Web Tabanlı Öğrenme Araçları, Dijital Beceri Gelişimi ve Yenilikçi Ölçme - Değerlendirme Yaklaşımları
Özet
Bu bölüm, web tabanlı öğrenme araçlarını fen bilimleri öğretimi bağlamında pedagojik işlevleri doğrultusunda ele almaktadır. Araçlar; iş birliği ve etkileşimli içerik, kavramsal organizasyon ve görsel düşünme, deneyimsel ve uygulamalı öğrenme, oyunlaştırma ve oyun tabanlı öğrenme, öğrenme yönetim sistemleri ve dijital değerlendirme olmak üzere altı temel kategori altında sınıflandırılmakta; her kategori temel işlevi, fen öğretimindeki kullanım olanakları, güncel araştırma bulguları ve sınırlılıkları çerçevesinde değerlendirilmektedir. Bölümde esas alınan ilke, bir aracın öğrenmeye katkısının teknik özelliklerinden çok öğrenciyi hangi öğrenme rolüne yerleştirdiğine ve öğretmenin pedagojik tasarımına bağlı olduğudur. Bu çerçevede söz konusu araçların üst düzey düşünme, öz düzenleme, iş birliği ve dijital üretkenlik becerilerini destekleme potansiyeli tartışılmaktadır. Ardından geleneksel sonuç odaklı testlerin sınırlılıklarından hareketle, anlık ölçme araçları, e-portfolyolar ve dijital dereceli puanlama anahtarlarıyla desteklenen biçimlendirici değerlendirme döngüsü açıklanmaktadır. Bölüm, Türkiye Yüzyılı Maarif Modeli Fen Bilimleri Dersi Öğretim Programı'nda yer alan bir öğrenme çıktısı üzerinden kurgulanmış, 8. sınıf Sürdürülebilir Yaşam ve Madde Döngüleri temasına ilişkin uçtan uca bir ders planıyla somutlaştırılmaktadır.
This chapter examines web-based learning tools in terms of their pedagogical functions within science education. The tools are classified under six principal categories: collaborative and interactive content tools, conceptual organization and visual thinking tools, experiential and applied learning tools, gamification and game-based learning systems, learning management systems, and digital assessment tools. Each category is evaluated with reference to its core function, its uses in science teaching, recent research findings and its limitations. The guiding principle of the chapter is that a tool contributes to learning not through its technical features but through the learning role in which it places the student and through the quality of the teacher's pedagogical design. Within this framework, the potential of these tools to support higher-order thinking, self-regulation, collaboration and digital productivity is discussed. Proceeding from the limitations of traditional outcome-oriented tests, the chapter then explains a formative assessment cycle supported by instant assessment tools, e-portfolios and digital rubrics. The chapter concludes by grounding this framework in an end-to-end lesson plan built upon a learning outcome from the Türkiye Century Maarif Model Science Curriculum, addressing the eighth-grade theme of Sustainable Life and Matter Cycles.
Referanslar
Achuthan, K. (2025, December). Artificial intelligence and learner autonomy: a meta-analysis of self-regulated and self-directed learning. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 10, p. 1738751). Frontiers Media SA. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1738751
Akçayır, M., & Akçayır, G. (2017). Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: A systematic review of the literature. Educational Research Review, 20, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.11.002
Alam, T. M., Stoica, G. A., & Özgöbek, Ö. (2025). Asking the classroom with technology: a systematic literature review. Smart Learning Environments, 12(1), 7.
Amini, R., Wilujeng, I., Suryanti, R. D., & Andika, R. (2025). Developing Elementary Science Online Learning Content Using Schoology. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 11(1), 275-281.
Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the Mix Right Again: An Updated and Theoretical Rationale for Interaction. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v4i2.149
Ardıç, M., Tanık Önal, N., & Önal, N. (2023). Teknoloji Destekli Fen Eğitimi Bağlamında Edpuzzle’a Yönelik Bir Değerlendirme. Temel Eğitim, 20, 71-85. https://izlik.org/JA69CY27UM
Astaño, J. (2025). The effectiveness of Canva as an instructional tool in improving students’ academic performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Digital Learning and Distance Education, 3(10), 1327-1345. https://doi.org/10.56778/jdlde.v3i10.468
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: A systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17, Article 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8
Børte, K., Lillejord, S., Chan, J., Wasson, B., & Greiff, S. (2023). Prerequisites for teachers’ technology use in formative assessment practices: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 41, 100568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100568
Brinson, J. R. (2015). Learning outcome achievement in non-traditional laboratories: A review of the empirical research on virtual and remote laboratories. Computers & Education, 87, 218–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.003
Broadbent, J., Sharman, S., Panadero, E., & Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M. (2021). How does self-regulated learning influence formative assessment and summative grade? Comparing online and blended learners. The Internet and Higher Education, 50, 100805.
