Using mobile devices to support the process and products of learning activities is a trend in inquiry-based learning, which is culminating in the formation of the subfield of mobile inquiry-based learning (m-IBL). However, even though mobile devices have been widely used in IBL activities in recent years, evaluative evidence for their substantial contributions to IBL is still deficient. Therefore, this study collected and analyzed 40 peer-reviewed journal articles published during 2001 to 2017 involving 3,542 participants and further discovered that m-IBL has produced meaningful improvements for IBL with an overall mean effect size of 0.803, with a 95% confidence interval [0.61, 0.99]. In addition, moderator variables such as control group types, learning outcomes, inquiry types, teaching methods, and domain subjects were related to different effect sizes. Finally, the results of the meta-analysis were discussed along with their implications for future research and practice.
*AhmedS.ParsonsD. (2013) Abductive science inquiry using mobile devices in the classroom. Computers & Education63: 62–72. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.017.
2.
AnastopoulouS.SharplesM.AinsworthS.CrookC.O'MalleyC.WrightM. (2012) Creating personal meaning through technology-supported science inquiry learning across formal and informal settings. International Journal of Science Education34: 251–273. doi:10.1080/09500693.2011.569958.
3.
AndersonR. D. (2002) Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education13: 1–12. doi:10.1023/A:1015171124982.
4.
ArabaciogluS.UnverA. O. (2016) Supporting inquiry based laboratory practices with mobile learning to enhance students' process skills in science education. Journal of Baltic Science Education15: 216–231. Retrieved from https://www.jbse.webinfo.lt/journal.htm.
5.
AryD.JacobsL. C.RazaviehA. (2002) Introduction to research in education, 6th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
6.
Barell, J. F. (2006). Problem-based learning: An inquiry approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bhagat, K.K., Liou, W. K., Spector, J. M., & Chang, C. Y. (2019). To use augmented reality or not in formative assessment: A comparative study. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(5–6), 830–840. doi:10.1080/10494820.2018.1489857.
9.
BloomB. S.EngelhartM. D.FurstE. J.HillW. H.KrathwohlD. R. (1956) Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, New York, NY: David McKay Company.
BorensteinM.HedgesL. V.HigginsJ. P. T.RothsteinH. R. (2009) Introduction to meta-analysis, Chichester, England: Wiley.
12.
BrownA. L.CampioneJ. C. (1994) Guided discovery in a community of learners. In: K.McGilly (ed) Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 229–270.
BruceB. C.CaseyL. (2012) The practice of inquiry: A pedagogical ‘sweet spot’ for digital literacy?Computers in the Schools29: 191–206. doi:10.1080/07380569.2012.657994.
15.
BucknerE.KimP. (2014) Integrating technology and pedagogy for inquiry-based learning: The Stanford mobile inquiry-based learning environment (SMILE). Prospects44: 99–118. doi:10.1007/s11125-013-9269-7.
16.
Chang, C., Chang, C. K., & Shih, J. L. (2016). Motivational strategies in a mobile inquiry-based language learning setting. System, 59, 100–115. doi:10.1016/j.system.2016.04.013.
17.
*ChangC. S.ChenT. S.HsuW. H. (2011) The study on integrating WebQuest with mobile learning for environmental education. Computers & Education57: 1228–1239. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.005.
18.
*ChangK. E.WuL. J.LaiS. C.SungY. T. (2016) Using mobile devices to enhance the interactive learning for spatial geometry. Interactive Learning Environments24(4): 916–934. doi:10.1080/10494820.2014.948458.
19.
ChangY. L.HouH. T.PanC. Y.SungY. T.ChangK. E. (2015) Apply an augmented reality in a mobile guidance to increase sense of place for heritage places. Journal of Educational Technology & Society18(2): 166–178. Retrieved from https://www.j-ets.net/ETS/index.html.
20.
*ChaoP. Y.ChenG. D. (2009) Augmenting paper-based learning with mobile phones. Interacting with Computers21: 173–185. doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2009.01.001.
21.
*ChenC. M. (2013) An intelligent mobile location-aware book recommendation system that enhances problem-based learning in libraries. Interactive Learning Environments21: 469–495. doi:10.1080/10494820.2011.593525.
22.
*ChenY. (2010) Dictionary use and EFL learning. A contrastive study of pocket electronic dictionaries and paper dictionaries. International Journal of Lexicography23: 275–306. doi:10.1093/ijl/ecq013.
