Claims

Modified Moore learning approach and conventional teaching produced no significant difference in undergraduate mathematical understanding or proving ability in advanced abstract algebra

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2011 · 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? There was no difference between MLA and conventional classes in mathematical understanding ability (F = 0.548, Sig. 0.462) or mathematical proving ability (F = 0.086, Sig. 0.771). → Maya and Sumarmo 2011 q2 i? Within low and medium prior-ability subgroups there were likewise no differences between the two classes on either ability. → Maya and Sumarmo 2011

Evidence

Maya and Sumarmo 2011

Rippi Maya, Utari Sumarmo. (2011). Mathematical Understanding and Proving Abilities: Experiment With Undergraduate Student By Using Modified Moore Learning Approach. IndoMS. J.M.E, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 231-250. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1078509

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Post-test experimental control group study of 56 undergraduates in Advanced Structure Algebra; two path ANOVA on understanding and proving test scores. MUA means were 65.65 (MLA) vs 68.77 (CNV); MPA 56.35 vs 55.17; both null hypotheses accepted. Equivalence was not tested.

"However according to the result of two path ANOVA in Table 3 , there was no difference between students’ MUA of MLA class and of CNV class. Similar findings of students’ MPA namely there was no difference of students’ MPA as well"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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