Computer-assisted instruction versus inquiry-based learning: The importance of working memory capacity.

The Covid-19 pandemic has led millions of students worldwide to intensify their use of digital education. This massive change is not reflected by the scant scientific research on the effectiveness of methods relying on digital learning compared to other innovative and more popular methods involving...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Johann Chevalère, Loreleï Cazenave, Mickaël Berthon, Ruben Martinez, Vincent Mazenod, Marie-Claude Borion, Delphine Pailler, Nicolas Rocher, Rémi Cadet, Catherine Lenne, Norbert Maïonchi-Pino, Pascal Huguet
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/512beb324a994c25ae479d89d175c133
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:512beb324a994c25ae479d89d175c133
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:512beb324a994c25ae479d89d175c1332021-12-02T20:16:23ZComputer-assisted instruction versus inquiry-based learning: The importance of working memory capacity.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0259664https://doaj.org/article/512beb324a994c25ae479d89d175c1332021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259664https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203The Covid-19 pandemic has led millions of students worldwide to intensify their use of digital education. This massive change is not reflected by the scant scientific research on the effectiveness of methods relying on digital learning compared to other innovative and more popular methods involving face-to-face interactions. Here, we tested the effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) in Science and Technology compared to inquiry-based learning (IBL), another modern method which, however, requires students to interact with each other in the classroom. Our research also considered socio-cognitive factors-working memory (WM), socioeconomic status (SES), and academic self-concept (ASC)-known to predict academic performance but usually ignored in research on IBL and CAI. Five hundred and nine middle-school students, a fairly high sample size compared with relevant studies, received either IBL or CAI for a period varying from four to ten weeks prior to the Covid-19 events. After controlling for students' prior knowledge and socio-cognitive factors, multilevel modelling showed that CAI was more effective than IBL. Although CAI-related benefits were stable across students' SES and ASC, they were particularly pronounced for those with higher WM capacity. While indicating the need to adapt CAI for students with poorer WM, these findings further justify the use of CAI both in normal times (without excluding other methods) and during pandemic episodes.Johann ChevalèreLoreleï CazenaveMickaël BerthonRuben MartinezVincent MazenodMarie-Claude BorionDelphine PaillerNicolas RocherRémi CadetCatherine LenneNorbert Maïonchi-PinoPascal HuguetPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 11, p e0259664 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Johann Chevalère Loreleï Cazenave Mickaël Berthon Ruben Martinez Vincent Mazenod Marie-Claude Borion Delphine Pailler Nicolas Rocher Rémi Cadet Catherine Lenne Norbert Maïonchi-Pino Pascal Huguet Computer-assisted instruction versus inquiry-based learning: The importance of working memory capacity.
description	The Covid-19 pandemic has led millions of students worldwide to intensify their use of digital education. This massive change is not reflected by the scant scientific research on the effectiveness of methods relying on digital learning compared to other innovative and more popular methods involving face-to-face interactions. Here, we tested the effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) in Science and Technology compared to inquiry-based learning (IBL), another modern method which, however, requires students to interact with each other in the classroom. Our research also considered socio-cognitive factors-working memory (WM), socioeconomic status (SES), and academic self-concept (ASC)-known to predict academic performance but usually ignored in research on IBL and CAI. Five hundred and nine middle-school students, a fairly high sample size compared with relevant studies, received either IBL or CAI for a period varying from four to ten weeks prior to the Covid-19 events. After controlling for students' prior knowledge and socio-cognitive factors, multilevel modelling showed that CAI was more effective than IBL. Although CAI-related benefits were stable across students' SES and ASC, they were particularly pronounced for those with higher WM capacity. While indicating the need to adapt CAI for students with poorer WM, these findings further justify the use of CAI both in normal times (without excluding other methods) and during pandemic episodes.
format	article
author	Johann Chevalère Loreleï Cazenave Mickaël Berthon Ruben Martinez Vincent Mazenod Marie-Claude Borion Delphine Pailler Nicolas Rocher Rémi Cadet Catherine Lenne Norbert Maïonchi-Pino Pascal Huguet
author_facet	Johann Chevalère Loreleï Cazenave Mickaël Berthon Ruben Martinez Vincent Mazenod Marie-Claude Borion Delphine Pailler Nicolas Rocher Rémi Cadet Catherine Lenne Norbert Maïonchi-Pino Pascal Huguet
author_sort	Johann Chevalère
title	Computer-assisted instruction versus inquiry-based learning: The importance of working memory capacity.
title_short	Computer-assisted instruction versus inquiry-based learning: The importance of working memory capacity.
title_full	Computer-assisted instruction versus inquiry-based learning: The importance of working memory capacity.
title_fullStr	Computer-assisted instruction versus inquiry-based learning: The importance of working memory capacity.
title_full_unstemmed	Computer-assisted instruction versus inquiry-based learning: The importance of working memory capacity.
title_sort	computer-assisted instruction versus inquiry-based learning: the importance of working memory capacity.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/512beb324a994c25ae479d89d175c133
work_keys_str_mv	AT johannchevalere computerassistedinstructionversusinquirybasedlearningtheimportanceofworkingmemorycapacity AT loreleicazenave computerassistedinstructionversusinquirybasedlearningtheimportanceofworkingmemorycapacity AT mickaelberthon computerassistedinstructionversusinquirybasedlearningtheimportanceofworkingmemorycapacity AT rubenmartinez computerassistedinstructionversusinquirybasedlearningtheimportanceofworkingmemorycapacity AT vincentmazenod computerassistedinstructionversusinquirybasedlearningtheimportanceofworkingmemorycapacity AT marieclaudeborion computerassistedinstructionversusinquirybasedlearningtheimportanceofworkingmemorycapacity AT delphinepailler computerassistedinstructionversusinquirybasedlearningtheimportanceofworkingmemorycapacity AT nicolasrocher computerassistedinstructionversusinquirybasedlearningtheimportanceofworkingmemorycapacity AT remicadet computerassistedinstructionversusinquirybasedlearningtheimportanceofworkingmemorycapacity AT catherinelenne computerassistedinstructionversusinquirybasedlearningtheimportanceofworkingmemorycapacity AT norbertmaionchipino computerassistedinstructionversusinquirybasedlearningtheimportanceofworkingmemorycapacity AT pascalhuguet computerassistedinstructionversusinquirybasedlearningtheimportanceofworkingmemorycapacity
_version_	1718374468254957568

Computer-assisted instruction versus inquiry-based learning: The importance of working memory capacity.

Ejemplares similares