Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Studies of Inquiry-Based Science Teaching: A Meta-Analysis
Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. C. · 2012
grade Cmeta-analysisindependentreplicated
Sample
37 K-12 science studies (22 codable contrasts)
Population
K-12 science classrooms; content knowledge/conceptual understanding.
Design
Crosses activity type x guidance (teacher-led vs student-led). Outcomes mostly researcher-designed/curriculum-aligned (~2x inflated); mostly immediate.
Key findings
'Inquiry works' resolves into 'GUIDANCE works': teacher-led/guided inquiry beat student-led by ~0.40 SD, and the overall d=0.50 rests on aligned researcher-designed tests (~2x inflated). Supports scaffolded guidance, not minimal-guidance discovery.
Genetic confound
Domain-knowledge outcomes; measure inflation is the main confound, not genetics.
Replication notes
Consistent with Alfieri guided-discovery and Lazonder guidance findings.
DOI / URL
10.3102/0034654312457206
Effects
| Outcome | Metric | Value | Measure | Timing | Vs | Horizon | Class |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inquiry-based vs traditional science instruction | d | 0.50 | researcher-designed | mostly immediate; classroom | business-as-usual | end-of-treatment | domain-skill |
| Teacher-LED vs student-led inquiry | d | teacher-led ~+0.40 larger | researcher-designed | immediate | active-alternative | end-of-treatment | domain-skill |
Cited by
- Explicit instruction vs discovery/inquiry — how much guidance?moderate supportconf: mediumgc: low
- Inquiry-based science teaching vs explicit and textbook science teachingmixedconf: mediumgc: low