The effect of computer-based teaching on academic success does not differ significantly by publication year of the studies¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Effect sizes in all four publication-year groups (2006-2007 through 2012-2014) were large, with no significant difference among groups (Z = 14.19, p > .05). → Veli Batdı 2015

Evidence¶

Veli Batdı 2015¶

Veli Batdı. (2015). A Meta-Analytic Study Concerning the Effect of Computer-Based Teaching on Academic Success in Turkey. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2015.5.2491

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Moderator analysis of 78 studies split into four publication-year groups. Table 7 reports QB = 4.77, Z = 14.19, df = 3, homogeneous under FEM; total ES = 1.12.

"the lowest effect size was seen in the 2006 through 2007 publication-year group (ES = .86). The effect sizes of the other groups were 1.10, 1.44, and 1.26, respectively, and the mean effect size was calculated at 1.12."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The effect of computer-based teaching on academic success does not differ significantly by implementation period, with the largest effect size in the nine-to-eighteen week period (ES = 1.87) — related
• Computer-based teaching has a large, positive, significant effect on students' academic success compared with traditional teaching methods in Turkish studies from 2006-2014 — a broader claim this one bears on
• GenAI function, intervention duration, publication year, and gender were not significant moderators of GenAI's motivational effect — related
• The effect of computer-based teaching on academic success does not differ significantly by subject area — related