Scaffolding targeting analysis-level skills yields much larger effects (g = 0.537) than scaffolding targeting synthesis or evaluation¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr2·q3·i0negligible
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.
q3 i0 Higher-order skills related to synthesis (g = 0.156) and evaluation (g = 0.147) were not improved to a large extent by computer-based scaffolding. → Nam Ju Kim 2018
Evidence¶
Nam Ju Kim 2018¶
Nam Ju Kim, Brian R. Belland, & Andrew E. Walker. (2018). Effectiveness of Computer-Based Scaffolding in the Context of Problem-Based Learning for STEM Education: Bayesian Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9419-1
q3 · i0 · quant-synthesis · r2
Subgroup results for synthesis and evaluation levels within the higher-order thinking moderator. Both effects were below d = 0.2: "synthesis (g = 0.156" and "evaluation ( g = 0.147". The discussion links this to current technology struggling to support synthesis, application, and reflection in PBL.
"However, higher-order thinking skills related to synthesis (g = 0.156, 95% CrI = 0.004 to 0.329) and evaluation ( g = 0.147, 95% CrI = 0.003 to 0.288), which require higher level application of knowledge than analysis ability, were not improved to a large extent by computer-based scaffolding"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Teacher-supported learning scaffolds show the largest effect (ES = 0.92), and longer intervention durations yield larger effects — related
- Scaffolding's effect was greatest among adult learners, though based on a single outcome — related
- Scaffolding improves learning — a broader claim this one bears on
- Computer-based scaffolding improves cognitive outcomes in problem-based learning in STEM education with an overall effect of g = 0.385 — a broader claim this one bears on
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
analysis-level-scaffolding-outperforms-synthesis-evaluation |
title |
Scaffolding targeting analysis-level skills yields much larger effects (g = 0.537) than scaffolding targeting synthesis or evaluation |
description |
Scaffolding targeting analysis-level skills yields much larger effects (g = 0.537) than scaffolding targeting synthesis or evaluation |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2018 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-22 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — nam-ju-kim-2018 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.