Claims

Posttest scoring by three judges showed high inter-judge reliability across all four poster dimensions

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · 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? Kendall's coefficient of concordance among the three teacher-judges was significant for thematic concept (W = .912), image creativity (W = .973), visual aesthetic (W = .789), expressive technique (W = .834), and total score (W = .953). → Chao-Ming Yang & Tzu-Fan Hsu 2017

Evidence

Chao-Ming Yang & Tzu-Fan Hsu 2017

Chao-Ming Yang & Tzu-Fan Hsu. (2017). New Perspective on Visual Communication Design Education: An Empirical Study of Applying Narrative Theory to Graphic Design Courses. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v6n2p188

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Inter-judge reliability test using Kendall's coefficient of concordance on posttest scores assigned by the same three graphic design teachers who scored the pretest. The total-score W was .953, and per-dimension W values ranged from .789 to .973, all significant. No effect size is printed.

"the Kendall’s W value for the total score was .953, suggesting a significance level of p < .001 ( p = .000). This demonstrated consistency among the posttest scores assigned by the three teachers."

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.