合作学习对学生体育学习成果的影响:一项元分析。

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Frontiers in Psychology Pub Date : 2025-05-13 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1508808
Hulusi Boke, Yalin Aygun, Sakir Tufekci, Fatma Hilal Yagin, Burak Canpolat, Goktug Norman, Pablo Prieto-González, Luca Paolo Ardigò
{"title":"合作学习对学生体育学习成果的影响:一项元分析。","authors":"Hulusi Boke, Yalin Aygun, Sakir Tufekci, Fatma Hilal Yagin, Burak Canpolat, Goktug Norman, Pablo Prieto-González, Luca Paolo Ardigò","doi":"10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1508808","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This meta-analysis examines the effect of Cooperative Learning (CL) interventions, compared to traditional instructional methods, on students' learning outcomes across affective, cognitive, physical, and social domains in physical education (PE). The review involved a comprehensive search of 12 databases in English, Spanish, and Turkish, with the last search conducted on June 2nd, 2024. Studies included were true experimental or quasi-experimental designs featuring direct CL interventions in PE, covering students of both genders from primary school to university levels. The standardized Cochrane methods were used to identify eligible records, collect and combine data, and assess the risk of bias. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) v4 software package was used to yield a summary of quantitative results. Hedges's <i>g</i> was used as the effect size (ES) measure, calculated from pre- and post-tests in both experimental and control groups. Forty-three studies (comprising 60 reports) were initially included, but three studies were excluded as outliers, leaving 40 studies (56 reports) with a total of 3.985 participants for analysis. The random effects model revealed a moderate positive overall effect of CL interventions (ES = 0.459, 95% CI = [0.324, 0.592], <i>p</i> < 0.001), indicating that CL enhances PE students' learning across four domains. Subgroup analyses showed small to moderate ESs for affective (ES = 0.304), physical (ES = 0.471), cognitive (ES = 0.589), and social learning (ES = 0.612). Risk of bias was evaluated using Begg and Mazumdar's rank correlation, the classic fail-safe number, and a funnel plot, all indicating a low risk of bias. Methodological quality was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI). The study was registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024532607). This meta-analysis underscores the effectiveness of CL as a student-centered pedagogical model in PE, demonstrating its positive effect on various learning outcomes in the affective, cognitive, physical, and social domains. The findings provide instructive data and strategies for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers aiming to integrate, implement, or make context-specific adaptations of CL into educational processes, while ESs in the affective, physical, cognitive, and social learning domains provide domain-based implementation guidance for these stakeholders.</p>","PeriodicalId":12525,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Psychology","volume":"16 ","pages":"1508808"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12106316/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of cooperative learning on students' learning outcomes in physical education: a meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Hulusi Boke, Yalin Aygun, Sakir Tufekci, Fatma Hilal Yagin, Burak Canpolat, Goktug Norman, Pablo Prieto-González, Luca Paolo Ardigò\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1508808\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This meta-analysis examines the effect of Cooperative Learning (CL) interventions, compared to traditional instructional methods, on students' learning outcomes across affective, cognitive, physical, and social domains in physical education (PE). The review involved a comprehensive search of 12 databases in English, Spanish, and Turkish, with the last search conducted on June 2nd, 2024. Studies included were true experimental or quasi-experimental designs featuring direct CL interventions in PE, covering students of both genders from primary school to university levels. The standardized Cochrane methods were used to identify eligible records, collect and combine data, and assess the risk of bias. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) v4 software package was used to yield a summary of quantitative results. Hedges's <i>g</i> was used as the effect size (ES) measure, calculated from pre- and post-tests in both experimental and control groups. Forty-three studies (comprising 60 reports) were initially included, but three studies were excluded as outliers, leaving 40 studies (56 reports) with a total of 3.985 participants for analysis. The random effects model revealed a moderate positive overall effect of CL interventions (ES = 0.459, 95% CI = [0.324, 0.592], <i>p</i> < 0.001), indicating that CL enhances PE students' learning across four domains. Subgroup analyses showed small to moderate ESs for affective (ES = 0.304), physical (ES = 0.471), cognitive (ES = 0.589), and social learning (ES = 0.612). Risk of bias was evaluated using Begg and Mazumdar's rank correlation, the classic fail-safe number, and a funnel plot, all indicating a low risk of bias. Methodological quality was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI). The study was registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024532607). This meta-analysis underscores the effectiveness of CL as a student-centered pedagogical model in PE, demonstrating its positive effect on various learning outcomes in the affective, cognitive, physical, and social domains. The findings provide instructive data and strategies for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers aiming to integrate, implement, or make context-specific adaptations of CL into educational processes, while ESs in the affective, physical, cognitive, and social learning domains provide domain-based implementation guidance for these stakeholders.