Advertisement

Asia Pacific Education Review

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 649–664 | Cite as

Meta-analysis of the effect of practical reasoning instruction on student outcome in Home Economics education in Korea

  • Nan Sook YuEmail author
Article

Abstract

This meta-analysis reviewed the effect of practical reasoning instruction (PRI) on student outcome in Home Economics education in Korea. In this meta-analysis, 25 studies with 35 effect sizes were analyzed. The results of this review indicated that PRI is more effective than traditional instruction on student outcomes. A medium and significant mean effect was 0.60 (SE = 0.06). Categorical analyses and regression analyses were employed to find the sources of variance and moderators that predict the effects of PRI. The moderator analyses revealed no statistically significant effects of publication status, study design, type of student outcome, gender of students, and location. The school level of the students and duration were revealed to be moderators. The effect of PRI on student outcome was found to be smaller in middle schools than in elementary or high schools. The results of regression analysis for middle school students indicated that the effect of PRI was predicted by the length of the intervention. A sensitivity analysis indicates that the method this review used for calculating effect sizes for nonexistent control groups was robust.

Keywords

Meta-analysis Practical reasoning instruction (PRI) Home Economics education Student outcome 

References

  1. * Data from theses references were included in the statistical analyses of PRI study results.Google Scholar
  2. Baldwin, E. E. (1989). A critique of home economics curriculum in secondary schools. In F. H. Hultgren & D. L. Coomer (Eds.), Alternative modes of inquiry in home economics research (pp. 236–250). Peoria, IL: Glencoe Publishing, Inc.Google Scholar
  3. Baldwin, E. E. (1991). The home economics movement: A “new” integrative paradigm. Journal of Home Economics, 83(4), 42–49.Google Scholar
  4. Baldwin, E. E. (1999). Family and consumer sciences curriculum: What ought to be? In J. Johnson & C. G. Fedje (Eds.), Family and Consumer Sciences curriculum: Toward a critical science approach (pp. 32–44). Peoria, IL: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  5. Becker, B. J. (1988). Synthesizing standardized mean-change measures. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 41, 257–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker, B. J. (1990). Coaching for the scholastic aptitude test: Further synthesis and appraisal. Review of Educational Research, 60(3), 373–417.Google Scholar
  7. Becker, B. J. (2000). Multivariate meta-analysis. In H. E. A. Tinsley & S. Brown (Eds.), Handbook of applied and multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling (pp. 499–525). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. London: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown, M. M. (1978). A conceptual scheme and decision-rules for the selection and organization of home economics curriculum content. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.Google Scholar
  10. Brown, M. M. (1980). What is home economics education?. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
  11. Brown, M. M., & Paolucci, B. (1979). Home economics: A definition. Washington, DC: American Home Economics Association.Google Scholar
  12. * Byun, H. (1999). The effect of practical reasoning instruction in home economics of the critical thinking: Family relations and resource management. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  13. Byun, H., & Chae, J. (2002). The effect of practical reasoning instruction in home economics on the critical thinking: Focusing on family relations and resource management. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 14(3), 1–9.Google Scholar
  14. Chae, J. (1996). Assessment of Korean secondary school home economics curriculum with implications for change. Unpublished dissertation. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  15. * Chae, J. (1999). The effects of practical reasoning instruction in home economics and other factors on Korean high school female students’ decision making skills. Journal of Korean Home Economics Association, 37(3), 43–61.Google Scholar
  16. * Chae, J., & Yoo, T. (2006). The effects of practical reasoning home economics instruction on middle school students’ self-esteem. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 18(1), 31–47.Google Scholar
  17. Chae, J., Yoo, T., & Park, M. (2007). The effects of practical reasoning home economics instruction on middle school students’ views of home economics. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 19(1), 65–79.Google Scholar
  18. * Chae, J., Yoo, T., Park, M., & Lee, J. (2003). The effects of practical reasoning home economics instruction on morality of middle school students. Journal of Korean Home Economics Association, 41(12), 53–68.Google Scholar
  19. Chang, H.-K. (1994). Lesson plan development for “Human development and family relationship” part based on Marjorie Brown’s home economics curriculum model. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Ewha Womans University.Google Scholar
  20. * Cho, H.-J. (1999). A study of teaching based on practical problems solving on the area of food habits in middle school home economics. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Chungang University.Google Scholar
