Blended instruction most strongly improves learning motivation (SMD = 0.936), with effects across six performance dimensions not significantly different¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr?·q3
Currency · newest study 2022 · 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 i? Effects across performance dimensions rank learning motivation (SMD = 0.936) above emotions and attitude (0.788), higher order thinking (0.764), academic achievements (0.696), practical skills (0.544), and learning satisfaction (0.516). → Li 2022
q3 i? Between-group differences in effects across dimensions are not statistically significant (p = 0.240). → Li 2022
Evidence¶
Li 2022¶
Li, B., Yu, Q., & Yang, F. (2022). The effect of blended instruction on student performance: A meta-analysis of 106 empirical studies from China and abroad. Best Evidence in Chinese Education, 10(2):1395-1403. https://doi.org/10.15354/bece.22.ar018
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r?
Subgroup analysis of the meta-analysis comparing effect sizes across cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions of student performance. All six printed SMDs exceed 0.5, and the between-group test is not significant (p = 0.240 > 0.05), indicating "no significant differences in the effect of blended instruction on student performance in different dimensions."
"learning motivation (SMD = 0.936) > emotions and attitude (SMD = 0.788) > higher order thinking (SMD = 0.764) > academic achievements (SMD = 0.696) > practical skills (SMD = 0.544) > learning satisfaction (SMD = 0.516)"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Blended instruction effects exceed 0.5 at every education level, peaking at senior secondary (SMD = 0.867), with no significant between-group difference — related
- Blended instruction effects are above moderate in all class sizes, largest for 51-100 students (SMD = 0.752), with no significant between-group difference — related
- Blended instruction yields an above-moderate positive effect on student performance versus traditional teaching (SMD = 0.669) — related
- Group learning yields a larger effect (SMD = 0.678) than independent learning (SMD = 0.584) in blended instruction, without significant between-group difference — related
- GCLA does not bolster motivational aspects of SRL: traditional ChatGPT users showed higher intrinsic motivation and higher amotivation than GCLA users — related
- Task-driven learning, role-playing, inquiry-based, and case-based teaching show effects above 0.8 in blended instruction, while Q&A teaching shows no significant effect — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.