Claims

The tablet e-textbook experimental group significantly outperformed the traditionally taught control group on the post-test

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · checked against its sources 2026-11-01 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Design limits · Ibtesam Al-Mashaqbeh and Muneera Al Shurman 2015: the intervention came bundled with another change; 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.

q2 i? At post-test, the experimental group taught with e-textbooks scored significantly higher than the control group taught with the traditional textbook method. → Ibtesam Al-Mashaqbeh and Muneera Al Shurman 2015

Evidence

Ibtesam Al-Mashaqbeh and Muneera Al Shurman 2015

Ibtesam Al-Mashaqbeh and Muneera Al Shurman. (2015). The Adoption of Tablet and e-Textbooks: first grade core curriculum and school administration attitude. Journal of Education and Practice, Vol.6, No.21. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1079146

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Between-group comparison at post-test (table 3): Regular group mean 90.93 (SD 4.228), Experimental group mean 94.50 (SD 1.954), t = -4.970, df 82, Sig. (2-tailed) .000, N=42 per group. The article reports the difference "significant in the side of the experiminal group"; no effect size is printed.

"revealed that it was significant in the side of the experiminal group as shown on table 3."

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.