Intern
ati
o
n
a
l
Jo
urn
a
l
o
f
E
v
al
ua
ti
o
n
and
Rese
arch in
Education (I
JE
RE)
V
o
l.5
,
No
.2
,
Jun
e
2
016
, pp
. 13
5
~
14
7
I
S
SN
: 225
2-8
8
2
2
1
35
Jo
urn
a
l
h
o
me
pa
ge
: h
ttp
://iaesjo
u
r
na
l.com/
o
n
lin
e/ind
e
x.ph
p
/
IJERE
Learning Model and Form of As
se
sme
n
t to
wa
r
d
The
Infere
nsia
l
Statistical Achievement by
Controlling Numeric Thingking
Skills
I Wayan
Widi
an
a
1
, I Nyo
m
an Ja
mpel
2
1
Primar
y
Teacher Education
Dep
a
rtment, Ganesh
a University
of
Education,
Bali, Indonesia
2
Education
Tech
nolog
y
Depar
t
ement, Gan
e
sha
University
of
Ed
ucation, Bali, In
donesia
Article Info
A
B
STRAC
T
Article histo
r
y:
Received Apr 27, 2016
Rev
i
sed
May 23
, 20
16
Accepted
May 28, 2016
This stud
y
aim
e
d to find out the effe
ct of learning model and form o
f
assessm
ent toward inf
e
rent
ial
statist
i
ca
l a
c
h
i
evem
ent
aft
e
r
control
ling
num
eric th
inkin
g
skills.
This st
ud
y
was qu
asi
e
xperim
e
nta
l
stu
d
y
wi
th 130
students as
the s
a
mple.
The data anal
y
s
is used A
N
COVA.
After
controlling
num
eric think
i
n
g
skills, the r
e
sult of this
stud
y show that: (1) th
e infer
e
nti
a
l
statistical achiev
ement of the st
udents group which follow SCSS learning
model is higher than the group which
follow co
nvention
a
l leare inferential
statistical achiev
ement of
stud
ents group which g
o
t performance
assessment
is higher
than
co
nvention
a
l
assessm
ent, (3) th
ere
is inte
rac
tion
eff
ect
betwe
e
n
learn
i
ng model and form of
assessmen
t toward the student
s' statist
i
c
a
l
achi
e
vem
e
nt
, (4)
in SCSS learn
i
ng m
odel,
the
st
udents' inf
e
rent
i
a
l st
atisti
ca
l
achievement wh
ich got p
e
rformance
a
ssessment is higher th
an
the group
which got conv
entional asse
ssment, (5)
in
conv
entional learning
model, th
e
students' infer
e
ntial
st
atist
i
c
a
l
achievement which got
performance
assessment are lower than
the gr
oup wh
ich got
convention
a
l assessment, (6)
in perform
ance
as
s
e
s
s
m
ent, the s
t
udents
'
inferen
tial s
t
atis
t
i
ca
l ac
hievem
e
n
t
which follow
the
stud
y with SCSS learning
m
odel is high
er th
an t
hose whic
h
follow conven
t
ional learning m
odel,
and
(7)
in conventional assessment,
the
students' inf
e
re
ntial st
atisti
ca
l ach
ievement w
h
ich follow SCSS learning
m
odel is lowe
r t
h
an th
e group
which fo
llow
conv
ention
a
l
le
arning
m
odel.
Keyword:
Achie
v
em
ent
Form
of assess
m
e
nt
Inferen
tial statistical
Learni
ng
m
ode
l
Nu
m
e
ric th
ink
i
n
g
sk
ills
Copyright ©
201
6 Institut
e
o
f
Ad
vanced
Engin
eer
ing and S
c
i
e
nce.
All rights re
se
rve
d
.
Co
rresp
ond
i
ng
Autho
r
:
I Ny
om
an Jampel,
Edu
catio
n Tech
no
log
y
Dep
a
rte
m
en
t,
Gane
sha
U
n
i
v
e
r
si
t
y
of
Ed
ucat
i
on,
Sin
g
a
r
a
j
a
, Bali
81
116
,
In
don
esia.
Em
a
il: n
y
o
m
an
.j
am
p
e
l@yah
o
o
.
co
m
1.
INTRODUCTION
Statistic learn
i
n
g
is
o
n
e
o
f
the learn
i
n
g
activ
ities wh
ich is
o
b
lig
at
o
r
ily
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d in tertiary edu
cation.
It
i
s
pro
v
i
d
e
d
t
o
t
h
e u
nde
r
g
ra
duat
e
an
d
post
g
ra
d
u
at
e
stu
d
e
n
t
s th
ro
ugh
the co
urses Descrip
tiv
e Statistics and
Inferen
tial Statistics. It is ex
pected
th
at su
ch co
urses
can
h
e
lp
stu
d
en
ts co
pe with
th
e
q
u
a
n
titativ
e in
formatio
n
.
As
p
r
o
s
p
ectiv
e scien
tists, it is exp
ected
t
h
at th
e stud
en
ts
are ab
le to
app
l
y th
e scien
tific
ap
pro
ach
t
o
cop
i
ng
with
th
e
p
r
o
b
l
em
s
th
ey
m
a
y h
a
v
e
. In
writing a
m
i
n
i
th
esis
, for ex
am
p
l
e, as o
n
e
o
f
t
h
e scien
tific activ
itie
s and
academ
ic resea
r
ch, the problem
s
of the
study should be answ
ered using the scientific
approach. In this case,
statistics p
l
ays
a ro
le as th
e sup
portin
g instru
m
e
n
t
wh
ich
can
b
e
used to
co
p
e
with
th
e qu
an
titativ
e d
a
t
a
o
b
t
ain
e
d
in
th
e stu
d
y
. In
o
t
h
e
r word
s, th
e situatio
n
,
co
nd
ition
,
or th
e fact wh
ich
are ex
p
l
o
r
ed
can
b
e
d
e
scrib
e
d
th
ro
ugh
th
e statistical
an
alysi
s
; in
ad
d
itio
n
,
l
o
g
i
cal con
c
l
u
si
ons ca
n al
so b
e
draw
n. T
h
i
s
sup
p
o
rt
e
d
by
what
i
s
stated by Sudijono [1], “t
h
a
t
if th
e statistic app
r
o
ach is
u
s
ed
as th
e su
ppo
rting
instru
m
e
n
t
, th
en
l
o
g
i
cal
concl
u
si
o
n
s ca
n
be d
r
a
w
n
ba
sed
on
t
h
e e
x
a
c
t
dat
a
.
As a
r
e
sul
t
,
deci
si
on
s can
be acc
ur
at
el
y
m
a
de, w
h
at
m
a
y
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
S
SN
:
2
252
-88
22
IJER
E
V
o
l
.
5,
No
. 2,
Ju
ne
2
0
1
6
:
13
5 – 1
4
7
13
6
happe
n
in the
fut
u
re ca
n be
pre
d
icted, a
nd
what conc
rete steps should be taken by a teaching staff c
a
n be
p
r
ed
icted
”
.
