All three groups gained from pretest to posttest, with the computer-assisted STAD group showing the highest mean gain score in physics achievement¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Mean gain scores were 60.70 for STAD, 54.33 for LTM and 49.37 for ICI, with STAD highest. → Gambari et al. 2015

Evidence¶

Gambari et al. 2015¶

Amosa Isiaka Gambari, Mudasiru Olalere Yusuf, David Akpa Thomas. (2015). Effects of Computer-Assisted STAD, LTM and ICI Cooperative Learning Strategies on Nigerian Secondary School Students' Achievement, Gender and Motivation in Physics. The Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Science, Volume 3, Issue 4. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1085925

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Descriptive comparison of pretest-posttest mean gain scores (Table 4) in the same three-group experimental study; gains are reported descriptively with no test statistic for the gain contrast.

"For instance, STAD had the mean gain scores of 60.70, LTM had 54.33 mean gain scores, while ICI had the mean gain scores of 49.37. This indicates that all the groups benefited from the treatment, with STAD having higher performance."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Nigerian secondary students taught physics with computer-assisted STAD and LTM cooperative strategies achieved significantly higher posttest scores than students taught with individualized computer instruction — related
• Computer-assisted STAD and LTM cooperative settings produced significantly higher physics motivation than individualized computer instruction — related
• All three instructional groups improved from pretest to posttest, with the blended learning group showing the highest mean gain score — related