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.¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · 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? Multilevel analyses found no significant condition effects on time online, adding, editing, or deleting elements, ruling out differential tool activity as an explanation. → Jeroen Janssen 2008
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
Multilevel analyses of students' logged online activity in the 124-student study; the article reports no significant condition effects on any of the four activity measures, so outcome differences cannot be attributed to activity volume.
"No significant effects of condition on time online ( b =- 1.46, p = .16), adding ( b = 0.00, p = .99), editing (b = 0.17, p = .80), and deleting elements ( b =- 0.10, p = .72) in the Debate-tool were found using multilevel analyses."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- 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. — 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
- 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
- Interaction volume during AI-supported practice sessions did not differ significantly across conditions, supporting comparability of practice exposure — related
- Learning conditions did not differ in total questions attempted, ruling out differential effort quantity as the source of create-question differences — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
no-condition-difference-tool-activity |
title |
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. |
description |
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. |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2008 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — jeroen-janssen-2008 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.