Undergraduates taught seasons with immersive planetarium visualizations show larger quiz gains (ES=0.696 Cont-Pre; ES=0.741 Post-Pre) than peers taught with the same visualizations on a flat classroom screen or with no visualizations¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1–r2 · q2 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i2 Group III students viewing immersive planetarium visualizations had larger contemporaneous and post-instruction gains than Group I (no visualizations) and Group II (classroom projection) students. → Yu et al. 2015 q2 i? The Group III Cont-Pre confidence interval does not overlap with Group I or II CIs, permitting rejection of the null at p<0.01. → Yu et al. 2015 (2)

Evidence¶

Yu et al. 2015¶

Ka Chun Yu, Kamran Sahami, Victoria Sahami, Larry C. Sessions. (2015). Using A Digital Planetarium For Teaching Seasons To Undergraduates. Journal of Astronomy & Earth Sciences Education, 2(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1101071

q2 · i2 · causal · r2

Quasi-experimental comparison of 17 AST1040 classes in three groups; Table 2 reports Group III mean gains of 17.4% (Cont-Pre) and 20.9% (Post-Pre) versus smaller gains for Groups I and II, expressed as "ES=0.696 for Cont-Pre; ES=0.741 for Post-Pre gains".

"The value of immersive visualizations is evident since the Group III gains ( ES=0.696 for Cont-Pre; ES=0.741 for Post-Pre gains) are larger than comparable gains in Groups I ( ES=0.174; ES=0.556) and II (ES=0.270; ES=0.125)."

Yu et al. 2015 (2)¶

Ka Chun Yu, Kamran Sahami, Victoria Sahami, Larry C. Sessions. (2015). Using A Digital Planetarium For Teaching Seasons To Undergraduates. Journal of Astronomy & Earth Sciences Education, 2(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1101071

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Figure 3 plots Cont-Pre gains with 95% confidence intervals; the authors report non-overlap of the Group III CI with Groups I and II, giving "p<0.01" under the stated null hypothesis. No effect size beyond the printed ES values is given for this contrast.

"From Figure 3, the Group III CI does not overlap with either the Group I or II CIs, meaning that p<0.01 when considering the null hypothesis that either the Group I or II mean is outside the Group III CI"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Non-immersive classroom visualization shows no significant contemporaneous-gain advantage over no visualizations, and its Post-Pre advantage reverses relative to the control group — related
• The planetarium group's Post-Pre gain advantage is robust against the classroom group but not against the small-n control group, whose wide confidence interval encompasses the planetarium CI — related