Student performance increases attributed to daily online testing can be fully explained by selection bias in major composition¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? A major-weighted GPA difference of 0.11 between the 2011 online-testing and 2008 traditional groups matches the reported advantages of 0.11 and 0.12, so selection bias accounts for the apparent effect. → Robinson 2021

Evidence¶

Robinson 2021¶

Robinson, D. H. (2021). A Complete SMOCkery: Daily Online Testing Did Not Boost College Performance. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09588-0

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Reanalysis of major-composition data for 994 students (2008) and 941 (2011) in the introductory psychology course, computing a major-weighted average GPA for each group. The weighted difference of 0.11 matched the reported GPA advantages, so "the student performance increases can be fully explained by selection bias".

"This “major” effect size for the online testing group over the traditional group (3.29 − 3.18 = 0.11) is almost identical to the reported advantages reported by Pennebaker et al. ( 2013) for both the concurrent semester (3.07 − 2.96 = 0.11) and the subsequent semester (3.10 − 2.98 = 0.12)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Differential attrition may explain the reported reduction in achievement gaps under daily online testing — related
• Grade inflation between 2008 and 2011 partly, but not fully, accounts for the apparent GPA advantage of the online-testing cohort — related