Students taught with smart board support retained more information four weeks after instruction than students taught with the 2005 curriculum¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? On the permanence (retention) test administered four weeks after the application, the experimental group's mean (18.81) was significantly higher than the control group's (16.26), t=2.555, p=.013. → Aktas 2016

Evidence¶

Aktas 2016¶

Aktas, S., & Aydin, A. (2016). The effect of the smart board usage in science and technology lessons. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 64, 125-138. http://dx.doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2016.64.7

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Retention test with the same 25-item achievement test applied four weeks after the post-test to both intact classes (experimental N=37, control N=38). The article reports the permanence scores "were found to be significantly different between the two groups" (t=2.555, p=.013).

"The average permanence test score of the experimental group was X̅ = 18.81. The average permanence test score of the control group was X̅ = 16.26. The permanence test achievement scores were found to be significantly different between the two groups (t=2.555, p <.05)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The experimental group showed no significant score decline between post-test and four-week retention test, while the control group declined significantly — related
• Smart board-supported teaching of the 7th-grade unit 'electricity in our lives' produced higher post-test achievement than the 2005 Science and Technology curriculum — related
• Learning from interactive whiteboard lessons supported by visual materials persisted, with only a small significant decline four weeks after the post-test — related
• MIT-based teaching produced significantly higher permanence-test scores three weeks after instruction than conventional teaching — related