  21. Cho, H.-J., & Ahn, S. (2000). A study of teaching based on practical problems solving on the area of food habits in middle school home economics. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 12(2), 29–45.Google Scholar
  22. * Cho, H.-J., & Lee, G. (2004). The analysis and the effect of the practical problem solving method of the clothings chapter in middle school home economics and technology in the 7th curriculum. The Secondary Education Research, 52(2), 385–417.Google Scholar
  23. * Choi, Y. (2002). The effects of Practical Reasoning study on problem solving ability in Home Economics. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Chonnam National University.Google Scholar
  24. Choi, J. (2008). Meta-analysis on the effects of the problem solving instruction in the practical arts (technology, home economics) education. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education, 14(4), 283–302.Google Scholar
  25. Choi, S. (2010). A development and evaluation of Practical Problem-based lesson plans with multiple intelligence: Focused on the unit ‘Nutrition & meals’ of Home Economics in middle school. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  26. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  27. Cooper, H. (1998). Synthesizing research: A guide for literature reviews (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  29. Doh, N. (1997). Lesson plans applying a practical problem solving model on the personal development and family relations in junior high schools’ home economics. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  30. Egger, M., Davey, S. G., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. British Medical Journal, 315, 629–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fox, C. K. (2001). Teacher efficacy, professional development, professional practices, and critical science-based FCS curriculum implementation. Unpublished Dissertation. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  32. Fox, W. S., & Laster, J. F. (2000). Reasoning for action. In A. Vail, W. S. Fox, & P. Wild (Eds.), Leadership for change: National standards for family and consumer sciences education (Vol. Year book 20, pp. 20–32). Peoria, IL: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  33. Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5, 3–8.Google Scholar
  34. Gleser, J. J., & Olkin, I. (2009). Stochastically dependent effect sizes. In H. M. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (pp. 357–376). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  35. Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  36. Hultgren, F. H., Boettner, D., Johnson, P., & Jones, C. (1989). A conceptual guide framework for home economics curriculum in Maryland. Google Scholar
  37. * Kang, K. (2010). The development and application of practical problem-based lesson plan on consumer choice of genetically modified food: focused on the ‘dietary life’ unit in high school home economics. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  38. Kang, K., & Kim, Y. (2010). The development and application of practical problem-based lesson plan on consumer choice of genetically modified food: Focused on the ‘dietary life’ unit in high school home economics. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 22(2), 101–113.Google Scholar
  39. Kim, J.-K. (1999). Implementing progress the practical reasoning Home Economics instruction on concerns based adoption model. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  40. * Kim, H. (2004). The development and application of web-based Practical Problem-Solving learning lesson plan: The case of the adolescent nutrition and diet unit in middle school technical and home economics class. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  41. Kim, S.-H. (2006). The differences in adolescents’ decision making abilities according to the level of critical thinking in terms of practical problem-based instruction of Home Economics. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Kyungpook National University.Google Scholar
  42. * Kim, J.-W. (2007a). Development, application and assessment of Practical Problem-based instruction for the food & nutrition field in middle school Technology & Home Economics: Compared with competency-based instruction. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Seoul National University.Google Scholar
  43. * Kim, S.-E. (2007b). The effect of practical problem solving study in food and nutrition area on elementary school student’s critical thinking disposition. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Cheongju National University of Education, Cheongju.Google Scholar
  44. * Kim, E. (2009a). Developing and implementing practical problem based lesson plan to improve self-leadership skills: focused on the unit of ‘Youth’s self management’ in middle school Technology & Home Economics. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Korea University.Google Scholar
  45. Kim, Y.-N. (2009b). The development and application of practical problem-focused teaching-learning process plans on the elderly housing in high school technology-home economics. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  46. * Kim, Y.-S. (2010). The effect of library assisted practical problem-based home economics instruction on student’s consciousness and attitude of ‘life and career planning’. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Korea University.Google Scholar
