Claims

Tenth-grade students taught electrical charging with real experiments or PhET simulations gave more correct posttest answers on a like-charge interaction question than students taught by traditional direct teaching

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2013 · 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? On posttest situation a), 75% of the Real group and 66% of the Sim group gave correct answers versus 43% of the control group. → Ajredini 2013

Evidence

Ajredini 2013

Ajredini, F., Izairi, N., Zajkov, O. (2013). Real Experiments versus PhET Simulations for Understanding Electrostatic Charging. European J of Physics Education, 5(1). https://ejpe.phywe.de

q2 · i? · causal · r?

Quasi-experimental posttest comparison among three groups (Real n=86, Sim n=81, control n=58) of 10th-grade gymnasium students in Macedonia after teaching the unit Electrical charging. The experimental groups clearly exceeded the control group: "the control group has only 43 % correct answers".

"While 75 % of the students in the Real group gave correct answers, the Sim group has slightly lower result of 66 % correct answers and the control group has only 43 % correct answers."

Discussion

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.