Th
e cou
r
se Inferen
tial Statis
tics is o
n
e
o
f
th
e o
b
ligato
r
y
co
urses prov
i
d
ed
to
the stud
en
ts
o
f
th
e
Depa
rt
m
e
nt
of PG P
A
U
D
(t
he
Depa
rt
m
e
nt
of Pre-sc
h
ool
Te
achers
’
Trai
ni
n
g
)
,
Facul
t
y
of
Ed
ucat
i
o
n
,
Ga
nes
h
a
Un
i
v
ersity o
f
Edu
catio
n. After tak
i
ng
th
is co
urse, it is
ex
pected
th
at th
e stu
d
e
n
t
s will b
e
ab
le an
d
co
mp
eten
t
to
exp
l
ain
th
e
mean
in
g
an
d
sig
n
i
fican
ce of
th
e In
feren
tial Statistics as a
p
a
ttern
o
f
t
h
e
q
u
a
n
titativ
e way o
f
t
h
i
nki
ng
req
u
i
r
ed t
o
de
vel
o
p s
c
i
e
nces an
d t
o
sol
v
e t
h
e
pre
-
s
c
ho
ol
ed
ucat
i
o
nal
pr
o
b
l
e
m
s
,
and t
o
gi
ve m
e
ani
n
g
t
o
any
i
n
f
o
rm
at
i
on an
d dat
a
t
h
r
o
ug
h t
h
e st
at
i
s
t
i
cal
i
n
fere
nt
i
a
l
m
e
t
hods. T
h
i
s
cour
se i
s
i
n
t
e
nde
d t
o
pr
ovi
de (
1
)
th
e con
c
ep
t of
wh
at statistics
is, ho
w it is u
s
ed
an
d wh
at
its ro
le and
po
sitio
n
in th
e scien
tific stud
y are; (2)
th
e co
n
c
ep
t of wh
at In
feren
tial Statist
i
cs is, a
n
d
h
o
w
it is fu
n
c
tio
n
e
d
and
used
; (3) th
e con
cep
ts of prob
l
e
m
s
,
vari
a
b
l
e
s,
ope
r
a
t
i
ng
defi
ni
t
i
ons, a
n
d
hy
p
o
t
h
esi
s
;
(4
) t
h
e
co
n
cep
t
of th
e d
a
ta requ
ired
in research, an
d the sk
il
l
requ
ired
fo
r form
u
l
atin
g
th
e d
a
ta co
llectin
g in
stru
m
e
n
t; (5
) th
e sk
ill required
fo
r co
llectin
g
and
pro
cessin
g
data; (6) the a
b
ility to exam
ine the
c
o
rrelations am
ong
variables (c
orre
lation) a
nd t
h
e
diffe
re
nces a
m
ong
v
a
riab
les wh
ich
are id
en
tified
m
a
n
u
a
lly and
u
s
ing
t
h
e
assistan
ce of t
h
e SPSS ap
p
licatio
n
;
an
d (7
) the sk
ill
requ
ired
for in
t
e
rpretin
g th
e data rev
ealed
fro
m
th
e resu
lt
of th
e stud
y.
The co
nce
p
t
of
st
at
i
s
t
i
c
s i
s
so im
port
a
nt
i
n
t
h
e de
vel
o
pm
ent
of sci
e
nces a
nd
dai
l
y
l
i
f
e t
h
at
i
t
shoul
d
be
one
o
f
t
h
e
f
a
vo
ri
t
e
co
urs
e
s
,
an
d t
h
at
t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s s
h
o
u
l
d
be f
o
nd
o
f
i
t
.
T
o
t
h
i
s
e
n
d,
t
h
e g
o
v
er
nm
ent
has
issu
ed
th
e
Act Nu
m
b
er 1
9of 2
0
0
5
co
n
c
ernin
g
th
e National Stan
d
a
rd
of Ed
u
cation
wh
ich
is in
tended
to
g
u
a
ran
t
ee th
e
q
u
a
lity o
f
t
h
e
n
a
tio
n
a
l edu
catio
n
as an
attemp
t to
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
t
h
e in
tellectu
a
l life o
f
t
h
e n
a
ti
o
n
and
to
form
th
e civilized
ch
aracteristic o
f
th
e natio
n
.
Howev
e
r,
th
e inferen
tial
statistic learn
i
ng
h
a
s no
t sho
w
n
an
y
satisfactory
outcom
e. That can
be see
n
from
the re
sult
of the e
v
aluation m
a
de in the aca
dem
i
c
years
10
1
2
/
1
01
3 a
n
d 2
0
13/
20
1
4
by
t
h
e De
pa
rt
m
e
nt
of P
r
e-
s
c
ho
ol
Teac
her
s
’ Trai
ni
n
g
,
F
acul
t
y
of E
d
u
cat
i
on,
Gan
e
sh
a
Un
iversity o
f
Ed
u
c
atio
n
.
Th
e resu
lt
was th
at in
t
h
e
l
a
st
t
w
o y
ears
t
h
e sco
r
es
obt
a
i
ned
by
t
h
e st
u
d
ent
s
fo
r
In
fere
nt
i
a
l
St
at
i
s
t
i
c
s avera
g
ed
2
.
1
4
.
T
h
e
eval
uat
i
o
n
was
m
a
de usi
n
g t
h
e scal
e
of
fi
ve
(ra
ngi
ng
f
r
o
m
0 t
o
4
)
. Th
at in
dicates th
at th
e q
u
a
lity o
f
th
e stu
d
e
n
t
s’
m
a
s
t
ery o
f
th
e con
cep
ts
wh
ich
Inferen
tial Statistics
co
n
t
ains was still
relativ
ely l
o
w. If su
ch
a
fact is n
o
t
i
mmed
i
ately co
p
e
d
with
, th
en
it will
b
e
d
i
ffi
cu
lt to
d
e
v
e
l
o
p th
e cou
r
ses wh
ich req
u
i
re th
e
go
od m
a
s
t
ery o
f
the in
feren
tial statistical co
n
cep
ts, esp
ecially in
the
min
i
th
esis writin
g
.
Fro
m
wh
at was in
itially o
b
s
erv
e
d
fro
m
th
e an
swers g
i
v
e
n
b
y
th
e
stud
en
ts wh
en th
e ev
al
u
a
tio
n was
mad
e
fo
r
Inferen
tial Statistics, it was
id
en
tified
th
at
th
e stu
d
e
n
t
s’ weakn
e
sses were in
1) th
e
math
e
m
atic
/sta
tistic
m
o
d
e
l wh
ich
was m
a
d
e
for th
e pro
b
l
em
pro
v
i
d
e
d
;
2
)
t
h
e st
rat
e
gy
c
hos
en a
nd
det
e
rm
i
n
ed
to
an
swer th
e
p
r
ob
lem co
m
p
letely;
3
)
th
e abilit
y to
ex
p
l
ain o
r
in
terp
ret the resu
lt; th
e stu
d
e
n
t
s were only ab
l
e
to
m
a
k
e
m
ech
an
ical calcu
latio
n
;
4) th
e ab
ility to
exp
l
ain
grap
hs u
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
written
v
a
riety o
f
lan
g
u
a
g
e
; an
d
5)
th
e
ab
ility
to
read
u
s
i
n
g
th
e co
n
c
ep
t o
f
a rep
r
esen
tatio
n p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d.