23.
*ChenY. S.KaoT. C.SheuJ. P. (2005) Realizing outdoor independent learning with a butterfly-watching mobile learning system. Journal of Educational Computing Research33: 395–417. doi:10.2190/0PAB-HRN9-PJ9K-DY0C.
24.
CohenJ. (1992) A power primer. Psychological Bulletin112: 155–159. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155.
CooperH. (2010) Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach, 4th ed. London, England: SAGE.
27.
CoxM. J. (2013) Formal to informal learning with IT: Research challenges and issues for e-learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning29: 85–105. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00483.x.
28.
de JongT.Van JoolingenW. R. (1998) Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research68: 179–201. Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com/home/rer.
29.
DierkingL. D.FalkJ. H.RennieL.AndersonD.EllenbogenK. (2003) Policy statement of the “informal science education” ad hoc committee. Journal of Research in Science Teaching40(2): 108–111. doi:10.1002/tea.10066.
30.
DonnellyD. F.LinnM. C.LudvigsenS. (2014) Impacts and characteristics of computer-based science inquiry learning environments for precollege students. Review of Educational Research84: 572–608. doi:10.3102/0034654314546954.
31.
DuvalS.TweedieR. (2000) Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics56: 455–463. doi:10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00455.x.
32.
EdelsonD. C.GordinD. N.PeaR. D. (1999) Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. Journal of the Learning Sciences8: 391–450. doi:10.1080/10508406.1999.9672075.
33.
EngestromY. (1987) Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research, Helsinki, Finland: Prienta-Konsultit Oy.
34.
Friesen, S., & Scott, D. (2013). Inquiry-based learning: A review of the research literature. Paper prepared for the Alberta Ministry of Education. Retrieved from http://galileo.org/focus-on-inquiry-lit-review.pdf.
35.
FurtakE. M.SeidelT.IversonH.BriggsD. C. (2012) Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research82: 300–329. doi:10.3102/0034654312457206.
36.
Furtak, E., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. (2009). Recent experimental studies of inquiry-based teaching: A meta-analysis and review. European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction. Amsterdam, Netherlands. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d1b2/00e1c68a263eb6f0d51957e4e0ea58f2ccaf.pdf.
37.
*GadoI.FergusonR.van't HooftM. (2006) Using handheld-computers and probeware in a science methods course: Preservice teachers’ attitudes and self-efficacy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education14: 501–529. Retrieved from https://www.aace.org/pubs/jtate/.
38.
GarrisonD. R.AndersonT.ArcherW. (1999) Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education2(2): 87–105. doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6.
39.
GijbelsD.DochyF.Van den BosscheP.SegersM. (2005) Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational Research75: 27–61. doi:10.3102/00346543075001027.
40.
Hmelo-SilverC. E. (2004) Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn?Educational Psychology Review16(3): 235–266. doi:10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3.
41.
Hmelo-SilverC. E.DuncanR. G.ChinnC. A. (2007) Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist42: 99–107. doi:10.1080/00461520701263368.
42.
*HoK.LauscherH. N.BroudoM.Jarvis-SelingerS.FraserJ.HewesD.ScottI. (2009) The impact of a personal digital assistant (PDA) case log in a medical student clerkship. Teaching and Learning in Medicine: An International Journal21: 318–326. doi:10.1080/10401330903228554.
43.
HouH. T.YuT. F.WuY. X.SungY. T.ChangK. E. (2016) Development and evaluation of a web map mind tool environment with the theory of spatial thinking and project-based learning strategy. British Journal of Educational Technology47(2): 390–402. doi:10.1111/bjet.12241.
44.
*HuangC. S.SuA. Y.YangS. J.LiouH. H. (2017) A collaborative digital pen learning approach to improving students' learning achievement and motivation in mathematics courses. Computers & Education107: 31–44. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.12.014.
45.
*HuangY. M.LinY. T.ChengS. C. (2010) Effectiveness of a mobile plant learning system in a science curriculum in Taiwanese elementary education. Computers & Education54: 47–58. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.006.
46.
*HungI. C.YangX. J.FangW. C.HwangG. J.ChenN. S. (2014) A context-aware video prompt approach to improving students’ in-field reflection levels. Computers & Education70: 80–91. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.007.
