No statistically significant difference in calculus achievement was found among students by major (medicine, applied medical science, engineering, computer science, science)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The ANCOVA major factor was not significant, and the article states only 2% of the effect was accounted for by major. → Albalawi 2018

Evidence¶

Albalawi 2018¶

Albalawi, A.S. (2018). The effect of using flipped classroom in teaching calculus on students‟ achievement at University of Tabuk. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 4(1), 198-207. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.383137

q2 · i? · causal · r2

One-way ANCOVA on the same 92-student quasi-experiment tested the students‟ majors factor (five colleges). Table 5 prints Major F = 0.389, Sig. 0.816, Partial Eta Squared 0.019; the article reports "only 2% of the effect was accounted for by the major."

"Table 5 shows that no sig nificant difference among their performance was related to their majors. Moreover, only 2% of the effect was accounted for by the major."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The Group by Major interaction on calculus achievement was not statistically significant — related
• Senior high school majors' background affects calculus conceptual understanding and self-efficacy, with no method-by-major interaction — related
• Flipped classroom instruction produced significantly higher calculus achievement than traditional instruction in a quasi-experiment at University of Tabuk — related
• Flipped classrooms benefit students in STEM subjects such as chemistry, engineering, mathematics, and physics less than students in other subjects — related