2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.03.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Controlled experiment replication in evaluation of e-learning system’s educational influence

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Along with tests, the randomisation of the sample also represented a prerequisite of the design (Fraenkel et al, 2012;Kumar, 2010;Cohen et al, 2007;Perry, 2011;Grubišić et al, 2009). For the generalisation of the findings on the target population, probability sampling that encompassed simple random sampling was used for the selection of the informants.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Along with tests, the randomisation of the sample also represented a prerequisite of the design (Fraenkel et al, 2012;Kumar, 2010;Cohen et al, 2007;Perry, 2011;Grubišić et al, 2009). For the generalisation of the findings on the target population, probability sampling that encompassed simple random sampling was used for the selection of the informants.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To ensure the statistical reliability of our initial experiment we conducted a factoral two-group experiment with two cycles with participation of 66 students in the 2013-2014 academic year (44 in Leuven campus and 22 in Brussels campus). In this factoral design, the inter circle learning effect and group composition influence are neutralized by the cycle rotation in two groups (Grubišić, Stankov, Rosić, & Žitko, 2009;Trochim, 2000). Between the cycles within each group the cases were altered.…”
Section: Replicated Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, for our summative evaluation, we took the route of controlled experiments, where the tasks, the systems used, and the order of completion of the tasks on the systems were designed and assigned by us, the experimenters, rather than developed and determined by the students. This level of control helped us to avoid factors that could affect the results but are irrelevant to the goal of the study, so that we could concentrate on the specific research questions to be answered (Grubišić et al, 2009). It also enabled us to collect rich data about the students and their interactions with the systems so that a deep analysis can be performed.…”
Section: A Summative Evaluation Of Dilightmentioning
confidence: 99%