A study of meta-analyses reporting quality in the large and expanding literature of educational technology

Abstract

As the empirical literature in educational technology continues to grow, meta-analyses are increasingly being used to synthesise research to inform practice. However, not all meta-analyses are equal. To examine their evolution over the past 30 years, this study systematically analysed the quality of 52 meta-analyses (1988–2017) on educational technology. Methodological and reporting quality is defined here as the completeness of the descriptive and methodological reporting features of meta-analyses. The study employed the Meta-Analysis Methodological Reporting Quality Guide (MMRQG), an instrument designed to assess 22 areas of reporting quality in meta-analyses. Overall, MMRQG scores were negatively related to average effect size (i.e., the higher the quality, the lower the effect size). Owing to the presence of poor-quality syntheses, the contribution of educational technologies to learning has been overestimated, potentially misleading researchers and practitioners. Nine MMRQG items discriminated between higher and lower average effect sizes. A publication date analysis revealed that older reviews (1988–2009) scored significantly lower on the MMRQG than more recent reviews (2010–2017). Although the increase in quality bodes well for the educational technology literature, many recent meta-analyses still show only moderate levels of quality. Identifying and using only best evidence-based research is thus imperative to avoid bias.
 
 Implications for practice or policy:
 
 Educational technology practitioners should make use of meta-analytical findings that systematically synthesise primary research.
 Academics, policymakers and practitioners should consider the methodological quality of meta-analyses as they vary in reliability.
 Academics, policymakers and practitioners could avoid misleading bias in research evidence by using the MMRQG to evaluate the quality of meta-analyses.
 
 Meta-analyses with lower MMRQG scores should be considered with caution as they seem to overestimate the effect of educational technology on learning.

The Potentiality of MOOCs as a Tool for Widening Access to Higher Education in the African Context: A Systematic Review

“…Systematic reviews were first formulated in the field of medicine in response to the exponential growth in medical research, where the findings proved impossible to synthesise on given topics (Ramey & Rao, 2011). Increasingly, however, systematic reviews are being used to synthesise research to inform practice (Tamim, Borokhovski, Bernard, Schmid, Abrami & Pickup, 2021) in other disciplines, such as educational technology. Davies (2000) argues that educational policy and practice have much to gain from systematic reviews.…”

Exploring the Impact of Meta-Analysis in Scientific Research: A Review

“…It contributes to decision-making and the advancement of knowledge across various disciplines by statistically combining the findings of primary research studies (Chaudhary & Singh, 2022). Particularly in the realm of educational technology, meta-analysis holds significant importance as it guides practice and eliminates biases by identifying and utilizing only the most reliable evidence-based research (Tamim et al, 2021). Moreover, meta-analysis can be effectively employed to comprehend the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) in education, thereby highlighting its potential and advantages in enhancing the learning experience for both educators and students (Alhazmi et al, 2023).…”

Impacts of COVID-19 Pandemic’s Distance Learning on Students and Teachers in Schools and in Higher Education – International Perspectives.

“…Until now, many professional learning opportunities for lecturers have been based on how to use specific software such as Zoom or Microsoft Teams, as opposed to capacity building opportunities that were focussed on effective pedagogy. When the use of digital technologies is focussed on enhancing the efficiency of current teaching and learning practices (Tamim et al, 2015), digital technologies have been used in familiar didactic ways (Oke & Fernandes, 2020) distinct from being used in new pedagogical ways that can truly transform teaching and learning (Crompton & Burke, 2020). These familiar didactic approaches and software training approaches are reflected then within the classroom when lecturers focus on the teaching of software skills as opposed to supporting learning with digital technologies (Nykvist et al, 2019).…”

“…The required transformation could be realised in part through technological advances (Oke & Fernandes, 2020), but a complete digital transformation requires changes in thinking as well as tools. Digital technologies and associated new pedagogical approaches have the potential to transform teaching and learning (Ertmer et al, 2012;Tamim et al, 2015), however adoption of digital pedagogy is not yet universal (Bate et al, 2013;König et al, 2020;Tamim et al, 2015), nor the potential benefits fully realised (Newman & Beetham, 2017). Digital technology used for convenience or as a bureaucratic requirement does not guarantee more effective pedagogy (Gregory & Salmon, 2013;Kirkwood & Price, 2014;Salmon, 2014).…”