No significant difference in solid geometry achievement between animation-with-narration and animation-with-text CAI groups¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The Scheffe post-hoc test found no significant difference between the AT (mean 65.38) and AN (mean 73.80) groups. → Gambari 2014

Evidence¶

Gambari 2014¶

Gambari, I. A., Ezenwa, V. I., & Anyanwu, R. C. (2014). Comparative Effects of Two Modes of Computer-Assisted Instructional Package on Solid Geometry Achievement. Contemporary Educational Technology, 5(2), 110-120. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1105561

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Scheffe post-hoc analysis of the same 120-student pretest-posttest experiment compared the two CAI modes; the printed means were 65.38 (AT) and 73.80 (AN) with no significant difference between them. Equivalence was not tested.

"there was no significant difference in the mean achievement scores of students exposed to AT (X = 65.38) and those exposed to AN (X = 73.80)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Animation-with-narration CAI produced significantly higher solid geometry achievement than lecture method among senior secondary students — related
• Animation-with-text CAI did not significantly outperform lecture method on solid geometry achievement — related
• Experimental and control groups were statistically equivalent on solid geometry achievement before treatment — related
• Video with concurrent narration and on-screen text yields higher immediate macrostructure comprehension than text alone or narration with text — related