Gender has no significant influence on mean achievement scores of students taught light and sound waves using guided inquiry teaching method¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · 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? There is no significant difference in the mean achievement scores of male and female students taught light and sound waves using GITM, F(1,48) = 0.656, P = 0.413. → Ekomaye 2019
q2 i? Male and female students in the experimental group performed almost equally at post-test (75.19 vs 74.52). → Ekomaye 2019 (2)
Evidence¶
Ekomaye 2019¶
Ekomaye, D. G. (2019). Effect of Guided Inquiry Teaching Method on Secondary School Students’ Achievement in Light and Sound Waves in Abuja, Nigeria. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, 6(2), 82-87. doi:10.20448/journal.509.2019.62.82.87
q2 · i? · causal · r2
ANCOVA of post-test LASWAT scores by gender within the experimental group (male N = 25, female N = 23), covariate pre-test. The article reports F(1,48) = 0.656, P = 0.413 > 0.05, so H02 was not rejected; no effect size is printed.
"Table 5 shows that there is no significant difference in the mean achievement scores of male and female students taught light and sound waves using GITM. This is evidenced in the calculated F -value of 0.656 and with probability value of 0.413"
Ekomaye 2019 (2)¶
Ekomaye, D. G. (2019). Effect of Guided Inquiry Teaching Method on Secondary School Students’ Achievement in Light and Sound Waves in Abuja, Nigeria. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, 6(2), 82-87. doi:10.20448/journal.509.2019.62.82.87
q2 · i? · causal · r2
Descriptive results in Table 4 for the experimental group: male post-test mean 75.19 (SD 10.200) versus female 74.52 (SD 11.156); the article states "both male and female students performed almost equal at post-test when exposed to GITM".
"However at post -test, male students in the experimental group had a mean score of 75.19 with a mean gain of 54.77 while female students in the same experimental group had a mean score of 74.52 with a mean gain of 55.74."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Students taught light and sound waves with guided inquiry teaching method scored significantly higher at post-test than students taught with the conventional method — related
- Male and female students differ significantly in application of Light waves, favouring males — related
- Male and female students show no significant difference in understanding of Light waves — related
- Descriptively, male students outperformed female students at all three levels of Light waves overall — related
- Method-by-gender interaction is significant only for application of Light waves, not for understanding or analysis — related
- Male students taught with the Target-Task Model significantly outperformed female students on the PTCE — 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.