Su
ch
facts
sho
w
th
at th
e
stud
en
ts
were n
o
t
g
ood
at so
lv
i
n
g
th
e m
a
th
e
m
a
tical co
mm
u
n
i
catio
n
an
d prob
lem
.
Th
e
resu
lt of t
h
e in
terv
iew, i
n
wh
ich
t
h
e interv
i
e
wees
wer
e
t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s wh
o ha
d pr
o
g
r
a
m
m
ed
an
d
tak
e
n
In
feren
t
i
a
l Statistics, sho
w
s th
at t
h
ey had
so
m
e
p
r
ob
lem
s
wh
en
attend
ing
th
e
course
. Such problems are
as fo
llo
ws: th
e
lear
n
i
ng
activ
it
y w
a
s less pr
o
c
essed
and
tended
to b
e
p
a
ssive; th
e stru
ctur
ed
ex
er
cises thro
ugh
wh
ich
th
e studen
t
s
were t
r
ain
e
d to
an
swer th
e inferen
tial statistics-related
p
r
ob
le
m
s
were in
su
fficien
t; the
ach
iev
e
m
e
n
t
ach
iev
e
d
b
y
th
e stu
d
e
n
t
s an
d
t
h
e assign
m
e
n
t
s p
r
ov
id
ed
to
the
m
were on
ly in
tend
ed
t
o
fu
lfill th
e
academ
ic assignm
ents; the fe
edbac
k
give
n
by the lect
urer for
what the s
t
ude
nt
s
had done was
insuffi
cient;
and t
h
e sy
st
em
im
pl
em
ent
e
d by
t
h
e l
ectu
r
er to
ev
alu
a
te th
e learn
i
ng
activ
ity was o
n
l
y in
ten
d
e
d
to
m
e
asu
r
e
whet
her the st
udents
could pa
ss In
feren
tial Statistics o
r
no
t.
It is in
th
is case th
at th
e lecturer is requ
ired
to
reform
the learni
ng activit
y creatively. The roles
of
the lecturer in the learni
n
g
act
i
v
i
t
y
are desi
gni
n
g
, m
a
nagi
n
g
, eval
uat
i
ng a
nd
deci
di
n
g
w
h
at
t
o
add t
o
f
o
l
l
o
w
up t
h
e learni
ng activity. The lecturer, as t
h
e teachin
g st
aff
who is m
o
st im
portantly responsible for a
n
d
di
rect
l
y
i
n
v
o
l
v
ed i
n
t
h
e l
ear
ni
ng
pr
ocess i
s
r
e
qui
red t
o
m
a
k
e
every atte
m
p
t he/she can t
o
im
prove the learni
ng
pr
ocess
,
w
h
i
c
h i
s
essent
i
a
l
l
y
expect
ed t
o
im
prove t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s’ l
ear
n
i
ng ac
hi
evem
ent
.
Suc
h
a l
e
arni
ng
pr
ocess
can
be
im
pro
v
ed
t
h
r
o
ug
h t
h
e i
n
n
ova
t
i
v
e st
rat
e
gi
es,
app
r
oaches
, m
odel
s
o
r
l
ear
ni
ng
m
e
t
hods.
One
of t
h
e l
earni
ng m
odel
s
whi
c
h
was once i
m
pl
em
ent
e
d t
o
i
m
pro
v
e t
h
e st
u
d
en
t
s
’ l
earni
n
g
achievem
e
nt was the Searc
h
,
Solve
,
Create and Sha
r
e (S
S
C
S) l
earni
ng
m
odel
.
Such a
l
earni
n
g
m
odel
i
s
one
of t
h
e i
n
n
ovat
i
ve l
ear
ni
n
g
m
odel
s
w
h
i
c
h c
a
n
be ef
fec
tively u
s
ed
i
n
St
atistics as it is
o
r
ien
t
ed
t
o
ward
s the
pr
o
b
l
e
m
-
sol
v
i
n
g. T
h
e SSC
S
l
earni
n
g
m
ode
l
i
s
m
a
de up of f
o
ur st
e
p
s t
h
r
o
ug
h w
h
i
c
h
t
h
e pr
o
b
l
e
m
can be
so
lv
ed
; th
ey are th
e pro
b
l
em id
en
tificatio
n
(search),
wh
at
i
s
pl
anne
d t
o
d
o
t
o
s
o
l
v
e
t
h
e pr
o
b
l
e
m
(sol
ve
)
,
solvi
n
g the
problem
(create), and s
o
ci
alizin
g
th
e pro
b
l
em
alread
y so
lv
ed (sh
a
re)
[2
].
Th
e
p
h
ilosoph
y
o
f
th
e
SC
SS l
earni
ng
m
odel
i
s
const
r
uct
i
v
i
s
t
,
m
eaning t
h
at
i
n
t
h
e S
S
C
S
l
earni
n
g
m
odel
kno
wl
e
dge i
s
co
nst
r
uc
t
e
d by
th
e stud
en
ts the
m
selv
es. Pizzin
i stated
“Th
e
SSCS Prob
lem
So
lv
in
g Mod
e
l is
d
e
sign
ed to
exp
a
nd
and app
l
y
scien
tific co
n
c
ep
ts and
critical th
in
k
i
ng
sk
ills”, m
ean
in
g
th
at th
e SSCS learn
i
n
g
m
o
d
e
l is o
r
ien
t
ed
to
ward
s the
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
J
ERE
I
S
SN
:
225
2-8
8
2
2
Lear
ni
n
g
M
o
d
e
l
an
d
For
m
of
Asses
m
ent
To
w
a
rd
T
h
e
Inf
e
r
e
nsi
a
l
St
at
i
s
t
i
c
al
..
.. (
I
W
a
ya
n
Wi
di
a
n
a
)
13
7
p
r
ob
lem
so
lv
in
g and is
d
e
sig
n
e
d
t
o
d
e
v
e
lo
p th
e sk
ill to th
ink
criticall
y
in
o
r
d
e
r to im
p
r
o
v
e
t
h
e st
u
d
e
n
t
s’
un
de
rst
a
n
d
i
n
g
of
co
nce
p
t
s
[
2
]
.
The sy
ntax
of t
h
e SSC
S learning m
odel includes
four stages
; they ar
e (1) the sea
r
ch
stage
,
in
whi
c
h
th
ere are
fou
r
activ
ities wh
ich
shou
ld
b
e
don
e; th
ey are th
e id
en
tificatio
n o
f
facts, th
e an
alysis o
f
fact
s, th
e
id
en
tificatio
n
o
f
p
r
ob
lem
s
, a
n
d
brain
s
torm
. (2) Th
e so
l
v
e stag
e, in
wh
ich
th
ere are
fo
ur activ
ities wh
ich
sh
ou
l
d
b
e
done; th
ey ar
e d
e
ter
m
in
in
g
th
e cr
iter
i
a; ev
alu
a
tin
g
th
e so
lu
tion
,
th
e
p
r
o
c
ed
ur
e th
rou
g
h
wh
i
c
h
the
so
lu
tion
is exp
l
ored, an
d determin
in
g
what is p
l
ann
e
d. (3) t
h
e c
r
eate stage, in
which t
h
ere
are
seve
ral
activ
ities d
o
n
e b
y
th
e stud
en
ts; th
ey are i
m
p
l
e
m
en
tin
g
th
e p
l
an
, i
d
en
ti
fyin
g
t
h
e con
c
ep
ts, represen
t
i
n
g
the
d
a
ta and
an
aly
s
is, d
e
term
in
in
g
th
e
p
a
rticip
an
ts as p
a
rt
of the sha
r
e sta
g
e, determ
in
in
g
wh
ere presen
tatio
n
is
perform
e
d, and
pre
p
ari
n
g the create stage
.
