Science/Egitim Ve Bilim, 40(178), 255-283.
5. Ayaz, M. F. (2015). Probleme dayalı öğrenme yaklaşımının öğrencilerin fen derslerine yönelik tutumlarına etkisi: Bir meta-analiz çalışması. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8(4), 51-76.
6. Ayaz, M. F., & Şekerci, H. (2016). Yapılandırmacı öğrenme yaklaşımının öğrencilerin derslere yönelik tutumlarına etkisi: bir meta-analiz çalışması. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (47), 46-63.
7. Bakioğlu, A., & Göktaş, E. (2019). Eğitim politikası bağlamında işbirlikli ve geleneksel öğrenmenin tutuma etkisinin meta-analizi. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science/Kuramsal Eğitimbilim Dergisi, 12(3),1013-1043.
8. Balemen, N., & Özer Keskin, M. (2018). The effectiveness of project-based learning on science education: A meta-analysis search. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 5(4), 849-865.

9. Balta, N., & Sarac, H. (2016). The effect of 7E learning cycle on learning in science teaching: A meta-analysis study. European Journal of Educational Research, 5(2), 61-72.
10. Batdı, V. (2021). Program Geliştirmede Temel Kavramlar. V. Batdı (Ed.), Eğitimde program geliştirme ve değerlendirme (s. 1-27). Nobel Yayıncılık.
11. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2011). Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons.
12. Capar, G., & Tarim, K. (2015). Efficacy of the cooperative learning method on mathematics achievement and attitude: A meta-analysis research. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 15(2), 553-559.
13. Chen, C. H., & Yang, Y. C. (2019). Revisiting the effects of project-based learning on students’ academic achievement: A meta-analysis investigating moderators. Educational Research Review, 26, 71-81.
14. Cooper, H., & Koenka, A. C. (2012). The overview of reviews: Unique challenges and opportunities when research syntheses are the principal elements of new integrative scholarship. American Psychologist, 67(6), 446.
15. Dal, S. & Tatar, N. (2017). Temel Kavramlar. S. Dal & M. Köse (Ed.), Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri (s. 1-46). Anı Yayıncılık
16. Dagyar, M., & Demirel, M. (2015). Effects of problem-based learning on academic achievement: A meta-analysis study.Education and Science, 40(181), 139-174.
17. Davis, S. A. (2005). Inquiry-based learning templates for creating online educational paths (Doctoral dissertation), Texas A&M University, United States.
18. Demirel, Ö.(2010). Kuramdan uygulamaya eğitimde program geliştirme. Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık.
19. Demirel, M., & Dağyar, M. (2016). Effects of problem-based learning on attitude: A meta-analysis study. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(8), 2115-2137.
20. Duman, B. (2013). Eğitimde Çağdaş Yaklaşımlar. G. Ocak (Ed.), Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri (pp: 359-414). PegemA Yayıncılık
21. Duran, M. & Dökme, İ. (2018). Araştırmaya dayalı öğrenme yaklaşımının kavramsal anlama düzeyi ve bazı öğrenme çıktıları üzerine etkisi. Trakya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(3) , 545-563.
22. Ekinci, N. (2011). İşbirliğine Dayalı Öğrenme. Ö. Demirel (Ed.). Eğitimde yeni yönelimler. Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık
23. Erdem Gürlen, E. (2011). Probleme Dayalı Öğrenme. Ö. Demirel (Ed.). Eğitimde yeni yönelimler. Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık
24. Funa, A., & Prudente, M. (2021). Effectiveness of problem-based learning on secondary students’ achievement in science: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Instruction, 14(4),69-84.
25. Genç, S. Z. (2017). Öğrenme Öğretmede Çağdaş Yaklaşımlar. M. Arslan (Ed.), Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri. Anı Yayıncılık Goulet-Pelletier, J. C., & Cousineau, D. (2018). A review of effect sizes and their confidence intervals, Part I: The Cohen’sd family. The Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 14(4), 242-265.
26. Gökalp, M. (2019). Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri. PegemA Yayıncılık
27. Gülbahar, B. (2014). Okul yöneticilerinin öğretim programlarının uygulanmasındaki öğretim liderliği rollerini belirlemeye yönelik bir alanyazın tarama çalışması. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 44(201), 83-108.
28. Güneş, G.& Asan, A. (2005). Oluşturmacı yaklaşıma göre tasarlanan öğrenme ortamının matematik başarısına etkisi. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 25, Sayı 1, Sayfa: 105–121
29. Gürdoğan-Bayır, Ö., & Bozkurt, M. (2018). Effectiveness of cooperative learning approaches used in the course of social studies in turkey: A meta-analysis study. European Journal of Education Studies, 4(10),171-192.
30. Hall, N. & Quinn, R. (2014). Parental involvement at the high school level: parents’ perspectives. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 1(1): 13-21.
31. Heindl, M. (2019). Inquiry-based learning and the pre-requisite for its use in science at school: A meta-analysis. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 3(2), 52-61.
32. Henson, R. K. (2006). Effect-size measures and meta-analytic thinking in counseling psychology research. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(5), 601-629.
33. Hew, K. F., Bai, S., Huang, W., Dawson, P., Du, J., Huang, G., ... & Thankrit, K. (2021). On the use of flipped classroom across various disciplines: Insights from a second-order meta-analysis. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(2), 132-151.
34. Higgins, J.,P.,T., Green, S, (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
35. Jin, Z. C., Zhou, X. H., & He, J. (2015). Statistical methods for dealing with publication bias in meta‐analysis. Statistics in medicine, 34(2), 343-360.
