Claims

Learning strategy and self-efficacy interact in their effect on mathematical representation ability

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Design limits · Supandi 2018: groups were assigned but students were analysed as independent (read from the study by two models, 2026-11-01)

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.

q3 i? There is a statistically significant interaction between learning strategy (expository vs think-talk-write) and self-efficacy level on mathematical representation ability (Fcount 3.86 vs Ftable 3.16). → Supandi 2018

Evidence

Supandi 2018

Supandi, S., Waluya, B., Rochmad, R., Suyitno, H., & Dewi, K. (2018). Think-Talk-Write Model for Improving Students' Abilities in Mathematical Representation. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 77-90. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.1136a

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Omnibus two-way ANOVA in the 2x3 factorial quasi-experiment (64 eighth-grade students); the interaction term reached significance at α = 0.05 with Fcount 3.86 against Ftable 3.16. No effect size is printed.

"Another calculation confirmed that H0AB is rejected, showing that there is an interaction effect between the learning strategies (A) and self-efficacy (B)."

Discussion

Learner Variables

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.