Online teaching proportion significantly moderates effects, with 50% online composition yielding the largest effect (SMD = 0.792) and both extremes the smallest¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Effect sizes differ remarkably across online proportions (p = 0.000), with 50% online (0.792) largest, 30-49% (0.525) and 51-69% (0.468) moderate, and both below 30% (0.346) and 70-80% (0.313) smallest. → Li 2022

Evidence¶

Li 2022¶

Li, B., Yu, Q., & Yang, F. (2022). The effect of blended instruction on student performance: A meta-analysis of 106 empirical studies from China and abroad. Best Evidence in Chinese Education, 10(2):1395-1403. https://doi.org/10.15354/bece.22.ar018

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r?

Moderator analysis of the meta-analysis classifying online teaching proportions into five groups. The between-group test (p = 0.000 < 0.05) shows "remarkably different effects", with "Blended instruction with 50% online teaching yields the most significant positive effect on student learning performance."

"SMDs of proportions of 50%, 30% - 49%, 51% - 69%, lower than 30%, and 70% - 80% are 0.792, 0.525, 0.468, 0.346, and 0.313 respectively"

Li 2022 (2)¶

Li, B., Yu, Q., & Yang, F. (2022). The effect of blended instruction on student performance: A meta-analysis of 106 empirical studies from China and abroad. Best Evidence in Chinese Education, 10(2):1395-1403. https://doi.org/10.15354/bece.22.ar018

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

The same moderator analysis notes a boundary pattern: both extremes of online proportion show the weakest effects, while all five groups remain positive (above 0.3).

"It is worth noticing that both the lowest proportion (lower than 30%) and the highest one (70% - 80%) produce the least significant effects"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Blended instruction yields an above-moderate positive effect on student performance versus traditional teaching (SMD = 0.669) — a broader claim this one bears on
• Blended instruction effects are above moderate in all class sizes, largest for 51-100 students (SMD = 0.752), with no significant between-group difference — related
• Sequence of online and face-to-face teaching does not significantly moderate blended instruction effects, though face-to-face + online + face-to-face shows the largest point estimate (SMD = 0.757) — related
• Teacher-student online interaction pattern significantly moderates blended instruction effects, with synchronous + asynchronous interaction largest (SMD = 1.189) and absence of interaction smallest (SMD = 0.130) — related
• Group learning yields a larger effect (SMD = 0.678) than independent learning (SMD = 0.584) in blended instruction, without significant between-group difference — related
• Teaching period significantly moderates blended instruction effects, with one to three months producing the largest effect (SMD = 0.845) — related