Claims

In a static group comparison, classes taught with the media achieved higher geometry scores than control classes

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · checked against its sources 2026-11-01 (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? The experiment classes (mean 67.63, 57 students) scored significantly higher than the control classes (mean 63.22, 59 students) on the geometry test. → Nurwijayanti 2019

Evidence

Nurwijayanti 2019

Nurwijayanti, A., Budiyono, & Fitriana, L. (2019). Combining Google SketchUp and Ispring Suite 8: A breakthrough to develop geometry learning media. Journal on Mathematics Education, 10(1), 103-116. https://jme.ejournal.uns.ac.id/index.php/jme

q2 · i? · design · r3

Product-trials effectiveness test using a static group comparison design with four classes from two schools selected by stratified cluster random sampling. After normality and homogeneity tests, the t-test rejected the null hypothesis and the media group had better achievement.

"The average score of experiment class was 67.63 and control class was 63.22."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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