Claims

Effect sizes differ significantly by educational level, with the highest effect at university level (ES = 2.254) and the lowest at primary level (ES = 0.936).

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2015 · 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 i3 Educational level is a significant moderator (QB = 9.838, p = 0.020); university (ES = 2.254) exceeds primary (ES = 0.936), with all levels showing high effect sizes. → Mehmet Fatih Ayaz 2015

Evidence

Mehmet Fatih Ayaz 2015

Mehmet Fatih Ayaz, Hanifi Şekerci. (2015). The Effects of the Constructivist Learning Approach on Student's Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analysis Study. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 14(4). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1077612

q3 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r2

Moderator analysis by educational level (Table 2) across the 53 studies. The article reports "the effect size value of the University which has the highest effect size (ES= 2.254)" versus primary first level at 0.936.

"However, because of the huge difference between the effect size value of the University which has the highest effect size (ES= 2.254) and the effect size value of primary first level which has the lowest value (0.936), significant differences can be seen."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.