And
(4) t
h
e
share
stage, in which t
h
e st
ude
nts
prese
n
t
their
fi
n
d
i
n
gs,
res
u
l
t
s an
d c
oncl
u
s
i
ons
o
f
wh
at
t
h
ey
ha
ve
o
b
t
a
i
n
ed
fr
om
t
h
ei
r
gr
ou
ps
i
n
fr
ont
o
f
t
h
e
cl
as
s, a
n
d
eval
uat
e
t
h
e s
o
l
u
t
i
on t
o
t
h
e
pr
obl
em
so
lv
ing
alread
y im
p
l
e
m
en
ted
.
In accordance
with De
ge
ng [3], “the
conventiona
l learning m
odel is
a learning te
rm
which i
s
co
mm
o
n
l
y i
m
p
l
e
m
en
ted
in
the d
a
ily learn
i
ng
activ
ities”. Su
tik
no
stated
t
h
at th
e conv
entio
n
a
l learn
i
n
g
m
o
d
e
l
is th
e learn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l wh
ich is co
mm
o
n
l
y im
p
l
e
m
en
ted
by an
e
ducat
or in the
class room
learning
process. In
t
h
i
s
prese
n
t
st
udy
, t
h
e co
nv
ent
i
onal
l
ear
ni
ng m
odel
refe
rs t
o
t
h
e l
ear
n
i
ng m
odel
wh
i
c
h has
been
so f
a
r
co
mm
o
n
l
y i
m
p
l
em
en
ted
in
t
h
e in
feren
tial
statistic
lear
ni
ng i
n
t
h
e De
p
a
rt
m
e
nt
of t
h
e Pre-sc
h
ool
Te
acher
s
’
Trai
ni
n
g
, Fac
u
l
t
y
of Educat
i
o
n
,
Ga
nesha
Uni
v
ersi
t
y
of
Ed
ucat
i
on [
4
]
.
From
what
was o
b
ser
v
e
d
,
such a
l
earni
n
g
m
ode
l
t
e
nde
d t
o
be
foc
u
se
d o
n
t
h
e
m
e
m
o
ri
zat
i
on l
ear
ni
n
g
an
d
t
o
l
e
rat
e
t
h
e c
o
n
v
e
r
ge
nt
res
p
ons
es,
e
m
p
h
a
size th
e
in
fo
rm
atio
n
on co
n
c
ep
ts, and
d
r
ill th
e exerci
ses in
tex
t
s.
Ap
art fro
m
th
at, th
e assessm
en
t
m
a
d
e
in
such
a learn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l was trad
ition
a
l i
n
n
a
ture
with
a p
a
p
e
r and
pen
c
il test, wh
i
c
h
o
n
l
y
requ
ired
o
n
e
correct a
n
swe
r
. Mem
o
rization learning
refers to the
m
e
m
o
rization of
facts, c
o
rrelations
,
pri
n
ciples
, and
conce
p
t
s
.
If
vi
ewed
fr
om
t
h
e
m
e
t
hodi
cal
p
h
i
l
o
so
phy
, i
t
ca
n be st
at
e
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e con
v
e
n
t
i
o
nal
l
earni
ng m
e
t
h
o
d
can be classi
fied as the
behavioristic learning m
odel.
Such
a th
eo
ry is b
a
sed
on
th
e assu
m
p
tio
n
th
at th
e
l
earner
s
are t
h
e passi
ve
h
u
m
a
n bei
ngs
w
h
o
are su
p
pose
d
to
listen
to
, reco
rd
, m
e
m
o
rize wh
at is learned
and
onl
y
resp
o
n
d
t
o
t
h
e
st
i
m
ul
us com
i
ng f
r
om
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
(st
i
m
ul
us-res
p
onse
)
.
T
h
e st
e
p
s t
a
ken
i
n
t
h
e
co
n
v
ent
i
onal
l
earni
n
g
m
odel
gene
ral
l
y
st
art
fr
om
expl
ai
ni
ng t
h
e m
a
t
e
ri
al gi
ve
n by
t
h
e l
ect
urer
, d
o
i
ng
t
h
e exe
r
ci
ses g
i
ve
n
,
and
end with
t
h
e hom
ework assignm
ent.
In
add
ition
,
a g
ood
class can
no
t b
e
stated to
b
e
g
o
o
d
if it
is o
n
l
y su
p
ported
b
y
the in
n
o
v
a
tiv
e
learn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l with
ou
t b
e
ing co
m
p
leted
wi
th
th
e ab
ility t
o
assess th
e co
m
p
eten
ce alread
y acq
u
i
red
b
y
th
e
learn
e
rs.
Th
ere are m
a
n
y
typ
e
s
o
f
altern
at
iv
e assessm
en
ts wh
ich can be u
s
ed
i
n
t
h
e
in
feren
tial statistic
l
earni
n
g
, o
n
e of w
h
i
c
h
i
s
t
h
e
per
f
orm
a
nce assessm
ent. It can be
use
d
to assess t
h
e
work pe
rform
a
nce,
beha
vi
o
r
a
nd t
h
e i
n
t
e
ract
i
o
n
m
a
de by
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s i
n
t
h
e
cl
assroo
m
.
Su
ch
an
in
teraction
can
b
e
th
e in
teractio
n
am
ong t
h
e st
u
d
ent
s
, bet
w
ee
n
t
h
e st
udent
s a
nd t
h
e l
ect
ure
r
, and t
h
e i
n
t
e
r
act
i
on bet
w
ee
n
t
h
e st
udent
s a
nd t
h
e
learning m
a
terial. There
f
ore, t
h
e pe
rfo
r
m
a
n
ce assessm
en
t is
th
e assessm
en
t in
wh
ich
th
e
p
r
o
cess is a p
r
i
o
rity
with
ou
t igno
ri
n
g
th
e ach
i
ev
emen
t. Th
at is
su
ppo
rted
by [5] who stated
that th
e
performance assignment is
foc
u
se
d on
t
h
e pr
ocess
,
pr
od
u
c
t
,
or th
e co
m
b
in
atio
n
of th
e two.
Acco
r
d
i
n
g t
o
St
i
ggi
n
s
[
6
]
,
“t
he pe
rf
o
r
m
a
nce asse
ssm
ent is a form
of assessm
ent which allows t
h
e
learn
e
rs to d
e
m
o
n
s
trate a p
a
rticu
l
ar
set
of
sk
ills or
b
e
h
a
vio
r
s, pro
d
u
c
ts
an
d con
t
ex
ts”. Furth
e
rm
o
r
e,
Maj
i
d
stated that the
perform
a
nce assessm
en
t is a
n
assessm
en
t with
v
a
riou
s t
y
p
e
s of tasks an
d
situ
atio
ns in
wh
i
c
h
t
h
e l
earne
rs
w
ho t
a
ke t
h
e t
e
s
t
are re
quest
e
d
t
o
dem
onst
r
at
e i
n
de
pt
h a
n
d
appl
y
w
h
at
t
h
e
y
kn
ow
o
f
som
e
t
h
i
n
g
with
in
v
a
ri
o
u
s
typ
e
s o
f
contex
ts [7
]. Besid
e
s,
Asm
a
wi
stated
th
at th
e p
e
rform
a
n
ce assessm
en
t
is an
assessm
en
t wh
ich
ob
lig
es t
h
e learn
e
rs to d
e
m
o
n
s
trat
e their perform
a
n
ce not to
answer
or choos
e
the
alternative a
n
s
w
ers
alrea
d
y prepa
r
ed
[
8
]
.
