## Data Analysis
### Questionnaire 2: Impact of Developed System on Student Assignments  
The effects of the developed system on student assignments grade were also measured. DE students in the field of information technology were divided into two groups. The same software assignments were given to both groups for 5 weeks in web programming. While the first group created all the assignments for the traditional DE approach, the second group created all the assignments through the new laboratory system. To read all the assignments belonging to both groups, information technology and engineering staff in charge of teaching were determined. To read all the assignments belonging to both groups, independent information technology, and engineering staff were determined. All assignments from students were randomly mixed and read by independent instructors. Independent lecturers were asked to evaluate all assignments over 100 points. Besides, Group 1 students traditionally attended 2 h of weekly laboratory lessons, but Group 2 students spent 27.89% more time in the online laboratory system than Group 1 students. The average of all grades belonging to the groups is shown in Table 3 for each week.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Variable** & **Variable Levels** & **N** & **Percentage (\%)** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Age} & 16–26 & 53 & 61.62 \\  & 27–37 & 27 & 31.41 \\  & 38–48 & 4 & 4.67 \\  & 49 and over & 2 & 2.32 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Gender} & Male & 78 & 90.69 \\  & Female & 8 & 9.30 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Income rate} & TRY 750 and less & 14 & 16.27 \\  & TRY 751–TRY 1500 & 32 & 37.20 \\ \cline{1-1}  & TRY 1501–TRY 2250 & 23 & 26.74 \\ \cline{1-1}  & TRY 2251–TRY 3000 & 12 & 13.95 \\ \cline{1-1}  & TRY 3000 and over & 5 & 5.81 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Professional experience} & 1–3 years & 68 & 79.06 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 4–6 years & 14 & 16.27 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 7 year and over & 4 & 4.65 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Demographic information of the attendances.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Week** & **Assignment** & **Subject** & **Group 1 (N = 43)** & **Group 2 (N = 43)** \\ \hline
1 & 1 & HTML. Basics & 67.41 & 65.54 \\
2 & 2 & CSS Basics & 72.23 & 74.69 \\
3 & 3 & Javascript & 71.78 & 79.23 \\  & & Fundamentals & & \\
4 & 4 & C\#.NET Basic Web & 64.12 & 80.49 \\  & & Components & & \\
5 & Final assignment & Designing a Static & 69.71 & 82.60 \\  & & Web Page & & \\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{Mean} & 69.05 & 76.51 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Group and week based results of software assignments.  
The subjects that students will learn within the scope of the determined course each week were determined in advance in the curriculum. Table 3 contains the topics covered in the course each week. Each week after the lesson, the instructor defined an assignment for the students. Group 1 was asked to complete the homework in the laboratory hour of the lesson, as in the classical education teaching model. However, the students in Group 2 completed their assignment using the newly developed system. Assignments were evaluated by a different professor weekly, but the results were collectively explained to the students at the end of the 5 th week.  
As seen in Table 3, there is a difference of 12.89 (18.49%) between final assignments and 16.46 (10.80%) by the average of all weeks. It was found that the group that the system was applied to performed more successfully than the weekly and the final assignment. The graph for the better evaluation and observation of the separately obtained values is shown in Figure 5.