Fig 1.
The popularity of IBL and CAI over the past twenty years.
Fig 2.
The experimental design of the present study.
The pedagogical material and academic test metrics in Physics-Chemistry, Earth and Life Sciences, and Technology were collaboratively elaborated by teams of teachers from each discipline. All data were collected in real classroom environments via an online platform dedicated to the present research, including demographics, academic tests, questionnaires, and WM measures.
Fig 3.
Pre-test imbalance analysis for measures of prior knowledge, socioeconomic status, working memory capacity and academic self-concept.
Fig 4.
Estimated regression coefficient effects of prior knowledge, socioeconomic status, working memory and academic self-concept on Science and Technology scores (Model 4).
Table 1.
Random intercept multilevel models in Sciences and Technology for the IBL vs. CAI comparison.
Fig 5.
Adjusted mean Science and Technology scores (Model 4) in inquiry-based learning and computer-assisted instruction (left panel) and as a function of students’ working memory capacity (right panel).