Claims

Students using CFDE report higher cognitive learning perception than students using TDE

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2016 · 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? Experiment group students using CFDE scored significantly higher on cognitive learning perception than control group students using TDE (F=8.68, p=0.00). → Yilmaz 2016

Evidence

Yilmaz 2016

Yilmaz, E. O., & Yurdugul, H. (2016). Design and effects of a concept focused discussion environment in e-learning. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 63, 353-374. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2016.63.20

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Post-test-only comparison ('application and final test') of 90 randomly assigned university students over six weeks; ANOVA on the Wu & Hiltz learning perception scale's cognitive dimension favored CFDE, "a highly significant (P≤0.05) finding".

"Table 4 includes cognitive learning perception average scores from learners from the experiment group (using CFDE) (33.63) and learners from the control group (using TDE) (29.50); this difference is calculated to be a highly significant (P≤0.05) finding."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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