Claims

No significant gender difference in achievement among students taught with interactive whiteboard

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · 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? Male and female students taught with IWB did not differ significantly in posttest achievement. → Gambari 2014

Evidence

Gambari 2014

Gambari, I. A., Balogun, S. A., & Alfa, A. S. (2014). Efficacy of Interactive Whiteboard on Psychomotor Skills Achievement of Students in Isometric and Orthographic Projection. Contemporary Educational Technology, 5(4), 316-330. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1105500

q2 · i? · causal · r2

ANCOVA of posttest scores for male and female students in the IWB group (n = 39). The gender main effect was not significant, "F (1, 42) = 1.697, p = > .05". Female students' mean gain (44.22) slightly exceeded males' (43.05).

"Table 5 shows that, main effect of treatment group (IWB) on gender produced an F (1, 42) = 1.697, p = > .05. This result was not significant at the 0.05 alpha level. This indicates no significant difference in the performance of male and female students exposed to IWB."

Discussion

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.