The authors argue the two-week experiment was too short for participants to acquire SQL skills, explaining the blended group's lower performance¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q1
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? The difference between learning performances in the pilot can be explained by the short experiment time, which did not allow participants to acquire knowledge of SQL effectively. → Yavuzarslan 2019

Evidence¶

Yavuzarslan 2019¶

Yavuzarslan, M., Olgun, H., & Yazici, S. (2019). A Pilot Study on the Comparison Between Blended and F2F Learning Methods in a SQL Course. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED602380

q1 · i? · causal · r2

Authors' interpretation in the Discussion, citing Hadjerrouit (2007) that learning a programming language is developing a skill rather than gaining a set of knowledge, and citing Gülseçen and others (2013) where online learners caught up by the second week. This is an explanatory argument, not a tested result of this study.

"Thus, the difference between the learning performances found in our pilot study can be explained by the short experiment time which did not allow participants to acquire knowledge of SQL effectively."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Undergraduate students taught SQL face-to-face performed significantly higher on the SQL Final Test than students taught with a blended learning method over a two-week experiment — related
• The authors interpret the null between-group result as reflecting the program's short duration and students' lack of experience with critical thinking tasks — related
• The blended learning group showed a slight but statistically significant improvement in SQL test scores from the first-week mid-test to the final test — related
• TBL effects on theoretical knowledge and practical skills are larger in interventions lasting more than 4 weeks — a broader claim this one bears on