Claims

Case-based learning yielded the highest attitude mean score, significantly above conventional teaching, but the 7E-versus-CBL attitude difference was not significant

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · 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? Case-based learning (69.21) and 7E learning cycle (68.87) each differed significantly from conventional teaching (68.54) on attitude at p < .05. → Adesoji 2015 q2 i? The attitudinal difference between the 7E group (68.87) and the case-based group (69.21) was not significant. → Adesoji 2015 (2)

Evidence

Adesoji 2015

Adesoji, F. A., & Idika, M. I. (2015). Effects of 7E learning cycle model and case-based learning strategy on secondary school students' learning outcomes in chemistry. Journal of International Society for Teacher Education, 19(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1177065

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Scheffé post-hoc tests of attitude by treatment; the article reports the case-based group (69.21) also differed significantly from the conventional group (68.54), and both experimental pairs contributed to the significant treatment effect.

"Table 7 shows a significant difference in the students' attitude scores in 7E learning cycle model strategy (x = 68.87) and conventional te aching strategy (x = 68.54)."

Adesoji 2015 (2)

Adesoji, F. A., & Idika, M. I. (2015). Effects of 7E learning cycle model and case-based learning strategy on secondary school students' learning outcomes in chemistry. Journal of International Society for Teacher Education, 19(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1177065

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Post-hoc analysis of attitude scores found the 7E-versus-case-based pair not significant; the article states this pair "did no t contribute to the significant effect of treatment obtained in Table 7." Equivalence was not tested.

"On the other hand, the attitudinal change between the 7E learning cycle model group (x = 68.87) and case -based learning group (x = 69.21) is not significant."

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.