Claims

Using a module containing critical thinking aspects produces significantly higher academic achievement than the commonly used school module in 8th-grade human circulatory system learning

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2020 · 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.

q3 i? Students taught with the CTa module scored significantly higher on the post-test than students taught with the commonly used module (F=90.562; p-value < 0.05). → Wicaksana 2020

Evidence

Wicaksana 2020

Wicaksana, Y. D., Widoretno, S., & Dwiastuti, S. (2020). The Use of Critical Thinking Aspects on Module to Enhance Students’ Academic Achievement. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2), 303-314. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13221a

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Quasi-experimental pre-test/post-test non-equivalent control group study at SMP PGRI 15 Sukolilo with 27 students per group; ANCOVA with pre-test as covariate showed the groups' post-test achievement were "significantly different (F=90.562; p-value < 0.05)".

"ANCOVA test results showed that students’ academic achievement of experimental and control groups are significantly different (F=90.562; p-value < 0.05)."

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.