Claims

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

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r? · 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? Effect sizes exceed 0.8 for task-driven learning, role-playing, inquiry-based teaching, and case-based teaching; lecturing and demonstrative teaching show moderate effects; Q&A teaching shows no significant effect (P > 0.05). → Li 2022 q3 i? Between-group differences across the ten teaching methods are not statistically significant (p = 0.121). → 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?

Moderator analysis coding ten teaching methods across the pooled studies. Project-based learning, peer instruction, and learning by discussion exceed SMD 0.6; Q&A teaching (P > 0.05) shows no significant effect; the between-group test is p = 0.121 > 0.05.

"the effect sizes of blended instruction under task-driven learning, role-playing, inquiry-based teaching, and case-based teaching are all above 0.8, indicating these four teaching methods have substantial positive effects"

Discussion

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.