Claims

Students taught with model robots failed significantly fewer lessons than conventionally taught students

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2010 · 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.

q2 i? The experimental group had significantly fewer failed lessons than the control group (χ2 = 3.22; p = 0.03). → Pásztor et al. 2010

Evidence

Pásztor et al. 2010

Attila PÁSZTOR, Róbert PAP-SZIGETI, Erika LAKATOS TÖRÖK. (2010). Effects of Using Model Robots in the Education of Programming. Informatics in Education, 9(1), 133–140. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2010.09

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Comparison of the two sub-samples (experimental nexp = 73, control nctrl = 76) at the end of the semester; the article reports the failed-lessons difference as significant with a chi-square test but prints no effect size.

"Number of failed lessons was significantly less in the experimental group than in the control group (χ2 =3 .22; p =0 .03)."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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