Mean effect sizes across the 13 reviewed meta-analyses ranged from -.11 to .57¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Across the 13 included meta-analyses, overall mean effect sizes ranged from -.11 to .57, and the majority were journal articles (9 out of 13). → Young 2016

Evidence¶

Young 2016¶

Young, J.R. (2016). Unpacking TPACK in Mathematics education research: A systematic review of meta-analyses. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 2(1), 19-29. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.2.1.19

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Systematic review screening: 65 initial meta-analyses were reduced to 13 representative studies after a priori inclusion criteria. The review reports the final pool of 13 studies conducted between 2001 and 2015, with median publication year 2008, and states that "Mean effect sizes ranged form -.11 to .57." One included meta-analysis (testing mode) reported a negative effect size of -.11.

"The final pool of studies consisted of 13 meta -analyses conducted between 2001 and 2015. Th e median year of publication was 2008 and the range for year of publication was 14 years."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Prior reviews and meta-analyses of manipulative use yielded conflicting findings, with mean effect sizes ranging from zero to 1.03 — related
• Prior meta-analyses report mixed effects of growth mindset interventions on achievement, with estimates ranging from a non-significant d = 0.05 to d = 0.14 — related
• Constructivist learning models have a medium-level overall effect (ES=.78) on K-12 student outcomes across 19 meta-analyses — related
• Effect sizes across ADHD between-group intervention studies range from −0.76 to 1.12 with a median of 0.18 and a slightly positive skewed distribution — related