Claims

The experimental and control groups did not differ significantly on the pre test

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · 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? Pre-test scores were statistically equivalent across groups, supporting comparability at baseline. → Rina Oktaviyanthi 2015

Evidence

Rina Oktaviyanthi 2015

Rina Oktaviyanthi, Yani Supriani. (2015). Experimental Design: Utilizing Microsoft Mathematics in Teaching and Learning Calculus. Journal of Education and Practice, Vol.6, No.25. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1078520

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Descriptive comparison of pre-test scores (experimental mean 74.3182, control mean 72.5455, n = 11 per group) with Shapiro-Wilk normality checks; the article reports no significant differences and no effect size. Equivalence was not formally tested.

"According to Table5 above, there are no significant differences from two groups in pre test results. I t means that the level of students in two groups gene rally is the equal."

Discussion

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.