500

For extra practice, I thought I’d start an informal critique thread for the article by Tatar and Robinson (2003). Feel free to also comment on the pros and cons of quasi or experimental research.

Cons of the study:

-lack of random assignment of students to groups
-multi-aged groups whose experience would affect results. We don’t know how many students of each age were in each class (differential selection of participants).
-novelty effect- were the students motivated by the newness of the digital cameras? Maybe the study should’ve been carried out over a longer period of time until the students got used to the cameras.
-table 3- the control group has 19 students and the experimental group has 10. Why? Am I reading that correctly?

Tatar, D., & Robinson, M. (2003). Use of the digital camera to increase student interest and learning in high school biology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(2), 89-95