C
a
m
pbel
l
an
d S
t
anl
e
y
[9]
di
vi
ded
, “t
he
per
f
o
rm
ance asses
s
m
e
nt
in
to
two
;
th
ey
are th
e
p
e
rfo
r
man
ce assessment project a
n
d
the perform
a
nce assessm
ent task. From
what wa
s
d
e
scr
i
b
e
d above, it can
be syn
t
h
e
sized
th
at
th
e p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
ce assessm
en
t is an
assessm
en
t wh
ich
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s th
e
l
earner
s
t
o
de
m
onst
r
at
e and
appl
y
i
n
de
pt
h
what
t
h
ey
k
n
o
w
wi
t
h
i
n
va
ri
ous
t
y
pes
of c
ont
e
x
t
s
,
depe
n
d
i
n
g
o
n
the
criteria des
i
red”.
Th
e
written
assessm
en
t (th
e
p
a
p
e
r an
d
p
e
n
c
il test) is
an
assessm
en
t wh
ich
is g
e
n
e
rally co
ndu
cted
b
y
th
e lectu
r
er t
o
m
easu
r
e th
e
stu
d
e
n
t
s’ ab
ilities th
roug
h
the written
test wh
ich
is co
m
b
in
ed
with
th
e
sco
r
es
obt
ai
ne
d
fr
om
t
h
e t
a
sks
gi
ve
n
whi
c
h a
r
e p
r
o
cessed
usi
n
g
p
a
rt
i
c
ul
ar
fo
rm
ul
as i
n
o
r
de
r t
o
obt
ai
n
t
h
e
fi
nal
sco
r
e.
Th
e written
test is also
b
e
tter kn
own
as th
e co
nv
en
tio
n
a
l
o
r
trad
itio
n
a
l assessm
en
t as it
refers to
th
e fo
rced
measu
r
em
en
ts
su
ch
as th
e
m
u
ltip
le ch
o
i
ce te
st, fillin
g
in
test, rig
h
t
or wron
g
test, m
a
tch
i
n
g
test, and
the lik
e
whic
h are c
o
mmonly used in educa
tion. The learners
us
ually choose
one of the
ans
w
ers
or c
o
m
p
lete
in
fo
rm
atio
n
.
Th
e written
test is co
n
d
u
c
ted
sep
a
rately fr
om th
e learn
i
n
g
p
r
o
cess.
It is co
nd
u
c
ted
aft
e
r th
e
l
earni
n
g
p
r
oce
ss i
s
fi
ni
she
d
or i
n
t
h
e en
d
of t
h
e l
ear
ni
ng
pr
ocess.
It
i
s
onl
y
use
d
t
o
m
easure t
h
e l
e
arne
rs’
cognitive a
b
ility; it cannot
m
e
asure
the lea
r
ne
r’s
learni
ng a
c
hievem
ent holistically.
Dimyati and Mudjiono stated that
t
h
e
l
earni
ng
res
u
l
t
i
s
t
h
e pea
k
of
t
h
e l
ear
ni
n
g
pr
ocess.
Su
ch
a
learn
i
ng
resu
lt main
ly fo
llo
ws fro
m
th
e ev
alu
a
tio
n
m
a
d
e
by th
e lectu
r
er,
an
d
also
con
s
titu
tes th
e resu
lt o
f
the
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
S
SN
:
2
252
-88
22
IJER
E
V
o
l
.
5,
No
. 2,
Ju
ne
2
0
1
6
:
13
5 – 1
4
7
13
8
in
teractio
n b
e
t
w
een th
e learnin
g
act and
teach
i
ng
act [1
0]
.
Wo
od
w
o
rt
h
a
n
d
M
a
r
qui
s st
a
t
ed t
h
at
t
h
e
l
earni
ng
resu
lt is th
e actu
al ab
ility which
can b
e
d
i
rectly
m
easu
r
ed
fro
m
a test [1
1]. Nasu
tio
n
stated
th
at th
e learn
i
ng
ach
iev
e
m
e
n
t
refers to so
m
e
o
n
e
’s m
a
stery o
f
wh
at
h
e
/s
h
e
kno
ws or a
particu
l
ar
sk
ill in
a lesson
,
which
i
s
com
m
onl
y
obt
ai
ned f
r
o
m
t
h
e t
e
st
-based m
a
rk
or sc
ore
pr
ovi
ded
by
t
h
e l
ect
urer [
1
2]
. B
l
oom
, as quo
t
e
d b
y
[13
]
, “classified
th
e learn
i
ng
ach
iev
e
m
e
n
t
into
three
b
e
tter-k
nown as the
Blo
o
m
’s tax
ono
m
y
, wh
ich
is
mad
e
u
p
o
f
th
e cog
n
itiv
e d
o
m
ain
,
t
h
e affectiv
e domain
,
an
d
th
e
p
s
ycho
m
o
to
ric d
o
m
ain
”
. Th
e co
gn
itiv
e do
main
is
co
n
c
ern
e
d w
i
t
h
th
e stud
en
t’
s
in
tellectu
a
l lear
n
i
n
g
ach
iev
e
men
t
w
h
ich
cov
e
r
s
six asp
ect
s; th
ey ar
e
know
ledg
e,
co
n
c
ep
t, app
licatio
n
,
an
alysis, syn
t
hesis, an
d
ev
al
u
a
tio
n. Th
e cog
n
itiv
e do
m
a
in
was rev
i
sed
b
y
[13
]
b
e
tter
k
nown
as t
h
e
Blo
o
m
’s Rev
i
sed
Tax
ono
m
y
.
Thu
s
, th
e i
n
fe
ren
tial statistic
l
earn
i
n
g
ach
i
v
e
men
t
is th
e cog
n
itiv
e
ability which the students
of the Depa
rtm
e
nt of the
Pre
-
school Teache
r
s’
Trai
ning, Faculty
of Educ
ation,
Gane
sha
Uni
v
ersi
t
y
of Ed
uc
at
i
on,
have a
f
t
e
r at
t
e
ndi
n
g
the in
feren
tial statistic
learn
i
ng with
in
a p
e
rio
d
o
f
ti
m
e
. Su
ch
ab
il
ity in
clu
d
e
s t
h
e ab
ility to
und
erstand
,
an
alyze, and
app
l
y what is learn
e
d
.
