Does Inquiry-Based Learning Improve Students' Critical Thinking? A Meta-Analysis Accounting for Control Group Variations.

Q2 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
F1000Research Pub Date : 2026-09-08 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.12688/f1000research.180569.3
Abel Harapan, Risky Setiawan, Tri Santi Kurnia, Andini Sakimin, Auliasari Marjan, Sarnus Joni Harto, Israel Ametepey, Fitriana Ibrahim, Alexander Bilaku
{"title":"Does Inquiry-Based Learning Improve Students' Critical Thinking? A Meta-Analysis Accounting for Control Group Variations.","authors":"Abel Harapan, Risky Setiawan, Tri Santi Kurnia, Andini Sakimin, Auliasari Marjan, Sarnus Joni Harto, Israel Ametepey, Fitriana Ibrahim, Alexander Bilaku","doi":"10.12688/f1000research.180569.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inquiry learning is widely recognized, through empirical studies, as an appropriate instruction in enhancing students' critical thinking, yet the results were varied across context. The previous meta-analysis did not include the control group variations as a potential moderator and the studies subject domain was limited only to science subjects. Consequently, it is difficult to generalize the effectiveness of IBL in enhancing critical thinking. This meta-analysis aims to investigate whether inquiry learning is effective in improving the students' critical thinking skills and examine the moderating roles of each study characteristic. Methods The literature search applying the PRISMA protocol 2020 was conducted by utilizing SCOPUS, ERIC, and DOAJ databases. A total of 57 studies from 51 articles, published from 2015 to 2025, were synthesized using a random-effects model with standardized mean difference (SMD).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis revealed that IBL has a large and significant effect on enhancing students' critical thinking (g = 1.336; 95% CI [1.061, 1.611]). However, substantial heterogeneity was observed (I <sup>2</sup> = 92.09%), suggesting variability across contexts. Moderator analyses revealed that the main moderator, control group variations, was statistically significant in moderating the effectiveness of IBL (Qm = 5.21; <i>p</i> = .022). in contrast, subject domain (Qm = 1.43; p = .698), education level (Qm = 1.11; <i>p</i> = .774), and country ( <i>Q <sub>m</sub></i>  = 3.33; <i>p</i> = .650), were insignificantly moderating the effectiveness of inquiry learning.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The present meta-analysis highlighted that IBL is effective in improving students' critical thinking. However, the effectiveness of IBL was relative to the type of control group variations. Its effect on critical thinking was greater when compared with teacher-centered learning but smaller when compared with other student-centered learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":12260,"journal":{"name":"F1000Research","volume":"15 ","pages":"730"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13562932/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"F1000Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.180569.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Inquiry learning is widely recognized, through empirical studies, as an appropriate instruction in enhancing students' critical thinking, yet the results were varied across context. The previous meta-analysis did not include the control group variations as a potential moderator and the studies subject domain was limited only to science subjects. Consequently, it is difficult to generalize the effectiveness of IBL in enhancing critical thinking. This meta-analysis aims to investigate whether inquiry learning is effective in improving the students' critical thinking skills and examine the moderating roles of each study characteristic. Methods The literature search applying the PRISMA protocol 2020 was conducted by utilizing SCOPUS, ERIC, and DOAJ databases. A total of 57 studies from 51 articles, published from 2015 to 2025, were synthesized using a random-effects model with standardized mean difference (SMD).

Results: The analysis revealed that IBL has a large and significant effect on enhancing students' critical thinking (g = 1.336; 95% CI [1.061, 1.611]). However, substantial heterogeneity was observed (I 2 = 92.09%), suggesting variability across contexts. Moderator analyses revealed that the main moderator, control group variations, was statistically significant in moderating the effectiveness of IBL (Qm = 5.21; p = .022). in contrast, subject domain (Qm = 1.43; p = .698), education level (Qm = 1.11; p = .774), and country ( Q m  = 3.33; p = .650), were insignificantly moderating the effectiveness of inquiry learning.

Conclusions: The present meta-analysis highlighted that IBL is effective in improving students' critical thinking. However, the effectiveness of IBL was relative to the type of control group variations. Its effect on critical thinking was greater when compared with teacher-centered learning but smaller when compared with other student-centered learning.

探究性学习能提高学生的批判性思维吗?对对照组差异的元分析。
背景:通过实证研究,研究性学习被广泛认为是提高学生批判性思维的一种适当的指导,但结果在不同的背景下是不同的。先前的荟萃分析没有将对照组的差异作为潜在的调节因素,研究的主题领域仅限于科学主题。因此,很难概括IBL在增强批判性思维方面的有效性。本荟萃分析旨在探讨探究性学习是否有效提高学生的批判性思维技能,并检验各学习特征的调节作用。方法采用PRISMA协议2020,利用SCOPUS、ERIC、DOAJ数据库进行文献检索。采用标准化平均差(SMD)随机效应模型,对2015 - 2025年间发表的51篇论文中的57项研究进行综合。结果:分析显示IBL对提高学生批判性思维有较大且显著的效果(g = 1.336; 95% CI[1.061, 1.611])。然而,观察到大量异质性(I 2 = 92.09%),表明不同背景下存在差异。调节因子分析显示,主要调节因子,对照组变异,在调节IBL疗效方面具有统计学意义(Qm = 5.21; p = 0.022)。相比之下,学科领域(Qm = 1.43, p = 0.698)、教育水平(Qm = 1.11, p = 0.774)和国家(Qm = 3.33, p = 0.650)对探究学习效果的调节作用不显著。结论:本荟萃分析强调IBL在提高学生批判性思维方面是有效的。然而,IBL的有效性是相对于对照组的类型变化。与以教师为中心的学习相比,它对批判性思维的影响更大,但与其他以学生为中心的学习相比,它的影响较小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
F1000Research
F1000Research Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (all)
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1646
审稿时长
1 weeks
期刊介绍: F1000Research publishes articles and other research outputs reporting basic scientific, scholarly, translational and clinical research across the physical and life sciences, engineering, medicine, social sciences and humanities. F1000Research is a scholarly publication platform set up for the scientific, scholarly and medical research community; each article has at least one author who is a qualified researcher, scholar or clinician actively working in their speciality and who has made a key contribution to the article. Articles must be original (not duplications). All research is suitable irrespective of the perceived level of interest or novelty; we welcome confirmatory and negative results, as well as null studies. F1000Research publishes different type of research, including clinical trials, systematic reviews, software tools, method articles, and many others. Reviews and Opinion articles providing a balanced and comprehensive overview of the latest discoveries in a particular field, or presenting a personal perspective on recent developments, are also welcome. See the full list of article types we accept for more information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书