Evidence Hub

Does Inquiry-Based Learning Improve Students' Critical Thinking? A Meta-Analysis Accounting for Control Group Variations

Harapan A, Setiawan R, Santi Kurnia T, Sakimin A, Marjan A, Joni Harto S, Ametepey I, Ibrahim F et al.

F1000Research, 2026

Abstract

Background: Inquiry learning is widely recognized, through empirical studies, as an appropriate instruction in enhancing students' critical thinking, yet the results were varied across context. The previous meta-analysis did not include the control group variations as a potential moderator and the studies subject domain was limited only to science subjects. Consequently, it is difficult to generalize the effectiveness of IBL in enhancing critical thinking. This meta-analysis aims to investigate whether inquiry learning is effective in improving the students' critical thinking skills and examine the moderating roles of each study characteristic. Methods The literature search applying the PRISMA protocol 2020 was conducted by utilizing SCOPUS, ERIC, and DOAJ databases. A total of 57 studies from 51 articles, published from 2015 to 2025, were synthesized using a random-effects model with standardized mean difference (SMD).

Results: The analysis revealed that IBL has a large and significant effect on enhancing students' critical thinking (g = 1.336; 95% CI [1.061, 1.611]). However, substantial heterogeneity was observed (I 2 = 92.09%), suggesting variability across contexts. Moderator analyses revealed that the main moderator, control group variations, was statistically significant in moderating the effectiveness of IBL (Qm = 5.21; p = .022). in contrast, subject domain (Qm = 1.43; p = .698), education level (Qm = 1.11; p = .774), and country ( Q m = 3.33; p = .650), were…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free