Claims

Learning the Solar System with PhET simulation produced significantly higher normalized-gain improvement in conceptual understanding than learning with PowerPoint slides

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · 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 experimental group using PhET 'Gravity and Orbits' achieved an average N-gain of 0.60 versus 0.42 for the PowerPoint control group, a significant difference by Mann-Whitney test (Asymp.Sig. 2-tailed = .038). → Prima 2018

Evidence

Prima 2018

Prima, E. C., Putri, A. R., & Rustaman, N. (2018). Learning Solar System using PhET Simulation to Improve Students' Understanding and Motivation. Journal of Science Learning, 1(2), 60-70. https://jurnal.uns.ac.id/science-learning

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Quasi-experiment with matching pretest-posttest design; two classes of 8th graders (n=42 total, 21 per group analyzed) at a private junior high school in Padalarang. The article reports "Asymp.Sig. (2-tailed ) is .038", so the difference in N-gain between groups is significant; no effect size is printed for the test.

"Based on to Table 6. the result showed that Asymp.Sig. (2-tailed ) is .038. It can be concluded Ha accepted for Mann-Whitney test because of Asymp.Sig. (2-tailed ) is 0.038 ൑ probability 0.05."

Discussion

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.