Sciences-oriented students reported significantly higher estimated understanding of the sorting strategy, while humanities-oriented students overestimated their understanding after the seeing phases until doing phases corrected it¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? MANOVA on understanding-estimate statements found significant differences (p = .0014) in favor of S-students. → Katai 2020 q2 i? H-students' understanding estimates were consistent with performance only after the white- and black-box tasks; the doing phases unmasked false sensations of understanding. → Katai 2020 (2)

Evidence¶

Katai 2020¶

Katai, Z. (2020). Promoting computational thinking of both sciences- and humanities-oriented students: an instructional and motivational design perspective. Education Tech Research Dev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09766-5

q2 · i? · associational · r1

MANOVA comparing groups' auto-estimated understanding across the session (Fig. 8). The article reports "significant differences (p =.0014) in favor of S-students"; no effect size is printed.

"Comparing (MANOVA) groups' scores referring to statements "I caught the logic of the sorting strategy" (q3/5, q4/5) and "I reached this performance because I understood the strategy the algorithm applies" (q5/6, q6/5, q7/5) we found significant differences (p =.0014) in favor of S-students (Fig. 8)."

Katai 2020 (2)¶

Katai, Z. (2020). Promoting computational thinking of both sciences- and humanities-oriented students: an instructional and motivational design perspective. Education Tech Research Dev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09766-5

q2 · i? · design · r2

Analysis of the understanding-estimate graphics: H-students showed a gradual increase in self-estimated understanding that performance results did not confirm; after the reconstruction task they realized they had not understood the algorithm adequately.

"Group-Ha's estimates were (relatively) consistent with their performance results only after the white- and black-box tasks."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Humanities-oriented students reported significantly higher anxiety than sciences-oriented students, but the gap diminished over the session and both groups' anxiety correlated strongly with errors made — related
• Sciences-oriented students appreciated the CT-promoter e-learning experience more overall, but humanities-oriented students' appreciation rose significantly during the doing phases, narrowing the group gap — related
• The two groups differed significantly in forecasted involvement in following learning units, with humanities-oriented students the only group scoring higher than their counterparts — related
• The four detected learning tactics differ significantly across all nine learning actions (MANOVA) — related
• Sciences-oriented students assimilated the studied sorting algorithm at a higher rate than humanities-oriented students during the black-box task — related