Discipline significantly moderates the effects of educational robotics on STEM learning, with larger effects in technology and cross-disciplinary contexts than in science and mathematics¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Discipline was the only moderator significantly associated with effect-size variability (F(3, 25) = 3.9205, p < 0.05); technology showed g = 0.947 and cross-disciplinary g = 0.414, while mathematics (g = 0.376) and science (g = −0.613) were not significant. → Fan Ouyang and Weiqi Xu 2024

Evidence¶

Fan Ouyang and Weiqi Xu 2024¶

Fan Ouyang and Weiqi Xu. (2024). The effects of educational robotics in STEM education: a multilevel meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00469-4

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Omnibus moderator analysis across 30 effect sizes in the multilevel model. Discipline was significant; subgroup estimates showed technology at g = 0.947 (p < 0.01) and cross-disciplinary at g = 0.414 (p < 0.05), versus non-significant mathematics (g = 0.376) and negative science (g = −0.613). Engineering was excluded for fewer than three effect sizes.

"Significant difference was detected between the weighted effect sizes of different disciplines (F(3, 25) = 3.9205, p < 0.05), which indicated that discipline significantly moderated the effects of educational robotics on STEM learning."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Educational level, instructor support, instructional strategy, interactive type, intervention duration, robotic type, and control group condition were not significant moderators of robotics effects — related
• Educational robotics has a moderate positive overall effect on K-16 students' STEM learning compared to non-robotics instruction — related
• Educational robotics has a moderate-to-large effect on students' STEM learning performance — related
• Educational robotics shows no significant effect on students' computational thinking in STEM education — related
• Pedagogical tool significantly moderates the CT gender gap, with programming and robots associated with male-favoring gaps and other tools (e.g., web-based) showing a negative significant effect — related
• Educational robotics has a moderate effect on students' STEM learning attitudes — related
• Differences in AI-supported instruction effects across STEM disciplines are not statistically significant — reports the opposite
• Science-related subject areas (mathematics, science, medical science) show larger effects than programming technology and other fields — related