Capuno, J. G. C. (2023). Quizziz: a game-based formative assessment tool for enhancing students self-regulated learning. International Journal of Social Learning (IJSL), 3(3), 329-340.
Cebrero, J. D. (2025). 21st century skills and science achievement among secondary school students: A systematic review. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 22(2), 248-268.
Chang, H. Y., Binali, T., Liang, J. C., Chiou, G. L., Cheng, K. H., Lee, S. W. Y., & Tsai, C. C. (2022). Ten years of augmented reality in education: A meta-analysis of (quasi-) experimental studies to investigate the impact. Computers & Education, 191, 104641.
Chen, F., & Chen, G. (2025). Technology-enhanced collaborative inquiry in k–12 classrooms: A systematic review of empirical studies. Science & Education, 34(3), 1731-1773.
Chen, J., Fu, Z., Liu, H., & Wang, J. (2024). Effectiveness of virtual reality on learning engagement: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT), 19(1), 1-14.
Clark, D. B., Tanner-Smith, E. E., & Killingsworth, S. S. (2016). Digital games, design, and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 79–122. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315582065
Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445–459. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543053004445
ClassDojo. (2025). Privacy and safety information. ClassDojo.
Common Sense Privacy. (2025). ClassDojo privacy evaluation / privacy seal information. Common Sense Media.
Çakıroğlu, Ü., Kokoç, M., & Atabay, M. (2024). Online learners' self-regulated learning skills regarding LMS interactions: A profiling study. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 36(1), 220–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-024-09397-2
Davies, M. (2011). Concept mapping, mind mapping and argument mapping: What are the differences and do they matter? Higher Education, 62, 279–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9387-6
de Jong, T., Linn, M. C., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2013). Physical and virtual laboratories in science and engineering education. Science, 340(6130), 305–308. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1230579
Demirkan, O., & Tok, D. (2024). The Role of Web 2.0 Based Presentation Tools in Education: Trends in the Literature and Future Perspectives. International Journal of Contemporary Approaches in Education, 3(2), 56-80. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijcae.2024.1100.1
Di Leo, N., & Traetta, L. (2025). Crafting knowledge block by block: A systematic review on the educational potential of Minecraft in schools. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 67-85. https://doi.org/10.17471/2499-4324/1379
Du, J., Liu, L., & Zhao, S. (2025). Empowering students in online learning environments through a self-regulated learning–enhanced learning management system. Behavioral Sciences, 15(8), 1041. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15081041
Eğitim Bilişim Ağı. (2026). EBA: Eğitim Bilişim Ağı. T.C. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı.
Erden, E. (2024). 7.sınıf hücre ve bölünmeler ünitesinde kullanılan web 2.0 araçlarının öğrencilerin 21. yüzyıl becerilerini deneyimlemelerine ve akademik başarılarına etkisinin incelenmesi (Tez No. 929270) [Yüksek lisans tezi, AMASYA ÜNİVERSİTESİ]. Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
Fahrni, D. D. D., Iten, G., Prasse, D., & Hascher, T. (2025). Teachers' practices in the use of digital technology to promote students’ self-regulated learning and metacognition: A systematic review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 165, 105150.
Faza, A., & Lestari, I. A. (2025). Self-regulated learning in the digital age: A systematic review of strategies, technologies, benefits, and challenges. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 26(2), 23-58.
Ford, W. B., Radley, K. C., Tingstrom, D. H., Dart, E. H., & Dufrene, B. (2025). Evaluation of the Good Behavior Game Using ClassDojo in Secondary Classrooms. School Psychology Review, 54(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2022.2067736
Forsström, S., Njå, M., Munthe, E., Houldsworth, L., & Álvarez-Galván, J. L. (2025). Key findings and integration strategies on the impact of digital technologies on students’ learning: Results from a literature review. OECD Education Working Papers.
