Claims

VFT-taught students significantly outperformed conventionally taught students on the essay item for Colonization and Succession in Mangrove Ecosystems

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

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? Two-way ANOVA showed a significant difference in essay-item achievement between the VFT and conventional groups (F = 104.566, sig = 0.000). → Norbaizura HARIS & Kamisah OSMAN 2015

Evidence

Norbaizura HARIS & Kamisah OSMAN 2015

Norbaizura HARIS & Kamisah OSMAN. (2015). The Effectiveness of a Virtual Field Trip (VFT) Module in Learning Biology. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 16(3). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1092841

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Two-way ANOVA on the single high-level essay question in the quasi-experiment; treatment post-test mean 47.50 versus control 9.17 (Table 8). The article prints F=104.566 and sig= 0.000; no effect size is reported.

"Table: 9 shows that there is significant difference in achievement scores for essay items for students taught using VFT and students taught using conventional methods for the topic of Colonization and Succession in Mangrove Ecosystems with the value of F=104.566 and sig= 0.000 (p <0.05)."

Discussion

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.