Males significantly favored writing interactive stories over traditional stories at school, while females showed no significant difference.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2010 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? A significant difference for males (p = .031) favoring interactive stories, but no significant difference for females (p = .388). → Carbonaro 2008

Evidence¶

Carbonaro 2008¶

Carbonaro, M., Szafron, D., Cutumisu, M., & Schaeffer, J. (2010). Computer-game construction: A gender-neutral attractor to Computing Science. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1098–1111. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.007

q2 · i? · design · r2

A follow-up McNemar analysis by gender found "no significant difference for females, χ2 (1, 23) = .006, p = .388, but a significant difference, χ2 (1, N = 26) = 2.006, p = .031, for the males".

"A subsequent analysis of more-traditional-in-school versus more-interactive-in-school by gender reveals no significant difference for females, χ2 (1, 23) = .006, p = .388, but a significant difference, χ2 (1, N = 26) = 2.006, p = .031, for the males."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Gender — moderator: an instructional effect differs by group

Related Claims¶

• Students enjoyed interactive game adventure writing significantly more than traditional story writing, with no significant gender difference. — reports the opposite
• 63.3% of students would like to write more interactive stories in school versus 34.0% for traditional stories, a significant difference. — related
• Achievement gains from pictorial-story instruction showed no significant differences due to gender or the group-by-gender interaction — related