Garrison, D. R. (2011). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Genç, G., & Kırmızıbayrak, Ö. (2024). The use of Web 2.0 tools in English language learning: A systematic review. Multidisciplinary Reviews, 7(5), e2024102.
Google for Education. (2025). Google Classroom and Google Workspace for Education resources. Google.
Granberg, C., Palm, T., & Palmberg, B. (2021). A case study of a formative assessment practice and the effects on students’ self-regulated learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68, 100955.
Grimalt-Álvaro, C., & Usart, M. (2024). Sentiment analysis for formative assessment in higher education: a systematic literature review. Journal of computing in higher education, 36(3), 647-682.
Gui, Y., Cai, Z., Yang, Y. et al. Effectiveness of digital educational game and game design in STEM learning: a meta-analytic review. IJ STEM Ed 10, 36 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00424-9
Gulboy, E., Denizli-Gulboy, H., & Rakap, S. (2025). Good Behavior Game: Effects on Disruptive Behaviors of Students with and Without Special Educational Needs in Inclusive Setting. Behavioral Sciences, 15(2), 177. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15020177
Gün-Tosik, E., Atasoy, B., & Okan Yüksel, A. (2023). The role of ePortfolios in formative assessment: A systematic literature review. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 14(Special Issue), 299–319. https://doi.org/10.21031/epod.1276063
Hanine, H., Farajy, N., & Moumen, A. (2025). Virtual Laboratories in STEM Education: A Scoping Literature Review on E-Learning Innovation. Engineering Proceedings, 112(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025112017
Hankeln, C., Kroehne, U., Hahn, S., & Prediger, S. (2025). Fifth and Sixth Graders Speak More Richly than They Write: Benefits of Speech Input for Digitally Assessing Conceptual Understanding. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 1-27.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Heung, Y. M. E., & Chiu, T. K. (2025). How ChatGPT impacts student engagement from a systematic review and meta-analysis study. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100361.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn?. Educational psychology review, 16(3), 235-266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
Hrastinski, S. (2021). Digital tools to support teacher professional development in lesson studies: a systematic literature review. International Journal for Lesson & Learning Studies, 10(2), 138-149.
Ivanov, A., Wang, J., & Tawira, L. (2025). Using Miro Collaboration Platform for Semester-Long Group Projects in Communication Design Research. In International Conference on Cooperative Design, Visualization and Engineering (pp. 147-152). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. 2, pp. 215–239). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Karipidis, N., & Tsimperidis, I. (2024). Integration of wikis in education: A qualitative systematic review. Discover Education, 3, 61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00150-6
Kefalis, C., Skordoulis, C., & Drigas, A. (2025). A Systematic Review of Mind Maps, STEM Education, Algorithmic and Procedural Learning. Computers, 14(6), 204. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers14060204
Kleftodimos, A., & Triantafillidou, A. (2023). The use of the video platform FlipGrid for practicing science oral communication. TechTrends, 67, 294–314.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00801-1
Koç, A., & Kanadlı, S. (2025). Effect of interactive learning environments on learning outcomes in science education: A network meta-analysis. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 34(4), 681-703.
Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543061002179
Kurtz, M., Benabbou, A., Pons, C., & Broisin, J. (2025). Collaboration in virtual and remote laboratories for education: A systematic literature review: M. Kurtz et al. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 20(4), 549-603.
Laurillard, D. (2013). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. Routledge.
Lowenthal, P. R., & Moore, R. L. (2020). Exploring student perceptions of Flipgrid in online courses. Online Learning Journal, 24(4), 28–41.
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i4.2335
Ma, J., & Nickerson, J. V. (2006). Hands-on, simulated, and remote laboratories: A comparative literature review. ACM Computing Surveys, 38(3), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.1145/1132960.1132961
Makransky, G., & Petersen, G. B. (2021). The Cognitive Affective Model of Immersive Learning: A theoretical research-based model of learning in immersive virtual reality. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 937–958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09586-2
Makransky, G., Terkildsen, T. S., & Mayer, R. E. (2019). Adding immersive virtual reality to a science lab simulation causes more presence but less learning. Learning and Instruction, 60, 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.12.007
Manolev, J., Sullivan, A., & Slee, R. (2019). The datafication of discipline: ClassDojo, surveillance and a performative classroom culture. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(1), 36–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.1558237
Maskos, K., Schulz, A., Oeksuez, S. S., & Rakoczy, K. (2025). Formative assessment in mathematics education: A systematic review. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 57(4), 679-693.
