Claims

Experimental group students held positive views about Roundhouse Diagrams, though about a quarter reported difficulty writing in their own words and being creative

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2014 · 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? 93.75% of the questionnaire mean scores fell in the Always/Usually range, indicating positive views; 69.6% enjoyed studying with the diagram, but 26.1% reported difficulty writing information in their own words and using their creativity. → Kocakaya and Gönen 2014

Evidence

Kocakaya and Gönen 2014

F. Kocakaya, S. Gönen. (2014). Influence of Computer-Assisted Roundhouse Diagrams on High School 9th Grade Students’ Understanding the Subjects of “Force and Motion”. Science Education International, 25(3), 283-311. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1044458

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Questionnaire (16 Likert-type propositions, Cronbach-alpha 0.75) applied only to the 30 experimental-group students; percentages and mean scores per proposition were calculated. The article reports "26,1% of the students reported that they had difficulty writing down the information in their own words and using their creativity".

"The results of the analysis of the data obtained via the Questionnaire for Roundhouse Diagram Student Views revealed that a majority of the mean scores regarding the propositions (93.75%) belonged to such responses as “Always” and “Usually”."

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.