Claims

The advantage of the 4C/ID-based environment over conventional instruction was much larger on learning transfer than on knowledge reproduction

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? Control-group students tended to score only slightly lower on the reproduction test but much lower on the transfer test compared with the experimental group. → Melo 2018

Evidence

Melo 2018

Melo, M. (2018). The 4C/ID-Model in Physics Education: Instructional Design of a Digital Learning Environment to Teach Electrical Circuits. International Journal of Instruction, 11(1), 103-122. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.1118a

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Observation of the two groups' performance on both achievement tests, shown graphically in Figure 4 and described in the Findings section; the reproduction difference was 6.6% (first application) versus 21.4% for transfer.

"the students in the control group tended to score slightly lower than those of the students in the experimental group in the reproduction test. However, with respect to the transfer test scores, the results show that the students in the control group have much lower scores when compared with those in the experimental group."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.