Experimental-group post-test descriptive scores on conceptual understanding exceeded control-group scores¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The experimental group's mean conceptual understanding score (21,291) was higher than the control group's (15,647), with similar standard deviations (4,161 vs 4,203). → Suarsana 2018

Evidence¶

Suarsana 2018¶

Suarsana, I.M., Widiasih, N.P.S., & Suparta, I.N. (2018). The effect of brain based learning on second grade junior students’ mathematics conceptual understanding on polyhedron. Journal on Mathematics Education, 9(1), 145-156. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1173645

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Descriptive analysis of post-test scores in the same quasi-experiment (Table 1): experiment N = 48, mean 21,291; control N = 51, mean 15,647. These are descriptive statistics; the article reports no standardized effect size.

"the average score of students’ mathematics conceptual understandingof experimental group is higher than students’ in control group. Standard deviations for experiment group is 4,161 and for the control group is 4,203"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The hybrid approach produced a significant advantage in the problem-solving domain but not in the conceptual-understanding domain — related
• SimCalc treatment effects were not sensitive to school socioeconomic status or percentage of Hispanic students, and 91% of 7th-grade treatment classrooms exceeded the control-group mean gain — related
• Propensity score analysis estimated a Texas generalizability index of 0.91, and post-stratification yielded a population average treatment effect of 1.47 versus a conventional estimate of 1.44 — related
• Experimental-group students scored significantly higher than control students on the open-ended physics questionnaire — related