A meta-analysis of 103 JAS studies reports the approach's effectiveness in 97% of researches¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · checked against its sources 2026-10-31 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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? Across the analyzed studies, 97% were judged to show the JAS approach's effectiveness. → S. Ngabekti 2017
Evidence¶
S. Ngabekti 2017¶
S. Ngabekti, S. Ridlo, E. Peniati, R. Martanto. (2017). META-ANALYSIS OF JELAJAH ALAM SEKITAR (JAS) APPROACH IMPLEMENTATION IN LEARNING PROCESS. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v6i1.8490
q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r1
Descriptive exploratory meta-analysis of thesis and faculty research from 2006 to 2016, with effectiveness coded into six indicators and percentages of same findings calculated across studies (n=103 in Table 1). The article reports "the effectiveness of JAS approach as many as 97%".
"Overall, the meta-analysis result shows the effectiveness of JAS approach as many as 97%."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- JAS most frequently optimizes study results (52.83%) and student activity (40.57%) — related
- Studies report experiment classes using JAS achieve higher average study results than control classes — related
- No publication bias is detected in the meta-analysis by rank correlation, regression, Fail-Safe N, and Trim and Fill checks — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.