Syah stated t
h
a
t
the fact
ors
which
c
o
nt
ri
b
u
t
e
t
o
t
h
e
l
earni
ng
achi
e
vem
e
nt
can
be cl
assi
fi
e
d
i
n
t
o
t
w
o;
they are the internal and
exte
rnal factors [14]. The learning m
odel
and
assessm
ent are the internal factors
wh
ich
co
n
t
ribute to
th
e stud
en
t’s learn
i
n
g
ach
i
v
e
m
e
n
t
, and
th
e in
tern
al
facto
r
s in
cl
u
d
e
th
e
n
u
m
eric ab
ility,
in
tellig
en
ce, talen
t
, in
terest, attitu
d
e
, and
so
forth
.
Th
e
nu
meric ab
ility
is o
n
e
of th
e b
a
sic
ele
m
en
ts req
u
i
red
to
stu
d
y
Math
ematics. Th
e n
u
m
eric ab
ility g
i
v
e
s th
e stron
g
fo
und
atio
n
required
to
an
swer th
e statistic
q
u
estio
n
s
wh
ich
are related
to
th
e arith
m
e
t
i
c o
p
e
rati
o
n
su
ch
as add
itio
n
,
d
e
d
u
c
ti
o
n
, m
u
ltip
lica
t
io
n
,
and
d
i
v
i
si
o
n
. In
relatio
n
to
t
h
e
m
a
th
e
m
atic
mastery, th
e nu
m
e
ric ab
ility
seem
s
to
b
e
reason
ab
le en
ou
gh
to exp
l
ore, as, as
alread
y kno
wn
th
at th
e
numeric syste
m
is p
a
rt
o
f
Math
em
a
tics
an
d
facilitates th
e d
e
v
e
lopmen
t o
f
Mathem
a
tics as a whole.
Accord
ing
to
Fud
y
artan
t
a [15
]
, “th
e
n
u
m
eric ab
ility is
th
e ab
ility wh
ich
is sp
eci
fically n
eed
ed
to
co
un
t, and
i
n
clu
d
e
s ad
d
ition
,
d
e
du
ction
,
m
u
l
tip
licatio
n
,
an
d d
i
v
i
si
o
n
. It
can
also
b
e
d
e
fi
n
e
d as an
ab
ility to
un
de
rst
a
n
d
t
h
e
corr
el
at
i
on a
m
ong num
bers
and t
o
s
o
l
v
e
t
h
e pr
o
b
l
e
m
s
whi
c
h are c
o
n
cerne
d wi
t
h
n
u
m
e
ral
conce
p
ts”. P
r
a
s
etyo stated that the num
eric ability is
the ability to count, reason
num
b
ers,
use or m
a
nipulate
the
correlation am
ong num
b
ers,
and
de
scri
be
things l
ogicall
y
[16].
In a
d
diti
on, Ca
rter stated that the
num
e
ric
ab
ility test is
freq
u
e
n
tly d
e
sig
n
e
d
to
ex
amin
e th
e log
i
c
streng
th
and
th
e ab
ility to
co
p
e
with
p
r
ob
lem
s
structurally and a
n
alytically [
17].
There
are
seve
ral
rel
e
va
nt
st
u
d
i
e
s w
h
i
c
h
s
h
o
w
t
h
at
t
h
e SS
C
S
l
earni
ng
m
odel
a
n
d t
h
e
p
e
rf
orm
a
nce
assessm
en
t p
o
sitiv
ely affect th
e stud
en
t
’
s learn
i
n
g
ach
i
v
e
men
t; su
ch
st
u
d
i
es
were
con
d
u
c
ted
i
n
d
i
fferen
t
tim
e
s and places and the
obje
cts explor
ed
were also differe
n
t. The fi
rst
study was conduc
ted by
W
a
rm
ini who
fo
u
nd t
h
at
t
h
e l
earni
n
g
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ved by
t
h
e st
ud
ent
s
wh
o l
earn
e
d i
n
gr
o
up u
s
i
ng t
h
e co
nv
en
t
i
onal
learn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l
was si
g
n
i
ficantly lo
wer th
an
th
at ach
iev
e
d
by th
e stud
en
ts
w
h
o
also
learned
in
gr
oup
but th
ey
u
s
ed
th
e SSCS learn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l su
pp
orted
with
th
e v
i
su
al
media. The se
cond st
ud
y w
a
s co
ndu
cted
by Y
u
n
i
Pan
tiwati who
foun
d
t
h
at th
e
co
gn
itiv
e ab
ility o
f
t
h
e st
u
d
e
nts who
were assessed
au
t
h
en
ti
cally was d
i
fferen
t
fro
m
th
at ach
iev
e
d
b
y
th
o
s
e wh
o
were assessed
u
s
i
n
g
the written
assessm
en
t
in
TPS (Th
i
nk
Pair Sh
are)
co
op
erativ
e learn
i
n
g
. Th
e imp
act of th
e use o
f
th
e au
th
en
t
i
c assessm
en
t
o
n
t
h
e cogn
itiv
e ab
ility was g
r
eater
th
an
and
sign
i
f
ican
tly d
i
fferen
t fro
m
th
e i
m
p
act of
th
e u
s
e o
f
th
e
written assessm
en
t. Th
e co
gn
itiv
e ab
ility
w
h
ich
is i
n
tend
ed in th
e
pr
esen
t stud
y is th
e learn
i
ng ach
i
ev
em
en
t. A
l
-
s
ad
aaw
i
f
ound
that th
e learn
i
ng
achi
e
vem
e
nt
f
o
r
sci
e
nces
ac
hi
eve
d
by
t
h
e
expe
ri
m
e
nt
al
gro
u
p
of
st
u
d
en
t
s
, nam
e
l
y
, t
h
e st
u
d
ent
s
w
h
o
we
re
assessed using the
perform
ance assessm
en
t
was
hi
g
h
er
t
h
a
n
t
h
at
achi
e
ve
d
by
t
h
e
co
nt
r
o
l
g
r
ou
p,
nam
e
l
y
, t
h
e
group of st
ude
nts who
were
a
ssessed usi
n
g t
h
e c
o
m
m
on assessm
ent.
