Expert panels and 31 experienced physics teachers rated the software favourably, with reliability of Cronbach's alpha .843 across 24 items¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2014 · 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? Nine experts (three each for technique, content, pedagogy) gave assessments with Cronbach's alpha .843 (.846 standardized) over 24 items. → Mohd. Jasmy Abd Rahman 2014
q2 i? Expert users (N = 31) rated all aspects around 4 on the rating scale, total mean 3.95. → Mohd. Jasmy Abd Rahman 2014 (2)
Evidence¶
Mohd. Jasmy Abd Rahman 2014¶
Mohd. Jasmy Abd Rahman, Mohd. Arif. Hj. Ismail & Muhammad Nasir. (2014). Development and Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Computer-Assisted Physics Instruction. International Education Studies, 7(13). https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n13p14
q2 · i? · design · r2
Expert evaluation during development: three experts from each of technique, content and pedagogy fields (9 evaluators) assessed the software; Cronbach's alpha .843, .846 based on standardized items, 24 items.
"Table 1. Assessment schedule of technical, pedagogical, and contentexperts upon interactive multimedia “motion and vector analysis Cronbach’s Alpha Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Items N of Items .843 .846 24"
Mohd. Jasmy Abd Rahman 2014 (2)¶
Mohd. Jasmy Abd Rahman, Mohd. Arif. Hj. Ismail & Muhammad Nasir. (2014). Development and Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Computer-Assisted Physics Instruction. International Education Studies, 7(13). https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n13p14
q2 · i? · causal · r2
Thirty-one experienced physics teachers (at least five years' experience) rated the software; design mean 4.03, pedagogic 3.97, content 3.76, technical 4.02, total 3.95 (SD 0.40).
"Table 4. Assessment done by expert users as a whole (N = 31) Aspects Questions Min Standard Deviation Design 1-10 4.03 0.52 Pedagogic 11-20 3.97 0.62 Content 21-30 3.76 0.64 Technical 31-38 4.02 0.66 Total -38 3.95 0.40"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The AEEGS software demonstrated internal consistency of Cronbach alpha 0.86 in trial testing and was validated for face and content validity by three software experts — related
- AEEGS scores show high absolute agreement with 12 human expert raters' scores on mathematical Economics essay items (average-measures ICC = 0.863) — related
- The basic science process skills test used showed a Cronbach's Alpha of 0.876 across 10 items — related
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.