36. Juandi, D., & Tamur, M. (2021). The impact of problem-based learning toward enhancing mathematical thinking: A meta-analysis study. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 16(4), 3548-3561.
37. Kaçar, T., Terzi, R., Arıkan, İ., & Kırıkçı, A. C. (2021). The effect of inquiry-based learning on academic success: A Meta-analysis study. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 9(2), 15-23.
38. Kaldirim, A., & Tavsanli, O. (2018). The effect of collaborative learning approach on students' academic achievement in Turkish courses in Turkey: A meta-analysis study. Eğitim Ve Bilim-Education And Science, 43(194),185-205.
39. Kaptan, F.& Korkmaz, H. (2001). Fen eğitiminde probleme dayalı öğrenme yaklaşımı. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20, 185 -192
40. Kaya, N. (2013). Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Yapılandırmacılığa Yönelik Tutumları Ve Yapılandırmacılığı Uygulamaya İlişkin Öz-Yeterlik İnançları. (unpublished master thesis), Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Afyon.
41. Kayabaşı, Y. (2012). Öğretmenlerin öğretim sürecinde kullandıkları öğretim yöntem ve teknikleri ile bunları tercih etme nedenleri. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 15 (27) , 45-65.
42. Kozikoğlu, İ. (2014). Ortaokul 7. sınıf İngilizce öğretim programının değerlendirilmesi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi.
43. Kung, J., Chiappelli, F., Cajulis, O. O., Avezova, R., Kossan, G., Chew, L., & Maida, C. A. (2010). From systematic reviews to clinical recommendations for evidence-based health care: Validation of revised assessment of multiple systematic reviews (R-AMSTAR) for grading of clinical relevance. The open dentistry journal, 4, 84-91.
44. Lin, L. (2018). Bias caused by sampling error in meta-analysis with small sample sizes. PloS one, 13(9).
45. Marfo, P., & Okyere, G. A. (2019). The accuracy of effect-size estimates under normals and contaminated normals in meta-analysis. Heliyon, 5(6), e01838.
46. MEB (2009). İlköğretim Matematik dersi 6–8. Sınıflar öğretim programı ve kılavuzu. Talim Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı, Ankara
47. Musna, R. R., Juandi, D., & Jupri, A. (2021). A meta-analysis study of the effect of Problem-Based Learning model on students’ mathematical problem solving skills. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1882, No. 1, p. 012090). IOP Publishing.
48. Oh, I. S. (2020). Beyond meta-analysis: Secondary uses of meta-analytic data. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 7, 125-153.
49. Ören, F., Ş., & Sarı, K. (2019). Araştırmaya dayalı öğrenme stratejisinin öğrencilerin üst düzey düşünme becerilerine etkisi: Bir meta-analiz çalışması. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 46(46), 328-348.
50. Saracaloğlu, A.S. (2019). Eğitimde program geliştirme ve değerlendirme. A. S. Saracaloğlu ve A. Küçükoğlu (Ed.), Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri (pp. 23-78). Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
51. Sarac, H. (2018). The effect of learning cycle models on achievement of students: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 4(1), 1-18.
52. Sarı, K., & Şaşmaz Ören, F. (2020). The effect of the inquiry-based learning strategy on academic achievements of the students: A study of meta-analysis. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 35(3), 540-555.
53. Schmidt, F.,L. and Oh, I,.S. (2013) Methods for second-order meta-analysis and illustrative applications. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 121(2): 204–218.
54. Suparman, S., Juandi, D., & Tamur, M. (2021). Does problem-based learning enhance students’ higher order thinking skills in mathematics learning? A systematic review and meta-analysis. In 2021 4th International Conference on Big Data and Education (pp. 44-51).
55. Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational research, 81(1), 4-28.
56. Terzi, Ç. (2011). Türk Eğitim Sistemi’nde okulların örgüt ve yönetim yapısı ile yapılandırmacı eğitim yaklaşımı arasındaki ilişkinin çözümlenmesi. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International (AJESI), 1(1), 75-82.
57. Titiz, O. (2005). Yeni öğretim sistemi. İstanbul: Zambak Yayınları
58. Toraman, C., & Demir, E. (2016). The effect of constructivism on attitudes towards lessons: A meta–analysis study. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 16(62).
59. Turgut, S., & Gülşen Turgut, İ. (2018). The Effects of Cooperative Learning on Mathematics Achievement in Turkey: A Meta-Analysis Study. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 663-680.
60. Turner, H. M. I., & Bernard, R. M. (2006). Calculating and synthesizing effect sizes. Contemporary issues in communication science and disorders, 33, 42-55.
61. Xie, C., Wang, M., &Hu, H. (2018) Effects of Constructivist and Transmission Instructional Models on Mathematics Achievement in Mainland China: A Meta-Analysis. Front. Psychol. 9:1923. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01923
62. Vickers, A., Goyal, N., Harland, R., & Rees, R. (1998). Do certain countries produce only positive results? A systematic review of controlled trials. Controlled clinical trials, 19(2), 159-166.
63. Yaman, S., & Karaşah, Ş. (2018). Effects of learning cycle models on science success: a meta-analysis. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 17(1), 65.
64. Young, J. (2017). Technology-enhanced mathematics instruction: A second-order meta-analysis of 30 years of research. Educational Research Review, 22, 19-33.
65. Zakaria, M. I., Maat,S. M., & Khalid, F. (2019). A systematic review of problem based learning in education. Creative Education, 10, 2671-2688.