Claims

Students taught with the animation model significantly outperformed traditionally taught control students on the ATP generation post-test

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · checked against its sources 2026-11-01 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? The experimental (animation) group scored significantly higher than the control (traditional instruction) group on the post achievement test, F(1/118) = 323.42, p < 0.01. → Jena 2015

Evidence

Jena 2015

Jena, A. K. (2015). Animation model to conceptualize ATP generation: A mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 3(1), 61-76. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1107841

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Univariate Analysis of Variance comparing post achievement test scores of the control group (n = 20, traditional instruction) and experimental group (n = 40, animation-cum-discussion instruction) in a non-equivalent quasi-experimental design. The article reports F(1/118) = 323.42, p < 0.01, with means 12.51±2.58 versus 25.62±2.79; no standardized effect size is printed.

"there existed significant difference between the performance of the control group (M = 12.51±2.58) and the experimental group (M =25. 62±2.79). The F (1/ 118) 323.42 P < 0.01 was significant and there existed significant difference between control group and experimental on their achievement on ATP generation"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.