Claims

Scaffolding produced a medium-effect improvement in pre-service teachers' conceptual understanding of electromagnetism and waves and optics

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2 · i2 medium
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.

q2 i2 The effect size of the scaffolding treatment on conceptual understanding was d = 0.59 (medium criterion), with experimental mean gain 27.12 (SD 9.73) versus control mean gain 22.94 (SD 4.36). → Sinaga 2015

Evidence

Sinaga 2015

Sinaga, P., Suhandi, A., & Liliasari. (2015). The Effectiveness of Scaffolding Design in Training Writing Skills Physics Teaching Materials. International Journal of Instruction, 8(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1085295

q2 · i2 · causal · r1

Quasi-experimental comparison of conceptual understanding gains on electromagnetism and waves and optics between experimental and control classes using 40 multiple-choice pre/post-test items (reliability 0.886). Effect size d = 0.59 was rated medium.

"the mean gain of the experimental class was 27.12, with a standard deviation of 9.73; while the mean gain of the control class was 22.94, with a standard deviation of 4.36, so that the coefficient of effect size d = 0.59, with a medium criterion"

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.