The Effectiveness of Geographic Information Systems in Social Studies Education: A Mixed-Meta Synthesis of Academic Achievement and Qualitative Learning Outcomes

This study aimed to synthesize quantitative and qualitative evidence regarding the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in social studies education through a mixed-methods meta-analysis that combines meta-analysis and meta-thematic analysis. As part of the quantitative synthesis, seventeen experimental and quasi-experimental studies were thematically analyzed, while seventeen qualitative studies were thematically analyzed as part of the qualitative synthesis. The results of the meta-analysis, which employed a random-effects model, indicated that the use of GIS has a significant positive effect on participants in the intervention groups’ academic achievement (Hedges’ g = 1.021). Moderator analyses revealed that sample size (Q = 0.382, p = .826), grade level (Q = 3.082, p = .214), duration of implementation (Q = 1.309, p = .520), and publication type (Q = 2.977, p = .226) did not result in statistically significant differences in effect sizes. The meta-thematic analysis identified six themes: higher-order thinking and cognitive skills, the learning process and environment, map literacy and spatial skills, awareness, emotional and motivational contributions, and technological and practical challenges. Qualitative findings indicate that, in the studies examined, the use of GIS was associated with positive contributions to participants in the intervention groups’ cognitive processes, spatial thinking and reasoning, learning experiences, awareness, and motivation. However, these qualitative findings were not interpreted as evidence of objective improvement in participant’ cognitive or affective characteristics. Similarly, no direct link or causal mechanism at the study level was tested between qualitative themes and quantitative effect sizes related to academic achievement. Therefore, the findings suggest that quantitative evidence of the positive impact of GIS use on academic achievement and the learning experiences and perceived benefits reported in qualitative studies provide complementary, yet non-causally linked, evidence.