Claims

Seventh-grade students taught science with an educational modules strategy significantly outperform conventionally taught students on the direct (immediate) achievement test

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2012 · 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? At á ≤ 0.05, direct post-test achievement differed significantly by teaching method in favor of the modules group (experimental mean 38.38 vs control 31.89). → Alelaimat and Ghoneem 2012

Evidence

Alelaimat and Ghoneem 2012

Abeer Rashed Alelaimat, Khowla Abd Al_Raheem Ghoneem. (2012). The Effect of Educational Modules Strategy on the Direct and Postponed Study's Achievement of Seventh Primary Grade Students in Science, in Comparison with the Conventional Approach. Higher Education Studies, Vol. 2, No. 2. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v2n2p40

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Semi-experimental two-group study (experimental n=87, control n=87 as printed in the sample section) with ANCOVA on the direct post-test after a three-week, 12-period intervention; the article reports the modules group mean exceeded the control mean by 6.5 marks, a statistically significant difference. The quote states the experimental group "is (38.38) which is higher than the average of the control group".

"the average of the experimental group working with module approach is (38.38) which is higher than the average of the control group by (6.5 degree) this difference is of statistic significance"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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