47.
*HungP. H.HwangG. J.LinY. F.WuT. H.SuI. H. (2013) Seamless connection between learning and assessment applying progressive learning tasks in mobile ecology inquiry. Educational Technology & Society16(1): 194–205. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info.
48.
HwangG. J.TsaiC. C. (2011) Research trends in mobile and ubiquitous learning: A review of publications in selected journals from 2001 to 2010. British Journal of Educational Technology42: E65–E70. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01183.x.
49.
*HwangG. J.ShiY. R.ChuH. C. (2011) A concept map approach to developing collaborative Mindtools for context-aware ubiquitous learning. British Journal of Educational Technology42: 778–789. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01102.x.
50.
*HwangG. J.TsaiC. C.ChuH. C.KinshukK.ChenC. Y. (2012) A context-aware ubiquitous learning approach to conducting scientific inquiry activities in a science park. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology28: 931–947. Retrieved from https://ajet.org.au/index.php/AJET.
51.
*HwangG. J.WuC. H.TsengJ. C.HuangI. (2011) Development of a ubiquitous learning platform based on a real-time help-seeking mechanism. British Journal of Educational Technology42(6): 992–1002. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01123.x.
52.
*HwangG. J.WuP. H.ZhuangY. Y.HuangY. M. (2013) Effects of the inquiry-based mobile learning model on the cognitive load and learning achievement of students. Interactive Learning Environments21: 338–354. doi:10.1080/10494820.2011.575789.
53.
JonesA.ScanlonE.GavedM.BlakeC.CollinsT.CloughG.TwinerA. (2013) Challenges in personalisation: Supporting mobile science inquiry learning across contexts. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning8: 21–42. Retrieved from https://telrp.springeropen.com.
54.
JongM. S. Y.TsaiC. C. (2016) Understanding the concerns of teachers about harnessing mobile technology to facilitate outdoor social inquiry learning: The EduVenture experience. Interactive Learning Environments24(2): 328–344. doi:10.1080/10494820.2015.1113710.
55.
KirschnerP. A.SwellerJ.ClarkR. E. (2006) Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist41: 75–86. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1.
56.
*LaiC. H.YangJ. C.ChenF. C.HoC. W.ChanT. W. (2007) Affordances of mobile technologies for experiential learning: The interplay of technology and pedagogical practices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning23: 326–337. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00237.x.
57.
*LaineE.VeermansM.LahtiA.VeermansK. (2017) Generation of student interest in an inquiry-based mobile learning environment. Frontline Learning Research5(4): 42–60. doi:10.14786/flr.v5i4.306.
58.
*LanY. F.TsaiP. W.YangS. H.HungC. L. (2012) Comparing the social knowledge construction behavioral patterns of problem-based online asynchronous discussion in e/m-learning environments. Computers & Education59: 1122–1135. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.004.
59.
Lan, Y. J., & Lin, Y. T. (2016). Mobile seamless technology enhanced CSL oral communication. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 335–350. Retrieved from https://www.j-ets.net/ETS/index.html.
60.
*LanY. J.SungY. T.TanN. C.LinC. P.ChangK. E. (2010) Mobile-device-supported problem-based computational estimation instruction for elementary school students. Journal of Educational Technology & Society13(3): 55–69. Retrieved from https://www.j-ets.net/ETS/index.html.
61.
LazonderA. W.HarmsenR. (2016) Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning effects of guidance. Review of Educational Research86: 681–718. doi:10.3102/0034654315627366.
62.
Lee, M. H., Liang, J. C., Wu, Y. T., Chiou, G. L., Hsu, C. Y., Wang, C. Y., … Tsai, C. C. (2019). High school students’ conceptions of science laboratory learning, perceptions of the science laboratory environment, and academic self-efficacy in science learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s10763-019-09951-w.
63.
*LeelammaS.IndiraU. D. (2017) My pocket technology: Introducing a mobile assisted inquiry learning environment (MAILE) to promote inquiries among secondary students. Journal of Education and Learning6(3): 107–117. doi:10.5539/jel.v6n3p107.
64.
Li, P. J., Hong, H. Y., Chai, C. S., Tsai, C. C., & Lin, P. Y. (2018). Fostering students’ scientific inquiry through computer-supported collaborative knowledge building. Research in Science Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s11165-018-9762-3.
