Initial physics ability differed between the two experimental groups before treatment¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · 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? Pre-test results showed that 80% of group 1 and 66.67% of group 2 students were in the fail category, indicating a difference in initial ability between the two classes. → Wenno et al. 2016
Evidence¶
Wenno et al. 2016¶
Izaak Hendrik Wenno, Pieter Wattimena, Luky Maspaitela. (2016). Comparative Study between Drill Skill and Concept Attainment Model towards Physics Learning Achievement. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), Vol.5, No.3. http://iaesjournal.com/online/index.php/IJERE
q2 · i? · causal · r1
Pre-test data collected before the learning process showed group 1 at 80% fail and group 2 at 66.67% fail categorization. The authors state these results "indicate that there is difference initial ability between two classes".
"These results indicate that there is difference initial ability between two classes."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Concept attainment model did not show significant influence on student learning achievement compared to drill skill model — related
- Drill skill model produces higher physics learning achievement than concept attainment model in Indonesian junior high school students — related
- Experimental and control classes had equivalent pretest narrative writing scores before treatment — related
- Experimental and control classes were equivalent in mathematical analogical ability before treatment — related
- Before treatment, the Logo and control groups showed no statistically significant difference in achievement on two-dimensional shapes — related
- High school students using the Every Circuit virtual module scored higher on the post-quiz than the paper-based control group after starting with nearly identical pre-quiz scores — related
- The experimental and control classes did not differ significantly on the listening pre-test — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.