The embedded design and applied experience groups did not differ significantly on the pretest of pedagogical content knowledge¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? An omnibus two-factor ANOVA on pretest means found no statistically significant difference between conditions (F(1,38) = .225, p = .63). → Lancaster 2019

Evidence¶

Lancaster 2019¶

Lancaster, J., & Bain, A. (2019). Designing University Courses to Improve Pre-Service Teachers' Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Evidence-Based Inclusive Practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44(2). https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol44/iss2/4

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Pretest equivalence check in the 40-participant quasi-experiment; participants were matched on age, prior exposure to students with disabilities, and grade point average. Pretest means were 4.00 (applied experience) and 3.75 (embedded design). No statistically significant difference; equivalence was not otherwise tested.

"An omnibus two-factor Analysis of Variance using pre-test means for the cumulative mastery test (repeated measures factor) and condition (between factor) revealed no statistically significant differences on the pretest (F) 1, 38= .225 p= .63)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Pre-service teachers in an embedded-design inclusive education course recorded significantly higher pedagogical content knowledge posttest scores than peers in an applied-experience condition — related
• Embedded design quiz performance exceeded the 80% mastery threshold on all three quizzes while applied experience quiz scores ranged from 34-80% — related
• Adding eleven hours of in-situ applied experience to the course did not increase pedagogical content knowledge achievement over the embedded design course alone — related
• Before the intervention, the experimental and control groups did not differ significantly in self-efficacy toward science education