65.
*LinY. T.LinY. C. (2016) Effects of mental process integrated nursing training using mobile device on students’ cognitive load, learning attitudes, acceptance, and achievements. Computers in Human Behavior55: 1213–1221. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.076.
66.
LipseyM. W.WilsonD. B. (2001) Practical Meta-analysis, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
67.
Liu, T. C., Lin, Y. C., Gao, Y., & Paas, F. (2019). The modality effect in a mobile learning environment: Learning from spoken text and real objects. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2), 574–586. doi:10.1111/bjet.12605.
68.
*LiuT. C.PengH.WuW. H.LinM. S. (2009) The effects of mobile natural-science learning based on the 5E learning cycle: A case study. Journal of Educational Technology & Society12(4): 344–358. Retrieved from https://www.j-ets.net/ETS/index.html.
69.
*LiuT. Y.TanT. H.ChuY. L. (2009) Outdoor natural science learning with an RFID-supported immersive ubiquitous learning environment. Educational Technology & Society12(4): 161–175. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info.
70.
LooiC. K. (1998) Interactive learning environments for promoting inquiry learning. Journal of Educational Technology Systems27: 3–22. doi:10.2190/L4Q4-8QMM-QPJ3-B5LJ.
71.
*LooiC. K.ZhangB.ChenW.SeowP.ChiaG.NorrisC.SolowayE. (2011) 1: 1 mobile inquiry learning experience for primary science students: A study of learning effectiveness. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning27: 269–287. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00390.x.
72.
*LowtherD. L.RossS. M.MarrisonG. M. (2003) When each one has one: The influences on teaching strategies and student achievement of using laptops in the classroom. Educational Technology Research and Development51: 23–44. doi:10.1007/BF02504551.
73.
MayerR. (2004) Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist59: 14–19. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14.
74.
*MeleroJ.Hernández-LeoD.SunJ.SantosP.BlatJ. (2015) How was the activity? A visualization support for a case of location-based learning design. British Journal of Educational Technology46: 317–329. doi:10.1111/bjet.12238.
75.
MinnerD. D.LevyA. J.CenturyJ. (2010) Inquiry-based science instruction—What is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching47: 474–496. doi:10.1002/tea.20347.
76.
MorrisS. B. (2008) Estimating effect size from pretest-posttest-control group designs. Organizational Research Methods11: 364–386. doi:10.1177/1094428106291059.
77.
MupiraP.RamnarainU. (2018) The effect of inquiry-based learning on the achievement goal-orientation of grade 10 physical sciences learners at township schools in South Africa. Journal of Research in Science Teaching55(6): 810–825. doi:10.1002/tea.21440.
78.
NouriJ.Cerratto-PargmanT.RossittoC.RambergR. (2014) Learning with our without mobile devices? A comparison of traditional school field trips and inquiry based mobile learning activities. Research & Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning9: 241–262. Retrieved from https://telrp.springeropen.com.
79.
OrwinR. G. (1983) A fail-safe N for effect size in meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Statistics8: 157–159. doi:10.3102/10769986008002157.
80.
PedasteM.MäeotsM.SiimanL. A.De JongT.Van RiesenS. A.KampE. T.TsourlidakiE. (2015) Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review14: 47–61. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003.
81.
*PerskyA. M.PollackG. M. (2010) Transforming a large-class lecture course to a smaller-group interactive course. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education74(9): 1–7. Retrieved from http://www.ajpe.org.
82.
*PowellC. B.MasonD. S. (2013) Effectiveness of podcasts delivered on mobile devices as a support for student learning during general chemistry laboratories. Journal of Science Education and Technology22: 148–170. doi:10.1007/s10956-012-9383-y.
83.
*PurbaS. W. D.HwangW. Y. (2017) Investigation of learning behaviors and achievement of vocational high school students using an ubiquitous physics tablet PC App. Journal of Science Education and Technology26(3): 322–331. doi:10.1007/s10956-016-9681-x.
84.
RosenthalR. (1979) The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin86: 638–641. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638.
85.
ScanlonE.AnastopoulouS.KerawallaL.MulhollandP. (2011) How technology resources can be used to represent personal inquiry and support students' understanding of it across contexts. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning27: 516–529. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00414.x.
86.
