After adjusting for pre-test critical thinking scores, the modeling based program produced no statistically significant difference between experimental and control groups' post-test critical thinking scores¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? ANCOVA with pre-test as covariate found no significant post-test difference between experimental and control groups (F = 3.332, p = .071, π2 = 0.029). → Bati 2015

Evidence¶

Bati 2015¶

Bati, K. & Kaptan, F. (2015). The Effect of Modeling Based Science Education on Critical Thinking. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 10(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1127622

q3 · i? · causal · r2

ANCOVA on post-test CCT-X scores of the experimental (n=60) and control (n=54) groups with pre-test scores as covariate, in the four-group quasi-experimental design. Corrected means were 36.48 (experimental) and 35.02 (control); the article prints π 2 = 0,029 and concludes the program "did not bring about a significant difference".

"Table 12 shows that there was not a significant difference between groups' post -test mean scores when they were adjusted for pre -test scores (F 1.111 = 3.332, p = .071 , π 2 = 0,029)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Critical Thinking — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• ANCOVA of post-test scores covarying pre-test scores confirms the ITS group outperformed the face-to-face group — related
• Post-test environmental attitudes did not differ significantly between experimental and control groups in the ANCOVA — related
• Within the experimental group, the modeling based science education program was followed by a statistically significant increase in critical thinking scores from pre-test to post-test — related