Non-immersive classroom visualization shows no significant contemporaneous-gain advantage over no visualizations, and its Post-Pre advantage reverses relative to the control group¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1–r2 · q2 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Group II Cont-Pre gains (6.7%) did not differ significantly from Group I gains (4.4%); the 95% CIs overlap, p>0.05. → Yu et al. 2015 q2 i1 In Post-Pre results the Group II effect size dropped to ES=0.125 while the control Group I rose to ES=0.556. → Yu et al. 2015 (2)

Evidence¶

Yu et al. 2015¶

Ka Chun Yu, Kamran Sahami, Victoria Sahami, Larry C. Sessions. (2015). Using A Digital Planetarium For Teaching Seasons To Undergraduates. Journal of Astronomy & Earth Sciences Education, 2(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1101071

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Figure 3-based inference from the quasi-experiment: overlapping 95% CIs for Group II versus Group I Cont-Pre gains mean the null cannot be rejected at the .05 level; equivalence was not tested.

"Although the Group II Cont-Pre gains was 6.7% versus 4.4% for Group I, the 95% CIs for the two groups overlap, meaning p>0.05 when considering the null hypothesis that the Group II mean is within the Group I CI, and vice versa."

Yu et al. 2015 (2)¶

Ka Chun Yu, Kamran Sahami, Victoria Sahami, Larry C. Sessions. (2015). Using A Digital Planetarium For Teaching Seasons To Undergraduates. Journal of Astronomy & Earth Sciences Education, 2(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1101071

q2 · i1 · causal · r1

Post-Pre results from Table 2: the classroom-visualization group's small effect (ES=0.125) fell below the control group's modest effect (ES=0.556), reversing its contemporaneous advantage.

"Students in the control classes have learning gains with a modest ES=0.556, while the Group II students have dropped to a small ES=0.125."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Undergraduates taught seasons with immersive planetarium visualizations show larger quiz gains (ES=0.696 Cont-Pre; ES=0.741 Post-Pre) than peers taught with the same visualizations on a flat classroom screen or with no visualizations — related
• Increased perceptual fidelity fails to reliably improve serious game learning outcomes (the fidelity fallacy) — a broader claim this one bears on
• Immersion principle: people do not necessarily learn better in 3D immersive virtual reality than with a corresponding 2D desktop presentation (d = -0.10 across 9 tests) — a broader claim this one bears on
• The planetarium group's Post-Pre gain advantage is robust against the classroom group but not against the small-n control group, whose wide confidence interval encompasses the planetarium CI — related