SharplesM.TaylorJ.VavoulaG. (2007) A theory of learning for the mobile age. In: R.AndrewsC.Haythornthwaite (eds) The SAGE handbook of e-learning research, London, England: SAGE, pp. 221–247.
87.
*ShihJ. L.ChuangC. W.HwangG. J. (2010) An inquiry-based mobile learning approach to enhancing social science learning effectiveness. Educational Technology & Society13(4): 50–62. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info.
88.
SolowayE.WallaceR. (1997) Does the internet support student inquiry? Don't ask. Communications of the ACM40(5): 11–17. doi:10.1145/253769.253771.
89.
Spronken-SmithR.WalkerR. (2010) Can inquiry-based learning strengthen the links between teaching and disciplinary research?Studies in Higher Education35: 723–740. doi:10.1080/03075070903315502.
90.
SuárezÁ.SpechtM.PrinsenF.KalzM.TernierS. (2018) A review of the types of mobile activities in mobile inquiry-based learning. Computers & Education118: 38–55. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.004.
91.
*SungY. T.ChangK. E.HouH. T.ChenP. F. (2010) Designing an electronic guidebook for learning engagement in a museum of history. Computers in Human Behavior26(1): 74–83. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.08.004.
92.
*SungY. T.ChangK. E.LeeY. H.YuW. C. (2008) Effects of a mobile electronic guidebook on visitors’ attention and visiting behaviors. Journal of Educational Technology & Society11(2): 67–80. Retrieved from https://www.j-ets.net/ETS/index.html.
93.
Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., & Yang, J. M. (2015). How effective are mobile devices for language learning? A meta-analysis. Educational research review, 16, 68–84. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2015.09.001.
94.
Sung, Y. T., Lee, H. Y., Yang, J. M., & Chang, K. E. (2019). The quality of experimental designs in mobile learning research: A systemic review and self-improvement tool. Educational Research Review. Advance online publication. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2019.05.001.
95.
SungY. T.ChangK. E.LiuT. C. (2016) The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students’ learning performance: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Computers & Education94: 252–275. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.008.
96.
Sung, Y. T., Yang, J. M., & Lee, H. Y. (2017). The effects of mobile-computer-supported collaborative learning: Meta-analysis and critical synthesis. Review of educational research, 87(4), 768–805. doi:10.3102/0034654317704307.
97.
*TanT. H.LiuT. Y.ChangC. C. (2007) Development and evaluation of an RFID-based ubiquitous learning environment for outdoor learning. Interactive Learning Environments15: 253–269. doi:10.1080/10494820701281431.
98.
*VarmaK. (2014) Supporting scientific experimentation and reasoning in young elementary school students. Journal of Science Education and Technology23: 381–397. doi:10.1007/s10956-013-9470-8.
99.
WangJ. R.HuangB. Y.TsayR. F.LeeK. P.LinS. W.KaoH. L. (2011) A meta-analysis of inquiry-based instruction on student learning outcomes in Taiwan. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher20: 534–542. Retrieved from http://www.dlsu.edu.ph/research/journals/taper/.
100.
*WeiC. W.HungI. C.LeeL.ChenN. S. (2011) A joyful classroom learning system with robot learning companion for children to learn mathematics multiplication. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology10(2): 11–23. Retrieved from http://www.tojet.net.
*WuP. H.HwangG. J.SuL. H.HuangY. M. (2012) A context-aware mobile learning system for supporting cognitive apprenticeships in nursing skills training. Educational Technology & Society15(1): 223–236. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info.
103.
*WuT. T. (2014) The use of a mobile assistant learning system for health education based on project-based learning. Computers Informatics Nursing32: 497–503. doi:10.1097/CIN.0000000000000089.
104.
*ZhangB.LooiC. K.SeowP.ChiaG.WongL. H.ChenW.NorrisC. (2010) Deconstructing and reconstructing: Transforming primary science learning via a mobilized curriculum. Computers & Education55: 1504–1523. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.016.
105.
*ZhengB.WarschauerM.HwangJ. K.CollinsP. (2014) Laptop use, interactive science software, and science learning among at-risk students. Journal of Science Education and Technology23: 591–603. doi:10.1007/s10956-014-9489-5.
106.
ZuritaG.NussbaumM. (2007) A conceptual framework based on activity theory for mobile CSCL. British Journal of Educational Technology38: 211–235. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00580.x.