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12525,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Psychology\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"1508808\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12106316/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1508808\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1508808","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本荟萃分析考察了与传统教学方法相比,合作学习(CL)干预对学生在体育教育(PE)中情感、认知、身体和社会领域学习成果的影响。回顾涉及对英语、西班牙语和土耳其语的12个数据库的全面检索,最后一次检索于2024年6月2日进行。纳入的研究是真正的实验或准实验设计,采用直接CL干预体育,涵盖从小学到大学水平的男女学生。采用标准化Cochrane方法识别符合条件的记录,收集和合并数据,并评估偏倚风险。采用综合meta分析(Comprehensive Meta-Analysis, CMA) v4软件包对定量结果进行汇总。采用Hedges’s g作为效应量(ES)测量,从实验组和对照组的前后测试中计算。最初纳入43项研究(包括60份报告),但有3项研究作为异常值被排除,留下40项研究(56份报告),共3.985名受试者进行分析。随机效应模型显示CL干预的总体正效应为中等(ES = 0.459,95% CI = )[0.324,0.592],p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effects of cooperative learning on students' learning outcomes in physical education: a meta-analysis.

This meta-analysis examines the effect of Cooperative Learning (CL) interventions, compared to traditional instructional methods, on students' learning outcomes across affective, cognitive, physical, and social domains in physical education (PE). The review involved a comprehensive search of 12 databases in English, Spanish, and Turkish, with the last search conducted on June 2nd, 2024. Studies included were true experimental or quasi-experimental designs featuring direct CL interventions in PE, covering students of both genders from primary school to university levels. The standardized Cochrane methods were used to identify eligible records, collect and combine data, and assess the risk of bias. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) v4 software package was used to yield a summary of quantitative results. Hedges's g was used as the effect size (ES) measure, calculated from pre- and post-tests in both experimental and control groups. Forty-three studies (comprising 60 reports) were initially included, but three studies were excluded as outliers, leaving 40 studies (56 reports) with a total of 3.985 participants for analysis. The random effects model revealed a moderate positive overall effect of CL interventions (ES = 0.459, 95% CI = [0.324, 0.592], p < 0.001), indicating that CL enhances PE students' learning across four domains. Subgroup analyses showed small to moderate ESs for affective (ES = 0.304), physical (ES = 0.471), cognitive (ES = 0.589), and social learning (ES = 0.612). Risk of bias was evaluated using Begg and Mazumdar's rank correlation, the classic fail-safe number, and a funnel plot, all indicating a low risk of bias. Methodological quality was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI). The study was registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024532607). This meta-analysis underscores the effectiveness of CL as a student-centered pedagogical model in PE, demonstrating its positive effect on various learning outcomes in the affective, cognitive, physical, and social domains. The findings provide instructive data and strategies for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers aiming to integrate, implement, or make context-specific adaptations of CL into educational processes, while ESs in the affective, physical, cognitive, and social learning domains provide domain-based implementation guidance for these stakeholders.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Psychology
Frontiers in Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
13.20%
发文量
7396
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Psychology is the largest journal in its field, publishing rigorously peer-reviewed research across the psychological sciences, from clinical research to cognitive science, from perception to consciousness, from imaging studies to human factors, and from animal cognition to social psychology. Field Chief Editor Axel Cleeremans at the Free University of Brussels is supported by an outstanding Editorial Board of international researchers. This multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide. The journal publishes the best research across the entire field of psychology. Today, psychological science is becoming increasingly important at all levels of society, from the treatment of clinical disorders to our basic understanding of how the mind works. It is highly interdisciplinary, borrowing questions from philosophy, methods from neuroscience and insights from clinical practice - all in the goal of furthering our grasp of human nature and society, as well as our ability to develop new intervention methods.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信