Neither unit pair nor its interaction with instructional method significantly affected retention of science content¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In a 2 × 2 factorial ANOVA, retention did not differ significantly between the Astronomy-Life Science pair (M = 59.61%) and the Chemistry-Environmental Science pair (M = 73.78%), and the method by unit-pair interaction was non-significant. → Mariale M. Hardiman 2017

Evidence¶

Mariale M. Hardiman 2017¶

Mariale M. Hardiman, Ranjini Mahinda JohnBull, Deborah Carran. (2017). The Effects of Arts-Integrated Instruction on Students' Memory for Science Content: Results from a Randomized Control Trial Study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED576190

q3 · i? · causal · r2

2 × 2 factorial ANOVA (instructional method × unit pair) on percent of retained content in the randomized control trial. Both the unit-pair main effect and the method-by-unit-pair interaction were non-significant as printed; no effect size was reported.

"For unit pairs, a non-statistically significant difference was observed on percent of content retained; (MAS-LS = 59.61%, MCH-ES = 73.78%), F(1, 506) = 1.801, p = .180. No interaction effect was observed between instructional method and unit pairs, F(1, 506) = 0.275, p = 0.600."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Arts-integrated and conventional science instruction produced no statistically significant difference in overall long-term retention of science content — related
• An instructional-method by reading-level interaction showed basic-level readers retained significantly more science content after arts-integrated instruction — related
• A condition-by-timing interaction suggests students who received arts-integrated science first retained more when later taught conventionally — related