د/ايمان زغلول قاسم

استاذ تكنولوجيا التعليم المساعد بكلية التربية بالزلفي

book B37

Citations Index Expanded (SSCI/E), it was excluded. In a later stage of the process, the
quality of the remaining studies was investigated more thoroughly.
3.2.4 Selection Process
All studies were exported to Thomson Reuters Endnote X4 (2010). With the assistance
of this program, all duplicate studies were found and subsequently removed from the
selection. Next, using the inclusion criteria, the studies were successively screened based on
their relevance for this review study. Whenever a study did not comply with a certain
criterion, it was removed from the selection. If it was not clear whether a study complied with
a criterion, it was not excluded. During the selection process, studies were judged based on
their title, keywords, and abstract. Selection steps 1, 2, 3, and 5 were performed by one
researcher. In selection step 4, the selection of a quarter of the studies was done by two
researchers, independently. The researchers agreed in 95% of the cases, and the few
discrepancies were resolved. Of the studies that satisfied the inclusion criteria, their full-text
documents were obtained.
3.2.5 Data Extraction and Appraisal of Studies
Data were extracted using a data-extraction form. For every article, a data-extraction
form was filled in.5 The first part of the form contains information about the study setting,
method, respondents, types of feedback, levels of feedback, timing, conclusions, etc. The
second part of the form is concerned with the quality of the study, which was judged based on
a method proposed by Petticrew and Roberts (2006). All studies were judged on five
categories: general orientation, selection of the sample, method, data and statistical tests, and
conclusions. A score was assigned to every category (-, +-, or +, representing 0, 1, or 2 points
respectively), and the scores for each study were aggregated into a sum score. Subsequently,
the studies were classified as being of low (0–3.5), moderate (4–7) or high (7.5–10) quality.
Three researchers filled out the data-extraction forms independently of each other. One
researcher extracted data from 100% of the articles, a second researcher extracted data from
35% of the articles and another researcher extracted data from another 39% of the articles.
Eventually, discrepancies were discussed and resolved. For the judgments of quality, when
there was more than one reviewer, the average of the judgements was taken.
3.3. Results
3.3.1 Search Results
The literature search resulted in 127 hits in ERIC, 134 hits in PsycInfo, 400 hits in
Scopus, and 524 hits in Web of Science. The total amount of studies found in the search was
1185. After removing duplicates, 1158 studies remained. These studies were subjected to the
inclusion criteria.
5

الوقت من ذهب

اذكر الله


المصحف الالكتروني