GD groups wrote essays significantly better in total grounds quality, total conceptual quality, and average conceptual quality, but did not cover more topics and were not better in average grounds quality.¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2008 · 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.
q3 i? GD groups produced significantly better essays in terms of total grounds quality, total conceptual quality, and average conceptual quality. → Jeroen Janssen 2008
q3 i? GD groups did not cover more topics in their essays than TD groups, nor were their essays better in terms of average grounds quality. → Jeroen Janssen 2008 (2)
Evidence¶
Jeroen Janssen 2008¶
Jeroen Janssen, Gijsbert Erkens, Paul A. Kirschner, Gellof Kanselaar. (2008). Effects of representational guidance during computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9078-1
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Multivariate analyses of covariance on essay-quality measures from the group products of the 39-group study; the article reports GD groups "produced significantly better essays in terms of total grounds quality, total con-ceptual quality, and average conceptual quality."
"However, GD groups produced significantly better essays in terms of total grounds quality, total con-ceptual quality, and average conceptual quality."
Jeroen Janssen 2008 (2)¶
Jeroen Janssen, Gijsbert Erkens, Paul A. Kirschner, Gellof Kanselaar. (2008). Effects of representational guidance during computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9078-1
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Univariate ANCOVA results from the same essay analysis; two of the five essay measures showed no significant condition difference, so the essay-quality effect is partial rather than uniform.
"The univariate analyses of covariance shown in Table 7 indicate that GD groups did not cover more topics in their essays than did TD groups, nor were their essays better in terms of average grounds quality."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The GD advantage in total grounds and total conceptual essay quality depended on topic length: it held for short to average topics and disappeared for longer topics. — related
- Groups using the Graphical Debate-tool constructed representations of significantly higher quality than groups using the Textual Debate-tool, for both debate positions. — related
- Students in the GD and TD conditions did not differ significantly in time online or in adding, editing, or deleting elements in the Debate-tool. — related
- Essay position did not affect essay scores, but essay-last students wrote essays of similar quality in less time using fewer words — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
gd-essays-total-grounds-conceptual-quality |
title |
GD groups wrote essays significantly better in total grounds quality, total conceptual quality, and average conceptual quality, but did not cover more topics and were not better in average grounds quality. |
description |
GD groups wrote essays significantly better in total grounds quality, total conceptual quality, and average conceptual quality, but did not cover more topics and were not better in average grounds quality. |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
mixed |
newest_evidence |
2008 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — jeroen-janssen-2008, jeroen-janssen-2008-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.