IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/thesis/n98kp.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing Normalized Gain g and Effect Size Cohen’s d to Measure the Improvement of Student’s Scientific Literacy

Author

Listed:
  • Setiawan, Adib Rifqi

Abstract

In this work I investigate about my curiousity. My investigation focused on the implications on claims about student learning that result from choosing between one of two metrics. The metrics are normalized gain g, which is the most common method used in Physics Education Research (PER), and effect size Cohen’s d, which is broadly used in Discipline-Based Education Research (DBER) including Biology Education Research (BER). Data for the analyses came from the research about scientific literacy on Physics and Biology Education from courses at institutions across Indonesia. This work reveals that the bias in normalized gaing can harm efforts to improve student’s scientific literacy by misrepresenting the efficacy of teaching practices across populations of students and across institutions. This work, also, recommends use effect size Cohen’s d for measuring student learning, based on reliability statistical method for calculating student learning.

Suggested Citation

  • Setiawan, Adib Rifqi, 2019. "Comparing Normalized Gain g and Effect Size Cohen’s d to Measure the Improvement of Student’s Scientific Literacy," Thesis Commons n98kp, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:thesis:n98kp
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/n98kp
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5d94be03d55120001a5eb934/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/n98kp?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:thesis:n98kp. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://thesiscommons.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.