HPL students learned as much as Scratch students, with equivalent improvement in both conditions¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Design limits · Brender 2025 (2): groups were assigned but students were analysed as independent (read from the study by two models, 2026-10-28)

Subclaims¶

q2 i? A mixed-effects repeated measures ANOVA (n=108) indicates equivalent improvement in both conditions, equivalent post-test scores, and equivalent change in scores. → Brender 2025 q2 i? The difference in normalised change scores between HPL and Scratch conditions was not significant (Kruskal-Wallis H = 0.09, p = 0.7665). → Brender 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Brender 2025¶

Brender, J., El-Hamamsy, L., Giang, C., Mathex, L., Käser, T., & Mondada, F. (2025). The handwriting programming language for primary school: aligning computer science education with established teaching practices. Education Tech Research Dev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-025-10503-z

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Mixed-effects repeated measures ANOVA on pre-/post-test scores from the validated lean CT test (Wiebe et al., 2019), nesting students in groups and groups in classes, with the interaction between test time and modality. The model (n=108) found "an equivalent improve- ment in both conditions" and equivalent post-test scores across conditions.

"the model (n=108, see Table 7) indicates that: (i) there is an equivalent improve- ment in both conditions ( /u1D6FD1 =− 0.94 , p < 0.0001 , and non-significant /u1D6FD2 and /u1D6FD3 ), (ii) HPL and Scratch students’ post-test scores are equivalent"

Brender 2025 (2)¶

Brender, J., El-Hamamsy, L., Giang, C., Mathex, L., Käser, T., & Mondada, F. (2025). The handwriting programming language for primary school: aligning computer science education with established teaching practices. Education Tech Research Dev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-025-10503-z

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Kruskal-Wallis test on normalised change scores for students answering both pre- and post-test. Although HPL students appeared to progress slightly more, the difference was not significant (H = 0.09, p = 0.7665), suggesting HPL is at least as effective as Scratch for learning.

"While it would appear that the students in the HPL condition progressed slightly more than those in the Scratch condition, this difference is not significant (Kruskal-Wallis H = 0.09, p = 0.7665)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Repeated measures ANOVA shows significant time-of-testing effect and significant time-by-group interaction on word-problem scores — related
• SRL interventions in a four-week online mathematics preparation course did not significantly change the mathematics overall score (interaction marginal), while the mathematics focus score on self-chosen chapters showed a statistically significant group by time interaction — related
• Adult typical and dyslexic readers show successful and comparable behavioral learning of novel symbol-speech sound associations — related
• Retrieval practice with feedback improves 24-hour cued recall more than restudy, and high semantic relatedness raises overall accuracy, but the Training Task × Relatedness ANOVA interaction is non-significant — related