Mayer, B. S. (2025). Digital informal learning through connectivism and networked learning: the case of Arabic culture groups. Discover Education, 4(1), 144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00526-2
Mayer, R. E. (2020). Multimedia learning (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
MEBİ. (2026). MEBİ bireysel öğrenme platformu. T.C. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı.
Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2024). Türkiye Yüzyılı Maarif Modeli Fen Bilimleri Dersi Öğretim Programı: 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıflar. T.C. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı.
Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2025a). MEBİ bireysel öğrenme platformu tanıtım ve kullanım bilgileri. T.C. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı.
Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2025b). MEBİ platformuna ilişkin güncel özellik ve erişilebilirlik duyuruları. T.C. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı.
Mittiga, S. R., Freeman, N. C., Leif, E. S., et al. (2024). Behavior change potential of classroom behavior management mobile applications: A systematic review. Education and Treatment of Children, 47, 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43494-024-00122-3
Mohd, C. K., Nuraini, C. K., Mohamad, S. N. M., Sulaiman, H., Shahbodin, F., & Rahim, N. (2023). A review of gamification tools to boost students’ motivation and engagement. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 101(7), 2771-2782.
Moodle. (2026). Moodle LMS: Open-source learning platform. Moodle.
Mursali, S., Hastuti, U. S., Zubaidah, S., & Rohman, F. (2024). Guided inquiry with Moodle to improve students’ science process skills and conceptual understanding. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 13(3), 1875. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v13i3.27617
Nguyen, T. T. T. (2024). Using Flipgrid videos to enhance speaking and presenting in English for non-native learners. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (iJEP), 14(2), 100–111.
https://doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v14i2.43813
Nguyen-Viet, B., & Doan Ngoc Minh, H. (2025).
How gamification enhances learning effectiveness through blended learning and intrinsic motivation: The moderating effects of self-regulation. SAGE Open, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251385846
Nguyen-Viet, B., & Nguyen-Viet, B. (2025). Gamification in Vietnamese education: Assessing psychological need satisfaction, intrinsic motivation, and learning effectiveness. Learning and Motivation, 89, 102101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2025.102101
Novak, J. D., & Cañas, A. J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them (Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008). Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition.
Ouyang, Z. (2025). Self-regulated learning and engagement as serial mediators between AI-driven adaptive learning platform characteristics and educational quality: a psychological mechanism analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1646469. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1646469
Özdemir, O. (2025). Kahoot! Game‐based digital learning platform: A comprehensive meta‐analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 41(1), e13084. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.13084
Özdemir, O., & Seçkin, H. (2024). Quantifying cognitive and affective impacts of Quizlet on learning outcomes: a systematic review and comprehensive meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1349835. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1349835
Öztürk, M., & Mıhcı Türker, P. (2024). Analysis of self-regulated learning strategies used by online learners. E-Learning and Digital Media. https://doi.org/10.1177/20427530241251420
Paul, A., Vallejo, N., Badu-Prempeh, N. B. A. B. P., Salas, R. M. E., Leung, D. G., Le, T., & Kaplan, T. (2025). Education Research: Brick by NeuroBrick—A Collaborative Framework for Digital Content Creation. Neurology® Education, 4(4), e200278.
Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational psychology review, 16(4), 385-407.
Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of game-based learning. Educational Psychologist, 50(4), 258–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533
Potkonjak, V., Gardner, M., Callaghan, V., Mattila, P., Guetl, C., Petrovic, V. M., & Jovanovic, K. (2016). Virtual laboratories for education in science, technology, and engineering: A review. Computers & Education, 95, 309–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.002
PowerSchool. (2026). Schoology Learning: K–12 learning management system. PowerSchool.
