Eleven of the included studies reported positive effects of graphing or graphing instruction, and none reported negative effects¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Eleven included studies reported positive effects of graphing or graphing instruction on student outcomes, and none of the included studies reported negative effects. → Verena Rufai 2024

Evidence¶

Verena Rufai 2024¶

Verena Rufai, Dominik Thüsbj, Sarah Malonecj, Stefan Küchemanndi, Sebastian Becker-Genschowe, Markus Vogelf, Roland Brünkengj, Jochen Kuhnhi. (2024). A Systematic Review of Empirical Research on Graphing Numerical Data in K-12 STEM Education. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED

q2 · i? · review · r3

In the review's results section on study results and moderators, the authors report that "Eleven studies reported positive effects" and, separately, that "None of the included studies reported any negative effects of graphing." No pooled effect size is printed.

"Eleven studies reported positive effects (Adams & Shrum, 1990; Branisa & Jenisova, 2015; Karplus, 1979; Gerard et al., 2012; Gultepe & Kilic, 2015; Meisadewi et al., 2017; Mevarech & Kramarsky, 1997; Padilla et al., 1986; Struck & Yerrick, 2010; Vitale et al., 2019; Wu & Krajcik, 2006)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Student attributes showed no main effects on outcomes except interest in science in graphing, and did not interact with sequence — related
• Manual graphing practice based on experimental data outperformed provision of computer-constructed graphs in one comparison study — a narrower finding that bears on this claim