  47. Kim, S–. S., & Chae, J. (2007). An analysis of the home economics education discipline items in the teacher recruitment examination for secondary school. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 21(2), 149–168.Google Scholar
  48. Kim, Y.-N., & Cho, J. (2009). The development and application of practical problem focused teaching-learning process plan for the later life: In high school technology & home economics. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 22(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
  49. Kim, S.-H., & Jang, Y. (2007). The differences in adolescents’ decision making abilities according to the level of critical thinking in terms of practical problem-based instruction of home economics. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 19(1), 133–148.Google Scholar
  50. Kim, D., Kim, B., Lee, K., Park, J.-K., Hong, S., & Kim, H. (2008). Effects of cognitive learning strategies for Korean learners: A meta-analysis. Asia Pacific Education Review, 9(4), 409–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kim, E., & Lee, Y. (2009). Developing and implementing practical problem based lesson plan to improve self-leadership skills: focused on the unit of ‘youth’s self management’ in middle school technology & home economics. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 21(4), 35–54.Google Scholar
  52. Kim, Y.-S., & Lee, Y. (2010). The effect of library assisted practical problem-based home Economics instruction on student’s consciousness and attitude of ‘life and career planning’. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 22(2), 61–79.Google Scholar
  53. Kister, J., Laurenson, S., & Boggs, H. (1993). Personal development resource guide. Work and Family Life Program. Ohio Department of Education, Division of Vocation and Adult Education. Google Scholar
  54. Kister, J., Laurenson, S., & Boggs, H. (1994). Nutrition and wellness resource guide. Work and Family Life Program. Ohio Department of Education, Division of Vocation and Adult Education. Google Scholar
  55. Kister, J., Laurenson, S., & Boggs, H. (1995). Family relations resource guide. Work and Family Life Program. Ohio Department of Education, Division of Vocation and Adult Education. Google Scholar
  56. Laster, J. F. (1982). A practical action teaching model. Journal of Home Economics, 74(3), 41–44.Google Scholar
  57. * Lee, H. (1999a). The effects of practical reasoning instruction in home economics on high school female students’ creativity. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Ewha Womans University.Google Scholar
  58. Lee, J.-B. (1999b). Development of cooperative learning lesson plan and the effect of cooperative learning on students’ self-esteem: Focused on the food and nutrition section of middle school home economics. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  59. Lee, J.-H. (2008). Development and evaluation of practical problem-based home economics teaching-learning process plans by blended learning strategy: the case of a unit ‘the youth and consumer life’. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  60. * Lee, G. (2010a). Practical problem-focused instructional design applying universal design concept and effects: Focusing on ‘designing my home’. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Gyeongsang National University.Google Scholar
  61. * Lee, J.-H. (2010b). Effects of practical problem solving study on the environmental literacy of elementary school students: The case of a unit ‘My Environment-friendly Life’ in practical arts. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  62. Lee, G., & Jang, S. (2010). Practical problem-focused instructional design and its perception applying universal design. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 22(2), 155–169.Google Scholar
  63. Lee, J.-B., Kim, Y., & Chae, J. (2000). Development of cooperative learning lesson plan and the effect of cooperative learning on students’ self-esteem: Focused on the food and nutrition section of middle school home economics. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 13(3), 131–146.Google Scholar
  64. * Lee, D., & Yang, J. (2010). Effects of practical problem solving Instruction on problem solving ability and dietary self-efficacy: Centering on the unit of food and nutrition of Practical Arts Education. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education, 23(1), 73–94.Google Scholar
  65. Leucht, S., Kissling, W., & Davis, J. M. (2009). How to read and understand and use systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 119(6), 443–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Applied Social Research Methods Series (Vol. 49). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  67. Montgomery, B. (1999). Continuing concerns of individuals and families. In J. Johnson & C. Fedje (Eds.), Family and consumer sciences curriculum: Toward a critical science approach (pp. 80–90). Peoria, IL: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  68. Montgomery, B. (2003). Reasoning for action in consumer education. Journal of Consumer Education, 21, 1–11.Google Scholar
