Tingir et al. (2017) concluded from their meta-analysis that the subject areas taught through mobile devices had significantly higher achievement scores (d = 0.48) than the ones taught with traditional teaching methods. Given the relatively high positive effect of mobile devices on student achievement, we carefully analysed the selected research in this meta-analysis. We reviewed Tingir et al.’s (2017) meta-analysis based on analysis of the methodology of the selected research, while drawing on the work of Slavin (2003), Cheung and Slavin (2016), and Sung et al. (2019). Twelve of the 14 (86%) studies included in the meta-analysis done by Tingir and his team (2017) present such major methodological flaws that they should not have been included. Our analysis leads us to believe that the conclusion of Tingir et al. (2017) is not justified. It is recognized that duration of experiment is negatively correlated with effect size: the shorter the duration, the higher the effect (Burston, 2015; Slavin & Lake, 2009). Although demanding more effort, the field of education must raise the bar if it is to have knowledge of acceptable value.

中文翻译：

---

Tingir 及其同事（2017 年）关于移动设备对学习影响的元分析综述

廷吉尔等人。(2017) 从他们的元分析中得出结论，通过移动设备教授的学科领域的成绩得分明显更高 ( d = 0.48) 比用传统教学方法教授的那些。鉴于移动设备对学生成绩的相对较高的积极影响，我们仔细分析了本荟萃分析中选定的研究。我们回顾了 Tingir 等人（2017 年）基于对所选研究的方法论进行分析的荟萃分析，同时借鉴了 Slavin（2003 年）、Cheung 和 Slavin（2016 年）以及 Sung 等人的工作。(2019)。Tingir 及其团队（2017 年）进行的荟萃分析中包含的 14 项研究中有 12 项（86%）存在不应该被包含在内的重大方法学缺陷。我们的分析使我们相信 Tingir 等人的结论。(2017) 是不合理的。众所周知，实验持续时间与效果大小呈负相关：持续时间越短，效果越高（Burston，2015；Slavin & 湖，2009 年）。尽管需要更多的努力，但教育领域必须提高标准，才能获得具有可接受价值的知识。