B
a
sed
on
t
h
e
back
g
r
o
u
n
d
de
scri
be
d a
b
o
v
e,
i
n
t
h
i
s
p
r
esen
t
st
udy
se
ve
n
hy
p
o
t
h
eses
are
t
e
st
ed;
t
h
e
y
are (1) th
e in
feren
tial statisti
c learn
i
ng
achiev
e
m
e
n
t
wh
ich
is ach
iev
e
d
b
y
th
e stu
d
e
n
t
s with
th
e SSCS
l
earni
n
g
m
odel
i
s
hi
ghe
r t
h
an
t
h
at
w
h
i
c
h i
s
achi
e
ve
d
by
t
h
e st
u
d
ent
s
wi
t
h
t
h
e
c
o
n
v
e
n
t
i
onal
l
e
a
r
ni
ng
m
odel
,
after th
eir nu
meric ab
ility
is c
o
n
t
ro
lled
;
(2
) t
h
e in
feren
tial statistic
learn
i
ng
ach
iev
e
m
e
n
t
wh
ich
is ach
iev
e
d
b
y
th
e stud
en
ts
with
th
e
p
e
rfo
r
man
ce assessmen
t
is h
i
g
h
e
r th
an
th
at
ach
i
e
v
e
d
b
y
th
e stu
d
e
n
t
s
with the written
assessm
en
t, after th
eir
n
u
m
eric ab
ility
is co
n
t
ro
lled
;
(3) the in
teractio
n
between
th
e learn
i
n
g
m
o
d
e
l an
d
t
h
e
t
y
pe of a
ssess
m
e
nt
cont
ri
but
es t
o
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s’ i
n
fe
re
n
tial statistic learn
i
n
g
ach
i
ev
em
en
t, after th
ei
r nu
m
e
ric
ab
ility is co
n
t
ro
lled
;
(4
) as
far as t
h
e gro
u
p
o
f
t
h
e st
u
d
e
n
t
s with
t
h
e
p
e
rfo
rm
an
ce assessm
e
n
t
are co
n
c
ern
e
d
,
th
e inferen
tial statistic learn
i
ng
resu
lt ach
i
eved
b
y
th
e
studen
t
s
with
t
h
e SSCS learn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l is h
i
gh
er than
th
at ach
iev
e
d
b
y
th
e stu
d
e
n
t
s with
th
e con
v
en
tio
n
a
l learn
i
n
g
m
o
d
e
l, after th
eir nu
m
e
ric ab
ility
is co
n
t
ro
lled
;
(5) as far as th
e
g
r
ou
p of t
h
e stud
en
ts
with
th
e wr
itten
assessm
en
t are con
cern
e
d
,
t
h
e in
feren
tial statistic
l
earni
n
g
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ved by
t
h
e st
u
d
e
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e S
S
C
S
l
earni
n
g
m
odel
i
s
l
o
wer
t
h
an t
h
at
achi
e
ved
by
th
e stud
en
ts
with
th
e conv
en
tio
n
a
l le
arn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l, after
th
eir nu
m
e
ric ab
ility is co
n
t
ro
lled
;
(6
) as far as the
gr
o
up
of t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e SSC
S l
earni
ng m
odel
are conce
r
ne
d, t
h
e i
n
fere
n
t
i
a
l
st
at
i
s
t
i
c
learni
ng
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ve
d
by
t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s
wi
t
h
t
h
e pe
rf
orm
a
nce assessm
ent
i
s
hi
g
h
er t
h
an
t
h
at
achi
e
ve
d
by
t
h
e
stu
d
e
n
t
s with
th
e written
assessm
en
t, after t
h
eir nu
m
e
ric a
b
ility
is co
n
t
rolled
;
an
d
(7
) as far as th
e gro
u
p
of
th
e stud
en
ts
with
th
e conv
en
tion
a
l learn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l
are co
n
c
ern
e
d
,
th
e inferen
tial statistic le
arn
i
ng
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
J
ERE
I
S
SN
:
225
2-8
8
2
2
Lear
ni
n
g
M
o
d
e
l
an
d
For
m
of
Asses
m
ent
To
w
a
rd
T
h
e
Inf
e
r
e
nsi
a
l
St
at
i
s
t
i
c
al
..
.. (
I
W
a
ya
n
Wi
di
a
n
a
)
13
9
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ve
d by
t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e pe
rf
orm
a
nce assessm
ent
i
s
l
o
wer t
h
an t
h
at
achi
e
ved
b
y
t
h
e
stu
d
e
n
t
s
with
t
h
e
written
assessm
en
t, after their nu
m
e
ric ab
ility is co
n
t
ro
lled
.
It is ex
p
ected th
at th
e result o
f
th
e
presen
t stud
y m
a
y
po
sitiv
ely con
t
ribu
te to th
e th
eo
retical
devel
opm
ent
o
f
m
odel
s
and t
h
e l
earni
ng as
sessm
ent
,
a
nd
m
a
y
be used a
s
a refere
nce
whi
c
h i
s
t
a
ken
i
n
t
o
co
nsid
eration
i
n
th
e atte
m
p
t
mad
e
to
i
m
p
r
ov
e th
e stud
en
t
s
’ in
feren
tial statistic
learn
i
ng
ach
iev
e
m
e
n
t
. Th
e
reason is t
h
at the res
u
lt of the
prese
n
t st
udy
explains
in
d
e
t
a
il th
e sup
e
riority o
f
th
e SSCS m
o
d
e
l learn
i
n
g
and
th
e form
o
f
assessm
en
t as p
a
rt o
f
th
e attem
p
t
m
a
d
e
to
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
t
h
e in
ferential stat
istic lea
r
n
i
n
g
ach
i
ev
emen
t.
In
ad
d
ition
,
this p
r
esen
t stu
dy also
p
i
ctu
r
es th
e co
rrelation
b
e
t
w
een
t
h
e n
u
m
eric ab
ilit
y an
d
th
e inferen
tial
statistic learning achie
vem
e
nt. The
im
ple
m
entation
of
the
accurate learning m
odel a
n
d the acc
urate t
y
pe of
assessm
en
t in
th
e learn
i
ng
process will co
n
t
ri
b
u
t
e t
o
t
h
e st
ud
en
ts’ learn
i
ng pro
cess an
d mo
tiv
ate th
e stud
en
t
s
t
o
l
earn i
n
or
d
e
r t
o
achi
e
ve t
h
e m
a
xim
u
m
learni
ng ac
hi
ve
ment. It is also expecte
d
that the pre
s
ent study m
a
y
give a
picture t
o
the lecturers
whose
responsibility
is teaching
Infere
ntial St
atistics that i
t
is i
m
portant to use
the accurate learni
ng m
odel a
n
d assessm
ent m
odel, and t
o
pay attention to the
studen
ts’
num
eric ability in the
learn
i
ng
p
r
o
c
ess. Su
ch a p
i
ct
u
r
e
will sig
n
i
fican
tly co
n
t
ri
bu
te to
th
e learn
i
ng
q
u
a
lity an
d
t
h
e
q
u
a
lity o
f
t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s’ l
ear
n
i
ng achi
e
vem
e
nt
. A
p
art
f
r
om
t
h
at
, i
t
i
s
exp
ected that the res
u
lt of the
p
r
ese
n
t
st
udy
can
be
used
as
a
re
fere
nce
by
the othe
r re
searche
r
s who ar
e in
terested
i
n
co
ndu
ctin
g si
milar research
2.
R
E
SEARC
H M
ETHOD
This present study
was conducted at the
Departm
e
nt
of t
h
e Pre-school
Teach
ers’ Trai
ning, Faculty
of E
d
ucation,
Gane
sha
Uni
v
ersity of E
duc
ation in th
e
odd sem
e
ster of the academ
ic
year 2015/2016, from
Au
g
u
st
t
o
No
vem
b
er 2
0
1
5
.
It
i
s
a q
u
asi
-
e
xpe
ri
m
e
nt
al
study
wi
t
h
a
2x
2 fact
ori
a
l
des
i
gn.
The c
h
a
r
t
of t
h
e
desi
g
n
i
s
p
r
ese
n
t
e
d i
n
Ta
bl
e
1
.
Tab
e
l 1
.
