The three groups were statistically equivalent in transformational geometry achievement before instruction¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
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.
q3 i? Pre-test ANOVAs found no significant differences among groups on recognition, features, construction, or the total test (all p > .05). → Gül Kaleli Yılmaz 2015
Evidence¶
Gül Kaleli Yılmaz 2015¶
Gül Kaleli Yılmaz. (2015). The Effect of Dynamic Geometry Software and Physical Manipulatives on Candidate Teachers’ Transformational Geometry Success. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2015.5.2610
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Pre-test ANOVA across the Computer (n=43), Manipulatives (n=36), and Traditional (n=38) Groups on all TGAT sections; no statistically significant differences, establishing baseline equivalence. No effect sizes printed.
"the ANOV A results showed no significant difference in the mean scores among the groups for the recognition section of the test [ F(2,114) = .16, p > .05], the features section of the test [F(2,114) = .46, p > .05], the construction section of the test [ F(2,114) =.61, p > .05] or the overall test [F(2,114) = .08, p > .05]"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- All three instruction groups (DGS, manipulatives, traditional) significantly increased their transformational geometry achievement from pre-test to post-test — related
- DGS instruction was most effective for recognizing transformations and stating their features, where it beat both manipulatives and traditional instruction — related
- DGS (Cabri II Plus) instruction produced the highest overall transformational geometry achievement, followed by manipulatives, with traditional instruction last — related
- The three groups were equivalent on EPT pre-test scores before the intervention — related
- Experimental and control groups were statistically equivalent on religious-concepts pretest before the intervention — related
- In the construction section, DGS and manipulatives instruction were equally effective and both significantly outperformed traditional instruction — related
- U-learning and E-learning groups were statistically equivalent at pretest before the intervention — related
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.