This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of concept maps on science achievement among elementary and secondary education students, including low-achieving students. A systematic search located 55 studies about concept mapping in science achievement published in peer-reviewed journals and dissertations between 1980 and 2020. We extracted 58 independent standardized mean difference effect sizes from 55 eligible studies involving 5,364 students from Grade 3 to Grade 12 who used concept maps for learning in physics/earth science, chemistry, and biology that met the specified design criteria. A random-effects model meta-analysis revealed that the mean effect size was moderate for overall science (g = 0.776). The mean effect sizes varied from moderate to large based on the subject area (g = 0.671 for biology; g = 0.590 for chemistry; g = 1.040 for physics and earth science); these differences between groups were not statistically significant (p = 0.220). Concept maps were generally associated with increased science learning across several learning and teaching conditions, and methodological features (low-achieving students, higher teaching guidance, intermediate grades, low- or middle-income countries, journal publications, and late year of publication). However, we found significant heterogeneity in most subsets. Implications for future research and practice recommendations are discussed.

本研究旨在评估概念图对中小学学生（包括成绩较差的学生）科学成绩的有效性。一项系统检索找到了 1980 年至 2020 年间发表在同行评审期刊和论文中的 55 项关于科学成就概念图的研究。我们从 55 项符合条件的研究中提取了 58 项独立的标准化平均差异效应大小，涉及 5,364 名使用概念的 3 年级至 12 年级学生符合指定设计标准的物理/地球科学、化学和生物学学习地图。随机效应模型荟萃分析显示，总体科学的平均效应大小适中（g  = 0.776）。根据学科领域的不同，平均效应大小从中等到大不等（ 生物学g = 0.671； 化学g = 0.590；物理和地球科学g  = 1.040）；组间差异不具有统计学意义（p  = 0.220）。概念图通常与多种学习和教学条件以及方法论特征（成绩较差的学生、较高的教学指导、中等成绩、低收入或中等收入国家、期刊出版物和出版年份较晚）的科学学习的增加相关。然而，我们发现大多数子集中存在显着的异质性。讨论了对未来研究和实践建议的影响。