Claims

Computer-assisted Roundhouse Diagrams produced higher posttest scores than the Context-Based Learning curriculum alone on a 9th-grade Force and Motion multiple-choice achievement test

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2 · i2 medium
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 i2 The experimental group using computer-assisted Roundhouse Diagrams scored significantly higher than the control group on the posttest of the Force and Motion Subject Achievement Test (t=2.531, p=0.015), with a reported effect size of η2=0.12 and d=0,38. → 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 · i2 · causal · r2

Quasi-experimental pretest-posttest control-group study in a Diyarbakır high school: experimental group n=30, control group n=17. Independent sample t-test of posttest means (6.4 vs 4.41) gave t=2.531, p=0.015; the authors report "medium effect size ( η2=0.12 d=0,38)".

"At the end of the study, the results of the Force and Motion Subject Achievement Test applied to the experimental and control groups revealed that the experimental group was more successful than the control group."

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.