Claims

Evidence-based learning, blended learning and computer-based learning combined with STEM showed large significant effects on learning achievement

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2022 · 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 After mastery learning, evidence-based learning (g = 1.94), blended learning (g = 1.48) and computer-based learning (g = 1.46) had the next largest significant effects on learning achievement. → Mustafa Çevik 2022

Evidence

Mustafa Çevik 2022

Mustafa Çevik, Büşra Bakioğlu. (2022). The Effect of STEM Education Integrated into Teaching-Learning Approaches (SEITLA) on Learning Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis Study. International Journal of Progressive Education, 18(2). https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2022.431.8

q3 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r2

Random-effects subgroup analysis (Table 5) ranking SEITLA approaches by effect size on learning achievement. Evidence-based learning (1 study, g = 1.94), blended learning (1 study, g = 1.48) and computer-based learning (3 studies, g = 1.46) each showed significant effects at p < 0.01.

"followed by evidence-based learning (g ¼ 1.94, p <0.01), blended learning (g ¼ 1.48, p <0.01), and computer-based learning (g ¼ 1.46, p <0.01), respectively"

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.