Jamovi HW8

Jamovi Homework 8 23 points Mathematics word problems can be particularly difficult, especially for primary-grade children. A recent study investigated a combination of techniques for teaching students to master these problems (Fuchs, Fuchs, Craddock, Hollenbeck, Hamlett, & Schatschneider, 2008). The study investigated the effectiveness of instruction type, where traditional math instruction was compared to a new technique called hot math that teaches students to recognize types or categories of problems so they can generalize skills from one problem to another (1 = traditional, 2 = hot math). They also offered this instruction either in private tutoring sessions to half of the students or in a classic classroom setting to the other half of students (1 = untutored, 2 = tutored). The following data were obtained. The dependent variable is a math test score for each student after 16 weeks in the study. Check your data entry carefully! It is easy to lose almost all the points on this homework assignment if you mistype a number – as many subsequent statistics and analyses will be incorrect! Output (7 points) 1) Conduct the appropriate statistical test, and then paste the following output: (4 points)  Three descriptive statistics tables showing the means and standard deviations for each level of instruction, each level of help, and the cell means for each combination of conditions  The inferential results table of the factorial ANOAVA 2) Paste three appropriate graphs from jamovi displaying how the overall means of each level of instruction compare, how the overall means of each level of help compare, and a graph displaying the interaction effect (3 points) Help Untutored Tutored Instructio n Traditional 2 6 5 3 5 7 1 5 0 7 4 5 5 1 5 7 1 5 Hot Math 4 8 4 4 7 8 9 11 7 6 7 5 5 7 4 7 8 8

 Report the values of three test statistics with their degrees of freedom (0.5 points each)  Report the values of three precise p -values to three decimals (unless jamovi reports p = .000, in which case you use p < .001) (0.5 points each)  Report a measure of effect size (partial eta-squared) for each test (0.5 points each)  Report whether each effect was significant or non-significant (0.5 points each)  Describe the direction of each main effect (0.5 points each)  Describe the nature of a significant interaction effect or if the interaction effect is not significant, describe what it means that there is no significant interaction (1 point)  Correct APA style formatting (1 point) Using a factorial ANOVA, we found that traditional math instruction ( M = 4.24, SD = 2.25) had lower average test scores than Hot Math instruction ( M = 6.61, SD = 1.97), the difference between the two groups were significant, F (1, 12.47) = 51.56, p = .001,  2 p = 0.29. We also found that there was a significant main effect of tutored versus untutored participants on test scores, F (1, 4.32) = 17.86, p = .046,  2 p = 0.12. There was a nonsignificant interaction effect between the type of instruction and type of help, F (1, 0.39) = 1.62, p = .536,  2 p = 0.01. We can see that Hot Math instruction did increase test scores for tutored and untutored participants, whereas traditional math instruction did not increase test scores for the participants.