  69. * Moon, S. (1999). The effect of Practical Reasoning Instruction applied to food and nutrition units on female high school student’s morality. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  70. Moon, S., & Chae, J. (2001). The effect of practical reasoning home economics instruction applied to food and nutrition units on female high school student’s morality. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 13(3), 119–130.Google Scholar
  71. National Association of State Administrators of Family and Consumer Sciences [NASAFACS]. (1998). National standards for family and consumer sciences education. Decatur, GA: Vocational-Technical Education Consortium of States.Google Scholar
  72. National Association of State Administrators of Family and Consumer Sciences [NASAFACS]. (2008). New family and consumer sciences national standards. Retrieved from http://www.alcareertech.org/files/new_national_family_and_consumer_sciences_standards.doc.
  73. Nikolay, P., Grady, S., & Stefonek, T. (1997). Wisconsin’s model for academic standards for family and consumer education (Bulletin 98033).Google Scholar
  74. Oh, H. (2003). Design of using ICT teaching-learning environment in practical problem solving learning for home economics education. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Sookmyung Women’s University.Google Scholar
  75. * Park, S. (2009). Development and application of teaching program for the ‘Being parents’ segment of high school technology & home economics: focusing on practical inference instruction. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  76. Park, S., & Cho, B. (2009). The application and effectiveness of a practical reasoning model of teaching and learning curriculum for the ‘parenthood’ unit in high school technology & home economics. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 21(2), 187–202.Google Scholar
  77. Pyun, E. (2009). The development of the teaching-learning process plans based on practical problem with motive induction strategy for ‘Nutrition and meal of youth’ unit. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Ewha Womans University.Google Scholar
  78. Ryu, S. (1998). Curriculum orientation and professional teaching practices reported by Korean secondary school home economics teachers and teacher educators. Unpublished Dissertation. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  79. * Ryu, S. (2007a). Effect of practical reasoning teaching strategy on elementary school students’ problem solving action in Practical Arts instruction. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education, 20(2), 75–87.Google Scholar
  80. * Ryu, S. (2007b). Effect of practical reasoning practical arts instruction on elementary school students’ problem solving action and ethical action. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education, 20(4), 1–16.Google Scholar
  81. * Song, M. (2003). The effects of the ICT teaching method by ICT instructional environment on learning the unit of ‘understanding of myself and family’ in middle school home economics. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Gyeongsang National University.Google Scholar
  82. * Song, E. (2007). Effect of nature dying instruction based on practical problem solving on elementary school student’s achievement motivation. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Cheongju National University of Education, Cheongju.Google Scholar
  83. Song, M., & Yoo, T. (2003). The effects of the ICT teaching method by ICT instructional environment on learning ‘Understanding of myself and family’ unit of home economics. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 15(1), 81–94.Google Scholar
  84. Staaland, E., & Strom, S. (1996). Family, food, and society: A teacher’s guide (Bulletin 96336).Google Scholar
  85. Sterne, J., & Egger, M. (2001). Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis: Guidelines on choice of axis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 54, 1046–1055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. * Sung, E. (2000). Developing the curriculum by adapting the practical problem solving instruction model on the clothes purchasing chapter in middle school’s home economics. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Seoul National University.Google Scholar
  87. * Yoo, T., & Lee, H. (2009). Effects of practical reasoning instruction on problem solving ability. Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association, 21(2), 203–215.Google Scholar
  88. Yoon, B. (1997). The effects of practical problem-based home economics instruction on both female and male high school students. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Ewha Womans University.Google Scholar
  89. Yoon, B., & Chae, J. (1998). Effects of practical problem-based home economics instruction perceived by both female and male high school students. Journal of Korean Home Economics Association, 36(5), 151–166.Google Scholar
  90. Yu, N. (2009). Home economics teacher’s reflection on pedagogical content knowledge in home economics education. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Korea National University of Education.Google Scholar
  91. Yu, N. (2011). An analysis of the items for the Home Economics teacher selection test from the perspective of the pedagogical content knowledge in home economics education. Journal of Korean Home Economics Association, 49(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Education Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Educational Psychology and Learning SystemsFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations