Claims

Post-test van Hiele levels did not differ significantly between the Geometer's Sketchpad group and the traditional instruction group on any angle concept

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2013 · 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? Independent samples t-tests found no significant difference between experimental and control groups on posttest 1 (p = .94), posttest 2 (p = .49), or posttest 3 (p = 0.33). → Poh Geik Tieng & Leong Kwan Eu 2013

Evidence

Poh Geik Tieng & Leong Kwan Eu 2013

Poh Geik Tieng & Leong Kwan Eu. (2013). Improving Students' Van Hiele Level Of Geometric Thinking Using Geometer's Sketchpad. The Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 2(3). www.mojet.net. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1086363

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Independent samples t-tests comparing groups after intervention (n = 16 experimental, n = 15 control). Posttest 3: t(14) = 1.00, p = 0.33, effect size 0.07; posttest 1: t(29) = -0.08, p = .94; posttest 2: t(29) = 0.70, p = .49. No effect sizes above small were reported.

"the mean van Hiele level of geometric thinking of the students in the experimental group (M = 2.00, SD = 0.00) was not significantly different than the mean van Hiele's level of geometric thinking of the students in the control group (M = 1.93, SD = 0.26), t (14) = 1.00, p = 0.33"

Discussion

Learner Variables

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.