Claims

Upper basic students taught Basic Technology practical skills via field trip scored higher on a post-test than students taught by expository method

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2013 · 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? Students taught using field trip had a higher post-test mean score (45.040) than students taught using the expository method (35.240). → Amosa 2013 (2) q2 i? The ANCOVA comparison of experimental and control groups led the authors to reject the null hypothesis of no difference. → Amosa 2013 (2)

Evidence

Amosa 2013

Amosa, A. G. A., Ogunlade, O. O., & Atobatele, A. S. (2013). Effect of Field Trip on Students' Academic Performance in Basic Technology in Ilorin Metropolis, Nigeria. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 3(2). https://www.mojet.net

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Quasi-experimental, non-equivalent pre-test post-test control group study of 50 upper basic students in two Ilorin schools, randomly assigned to field trip (n=25) or expository (n=25) groups. Descriptive post-test means show "The mean score (45.040) of the students taught using field trip was higher" than the control mean of 35.240.

"The mean score (45.040) of the students taught using field trip was higher than the mean score (35.240) of the students taught using expository method."

Amosa 2013 (2)

Amosa, A. G. A., Ogunlade, O. O., & Atobatele, A. S. (2013). Effect of Field Trip on Students' Academic Performance in Basic Technology in Ilorin Metropolis, Nigeria. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 3(2). https://www.mojet.net

q2 · i? · causal · r1

ANCOVA on post-test scores of the experimental and control groups, as reported in Table 3 of the Results section. The article reports the value produced and rejects hypothesis one, though the printed F and significance figures are presented in an unconventional format.

"From Table 3, it is shown that at 0.05 significant levels, the value produced F = (2,22)3.440 >0.109."

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.