Pedagogical tool significantly moderates the CT gender gap, with programming and robots associated with male-favoring gaps and other tools (e.g., web-based) showing a negative significant effect¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q4
Currency · newest study 2025 · checked against its sources 2026-10-19 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q4 i? Pedagogical tool was a significant moderator (F(4, 95) = 3.376, p < 0.05); programming showed a significant positive effect (g = 0.125, p < 0.01) and other tool types a significant negative effect (g = −0.407, p < 0.01). → Suya Liu · Yun Dai · Oi Lam Ng · Zhihui Cai 2025

Evidence¶

Suya Liu · Yun Dai · Oi Lam Ng · Zhihui Cai 2025¶

Suya Liu · Yun Dai · Oi Lam Ng · Zhihui Cai. (2025). Gender Disparity in Computational Thinking Pedagogy and Assessment: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10095-3

q4 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Moderator analysis of pedagogical tool across 100 effect sizes. Programming tools showed a significant male-favoring effect; robots showed the largest but non-significant effect. The article states robustness for non-digital (k = 5), mixed (k = 5), and other tools (k = 7) was weakened by small sample sizes.

"Robots (g = 0.173, p = 0.073) demonstrated the largest effect size, followed by mixed tools (g = 0.155, p = 0.346), non-digital activities (g = 0.135, p = 0.409), and programming ( g = 0.125, p < 0.01). Other types of tools (e.g., web-based tools) showed a negative and statistically significant effect size ( g = −0.407, p < 0.01)"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Gender — moderator: an instructional effect differs by group

Related Claims¶

• Gender disparities in CT education show a very small but statistically significant overall effect favoring males (g = 0.106) — a broader claim this one bears on
• Discipline significantly moderates the effects of educational robotics on STEM learning, with larger effects in technology and cross-disciplinary contexts than in science and mathematics — related
• The effects of thoughtless GenAI use on motivation, self-efficacy, and self-directed learning differ significantly by gender — related
• Educational robotics shows no significant effect on students' computational thinking in STEM education — related
• Male students report significantly higher overall technological self-efficacy than female students (p = 0.001) — related
• Gender does not significantly moderate the effect of AI-supported PBL on computational thinking or academic achievement — related