Both self-reported and concrete measures of learning show significant positive effects of service-learning, with no significant difference between measure types¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2012 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i1 Self-reported learning outcomes (d = .365) and concrete measures such as exams and assignment scores (d = .311) were both significantly and positively related to student learning, and the difference between them was not statistically significant. → Jami L. Warren 2012

Evidence¶

Jami L. Warren 2012¶

Jami L. Warren. (2012). Does Service-Learning Increase Student Learning?: A Meta-Analysis. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mjcsl

q3 · i1 · quant-synthesis · r2

Moderator analysis within the same fixed-effects meta-analysis of 11 studies, conducted because of significant heterogeneity. Self-report effects ("d = .365") were descriptively larger than concrete-measure effects ("d = .311"), but t-tests found no statistically significant difference between the two measure types.

"Both measures of learning, including student self-reported learning outcomes and more concrete measures of learning such as exams and other student assignment scores, were significantly and positively related to student learning (for self-report: d = .365, p = .000; for exams and student assignments: d = .311, p = .000)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Self-reported learning yields descriptively greater service-learning effects than exam scores, but the difference is not statistically significant — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)