Claims

Open-ended responses on representational visuals differed by group, with treatment teachers more likely to see both pros and cons

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · 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? The distribution of coded open-ended responses about whether context pictures help students differed between control and treatment teachers, χ2(2, N = 38) = 10.47, p < .01. → Clinton 2015 q2 i? 45% of treatment teachers expressed both pros and cons of representational visuals versus 17% of control teachers, while 72% of control teachers viewed them as uniformly helpful versus 20% of treatment teachers. → Clinton 2015

Evidence

Clinton 2015

Clinton, V. & Cooper, J.L. (2015, April). Teacher Viewpoints of Instructional Design Principles for Visuals in a Middle School Math Curriculum. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED574965

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Open-ended survey question coded into yes, maybe/depends, and no categories for control and treatment teachers. The article prints χ2(2, N = 38) = 10.47, p < .01 and the cited percentages; no effect size reported.

"the distribution of teacher responses across categories differed for control and treatment teachers, χ2(2, N = 38) = 10.47, p < .01). Among the treatment teachers, 45% expressed both pros and cons of visuals in their responses (compared to only 17% of control teachers)"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.