Pujono, E., Maulana, F., David, A., & Opeyemi, B. (2024). Exploring Innovative Approaches: Optimizing Google Classroom for Enhanced Motivation in Science Learning. Schrödinger: Journal of Physics Education, 5(2), 39-45. https://doi.org/10.37251/sjpe.v5i2.965
Radianti, J., Majchrzak, T. A., Fromm, J., & Wohlgenannt, I. (2020). A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda. Computers & Education, 147, 103778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778
Rath, A. (2025). Padlet: a tool for fostering collaborative learning and feedback literacy in dental education. Frontiers in Medicine, 11, 1357068. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2024.1357068
Rebenitsch, L., & Owen, C. (2016). Review on cybersickness in applications and visual displays. Virtual Reality, 20, 101–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-016-0285-9
Redecker, C., & Punie, Y. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. Publications Office of the European Union.
Robillos, R. J. (2023). Improving students’ speaking performance and communication engagement through technology-mediated pedagogical approach. International Journal of Instruction, 16(1), 551–572.
https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16131a
Robles Mucho, J. L., Andrade-Girón, D. C., Benites-Tirado, V. R., Quispe-Maquera, N. B., Ayala-Jara, C., Tito Chura, H. E., ... & Barboza, J. J. (2026). Open learner models and pedagogical strategies in higher education: a meta-synthesis of approaches to self-regulated learning. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 10, p. 1760183). Frontiers.
Ruyang, L., Lu, T., Mengyao, X., & Hedi, Y. (2025). Contemporary trends of AI-powered foreign language teaching: a systematic literature review from connectivism perspective. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2025.2586144
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117714
Schmidt, K. J., Dukewich, K. R., Symonds, C. I., & Thrasher, A. V. (2025). When more isn’t better: evidence for an instructional equivalence hypothesis in multimedia design. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1718397.
Selwyn, N. (2016). Education and technology: Key issues and debates (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.
Shi, Y., Chen, M., Wei, Y., Shen, J., Wu, M., & Zhu, K. (2025). Understanding effects of engaging online learning environments on students’ cognitive engagement and well-being: the role of academic self-concept and flow. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1614109.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10.
Slattery, E. J., Lehane, P., Butler, D., O’Leary, M., & Marshall, K. (2025). Assessing the benefits of digital game-based learning with Minecraft in children, adolescents and young adults: A broad systematic review. Review of Education, 13, e70035. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.70035
Spatioti, A. G., Kazanidis, I., & Pange, J. (2022). A Comparative Study of the ADDIE Instructional Design Model in Distance Education. Information, 13(9), 402. https://doi.org/10.3390/info13090402
Stanevičienė, E., et al. (2025). The use of multimedia in the teaching and learning process of higher education: A systematic review. Sustainability, 17(19), 8859. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17198859
Sumarhadi, A., & Supahar, S. (2025). Development of a Science E-Module Based on Problem Based Learning Using Moodle to Improve Students' Science Literacy and Critical Thinking Abilities. Journal of World Science, 4(8), 1083-1094.
Toomla, K., Hooshyar, D., Kikas, E., Malva, L., Malleus-Kotšegarov, E., & Aus, K. (2026). Tracing and supporting self-regulated learning in K-12 digital learning: A systematic review of the last three decades (1990-2024). Educational Research Review, 100782.
Tuna Pusa, E., & Dinçer, S. (2025). A Meta-synthesis Study on the Use of e-assessment Tools in Education. SAGE Open, 15(3), 21582440251360495. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251360495
Wang, X. M., Wang, J. L., Xu, S. Y., & Xu, S. J. (2025). Concept mapping in STEM education: a meta-analysis of its impact on students’ achievement (2004–2023). International Journal of STEM Education, 12(1), 30.
Wu, X. Y. (2025). Exploring the impact of blended collaborative learning on deep learning outcomes: A structural equation modeling approach. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 13411–13437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13202-z
Xu, E., Feng, X., Ning, K., Wang, Y., Zhou, L., & Li, H. (2025). The effectiveness of technical-supported collaboration in promoting students’ learning outcomes: a meta-analysis based on empirical literature. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 1-14.
Yüzbaşıoğlu, M. K. (2025). Eğitim Bilişim Ağı (EBA) Platformunda Bulunan Fen Bilimleri Dersi Video İçeriklerinin Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Açısından İncelenmesi. Fen Bilimleri Öğretimi Dergisi, 13(2), 122-139.
Zheng, B., Warschauer, M., Lin, C. H., & Chang, C. (2016). Learning in one-to-one laptop environments: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Review of educational research, 86(4), 1052-1084. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316628645
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
