EdTech effects vary by school stage and subject, with science showing the largest subject-level effect (d = 0.893)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesisr3·q4·i2–i3
Currency · newest study 2025 · 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.
q4 i2 Pooled effects were higher in secondary education (d = 0.565) than primary education (d = 0.3403). → Björn Haßler 2025
q4 i3 Subject-specific effects were stronger in science (d = 0.893) than mathematics (d = 0.381) and literacy (d = 0.305). → Björn Haßler 2025 (2)
Evidence¶
Björn Haßler 2025¶
Björn Haßler, Bethany Huntington, Christopher Klune, Jennie Lester, Aditi Bhutoria, Hassan Mansour. (2025). Understanding Quality Characteristics of EdTech Interventions and Implementation for Disadvantaged Pupils: Systematic review with meta-analysis. Education Endowment Foundation. https://doi.org/10.53832/opendeved.1170
q4 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r3
Subgroup analysis within the pooled meta-analysis of 189 school-based EdTech studies, comparing secondary ("d = 0.565") with primary ("d = 0.3403") education effects on attainment.
"with higher effects observed in secondary education (d = 0.565) compared to primary education (d = 0.3403)"
Björn Haßler 2025 (2)¶
Björn Haßler, Bethany Huntington, Christopher Klune, Jennie Lester, Aditi Bhutoria, Hassan Mansour. (2025). Understanding Quality Characteristics of EdTech Interventions and Implementation for Disadvantaged Pupils: Systematic review with meta-analysis. Education Endowment Foundation. https://doi.org/10.53832/opendeved.1170
q4 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r3
Subject-level subgroup results from the same meta-analysis, with the largest pooled effect in science ("d = 0.893") versus mathematics ("d = 0.381") and literacy ("d = 0.305").
"Subject-specific results showed stronger effects in science (d = 0.893) than in mathematics (d = 0.381) and literacy (d = 0.305)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- GenAI's motivational effect varies by subject domain, largest for language learning and smallest for science (exploratory) — related
- Blended instruction effects exceed 0.5 at every education level, peaking at senior secondary (SMD = 0.867), with no significant between-group difference — related
- The effect of digital technology-assisted STEM education on academic achievement differs significantly by education level, largest at high school and smallest at primary school — related
- The motivational effect of GenAI is larger in higher education than in primary and secondary education (exploratory) — 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.