Claims

Integrated STEM education and constructivist teaching did not differ significantly on one-year permanence of reflective thinking skills towards problem solving

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · 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? On the RTSSPS permanence test one year later, the integrated STEM group averaged 55.45 versus 52.27 for the control group, with no significant difference (p = 0.310). → Sarican 2018

Evidence

Sarican 2018

Sarican, G., Akgunduz, D. (2018). The impact of integrated STEM education on academic achievement, reflective thinking skills towards problem solving and permanence in learning in science education. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 13(1), 94-113. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1196043

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Independent t-test on RTSSPS permanence-test scores in the 44-student quasi-experiment: t = −1.028, p = 0.310. The article notes the experimental group's RTSSPS PT mean (55.45) was higher than the control group's (52.27) but not significantly.

"However, no significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of the RTSSPS PT score (p > 0.05)."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.