No significant interaction between learning method and initial ability category on mathematical analogical gain¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The Learning * Students' Skill interaction was not significant (p = .701), so the discovery-learning advantage held across ability categories. → Maarif 2016

Evidence¶

Maarif 2016¶

Maarif, S. (2016). Improving junior high school students' mathematical analogical ability using discovery learning method. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 2(1), 114-124. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1105169

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Two-way ANOVA (Table 4) on normalized gain for the 72-student study: the interaction sum of squares was .019 with F = .357 and p = .701, leading the author to accept H0 (no interaction).

"Learning * Students’ Skill .019 2 .009 .357 .701 Terima H0"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Discovery learning produces significantly greater improvement in junior high students' mathematical analogical ability than expository teaching — related
• Improvement in mathematical analogical ability differs significantly by students' initial ability category, with higher initial ability associated with higher gain — related
• There is no interaction between learning approach (SSML vs CL) and mathematical prior knowledge (upper, middle, low) on enhancement of MPSA — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• The SSML advantage in MPSA enhancement is significant for middle-MPK students but not for upper- and low-MPK students — reports the opposite