Factorial
Design
2
× 2
A
(Learning M
o
del)
B (
F
orm
of Asses
s
m
ent
)
SSCS
(A
1
)
Convent
i
onal
(A
2
)
Perfor
m
a
nce
(B
1
)
(X,Y
)
11k
k
=
1
,
2
……………..
n
11
(A
1
B
1
)
(X,Y
)
21k
k
=
1
,
2
……………..
n
21
(A
2
B
1
)
Writt
e
n (B
2
)
(X,Y
)
12k
k
=
1
,
2
……………..
n
12
(A
1
B
2
)
(X,Y
)
22k
k
=
1
,
2
……………..
n
22
(A
2
B
2
)
Th
e
po
pu
lation
o
f
th
e
presen
t stud
y in
cl
ud
ed th
e stud
en
ts
o
f
th
e
Dep
a
rtm
e
n
t
o
f
the Pre-sch
o
o
l
Teachers’ Trai
ning, Fac
u
lty
of E
duca
tion,
Gane
sha Uni
v
ersity of Educ
ati
on who
were in the even s
e
m
e
ster
of the academ
ic year 2014/2015 and
had programmed
and attended t
h
e co
urse of Infe
rential Statistics,
t
o
t
a
l
i
ng
22
8
w
ho
we
re di
vi
d
e
d i
n
t
o
si
x cl
a
sses. I
n
t
h
e
p
r
esent
st
u
d
y
,
t
h
e sam
p
l
e
was det
e
rm
i
n
ed usi
ng t
h
e
ran
d
o
m
sam
p
l
i
ng
t
ech
ni
q
u
e.
B
a
sed
on
t
h
e
r
a
nd
om
resul
t
,
i
t
was
fo
u
n
d
t
h
at
t
h
e sam
p
l
e
i
n
cl
u
d
ed
1
3
0
st
ude
nt
s
wh
o
wer
e
di
vi
ded
i
n
t
o
f
o
ur cl
asses.
Th
e d
a
ta co
llected
in
th
is p
r
esen
t stu
d
y
were
th
e d
a
ta o
n
th
e
in
feren
tial learn
i
ng
ach
iev
e
m
e
n
t
an
d
th
e
stu
d
e
n
t
s’
n
u
m
eric ab
ility. Su
ch
d
a
ta were o
b
t
ain
e
d
th
rou
g
h
th
e test wh
ich
was
d
e
sig
n
e
d
to
m
e
a
s
u
r
e the
in
feren
tial statistic learn
i
ng
ach
i
ev
em
en
t b
a
sed
o
n
t
h
e cu
r
r
i
c
ul
um
i
ssued
b
y
Ganes
h
a
U
n
i
v
ersi
t
y
o
f
E
d
uc
at
i
on.
The t
e
st
was d
e
si
gne
d i
n
t
h
e fo
rm
of an essay
t
e
st
m
a
de up of
8 i
t
e
m
s
. A rub
r
i
c
was use
d
as t
h
e cri
t
e
ri
a of t
h
e
in
feren
tial statistic learn
i
ng
ach
iev
e
m
e
n
t
with
th
e sco
r
e
s
ra
ngi
ng
f
r
o
m
0 t
o
l
0
.
Th
e dat
a
on
t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s
’
n
u
m
eric ab
ility was
o
b
t
ai
n
e
d
fro
m
th
e resu
lt of th
e obj
ectiv
e m
u
ltip
le-
c
h
o
i
ce test. It
was
u
s
ed
to test th
e
co
un
ting
op
eratio
n
s
su
ch
as
su
ch
as add
itio
n, d
e
du
ctio
n,
m
u
ltip
licatio
n
,
d
i
v
i
si
o
n
, and th
e m
i
x
e
d
cou
n
ting
o
p
e
ration
s
to
talin
g
30
ite
m
s
with
th
e criteria th
at sco
r
e 1
was fo
r th
e item wh
ich
wa
s c
o
rrectly answe
r
ed and
score
0
was fo
r
the
item
whic
h was wr
o
ngly
answ
ere
d
.
The
data we
re
analyzed
using the
desc
riptive and
i
n
fe
rential techniques
.
The
desc
riptive analysi
s
use
d
t
h
e m
ean
fo
rm
ul
a and st
anda
r
d
o
f
de
vi
at
i
on.
The
f
o
r
m
ul
a of co
vari
ance (
A
NAC
O
V
A
)
a
n
al
y
s
i
s
was
use
d
as th
e tech
n
i
q
u
e of inferen
tial an
alysis with
t
h
e assistan
ce
of
SPSS-
P
C
f
o
r
W
i
nd
ow
s v
e
r
s
i
o
n 16
.0
.
3.
R
E
SU
LTS AN
D ANA
LY
SIS
3.
1.
The description of
the
data on the
numeric ability
and inf
erenti
al statistic
Th
e d
e
scrip
tion
o
f
th
e
d
a
ta o
n
th
e
n
u
m
eric ab
ility
an
d
in
feren
tial stati
s
tic learn
i
n
g
ach
i
v
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
each
group of t
h
e st
ude
nts is
presente
d in Ta
ble 2.
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
S
SN
:
2
252
-88
22
IJER
E
V
o
l
.
5,
No
. 2,
Ju
ne
2
0
1
6
:
13
5 – 1
4
7
14
0
Tab
l
e
2
.
Su
mmary of th
e Data Ob
tain
ed fro
m
th
e Resu
lt of t
h
e St
u
d
y
A
B
A
1
A
2
Total
X
Y X Y X
Y
B
1
N
N
33
33
33
66
66
70.
55
16.
58
62.
52
18.
05
66.
53
S
S
3.
48
1.
77
4.
32
2.
59
5.
61
B
2
N
32
32
32
32
64
64
18.
41
63.
75
18.
69
66.
81
18.
55
65.
28
S
2.
9
4.
14
2.
16
4.
54
2.
43
4.
58
Total
N
65
65
65
65
130
130
18.
97
67.
2
17.
62
64.
63
18.
29
65.
92
S 2.
62
5.
11
2.
23
4.
9
2.
51
5.
15
3.
2.
Prerequisite T
e
st
of Anal
ysis
Test
of Data
Nor
m
ality
The Kol
m
ogo
r
o
v
-
Sm
i
r
no
v
a
or Sh
ap
iro-W
ilk test was u
s
ed
to
test th
e no
rmali
t
y o
f
th
e
data assisted
with
t
h
e SPSS
statistic p
r
og
ram
fo
r
W
i
nd
ow v
e
rsion
16
.0.
The
res
u
lt of t
h
e calc
u
lation
is presente
d i
n
Table
3 as
f
o
l
l
o
ws.
It
can
be
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
fr
om
Tabl
e
3 t
h
at
al
l
t
h
e si
gni
fi
cant
sc
ore
s
,
whi
c
h a
r
e
pr
esent
e
d
,
a
r
e
hi
gh
e
r
t
h
an
0.
05;
t
h
e
r
ef
ore
,
i
t
can
be co
ncl
u
de
d
t
h
at
al
l
t
h
e da
t
a
on t
h
e st
u
d
e
nt
s’ i
n
fer
e
nt
i
a
l
st
at
i
s
t
i
c
l
e
arni
ng
ach
iev
e
m
e
n
t
ob
tain
ed fro
m
th
e sub
p
opu
latio
n were
with
no
rm
al d
i
strib
u
t
io
n
.
Tab
l
e
3
.
Su
mmary of th
e Result o
f
t
h
e Test
of th
e Data
on
t
h
e
Inferen
tial Statistic Learn
i
n
g
Ach
i
ev
em
en
t (Y)
G
r
oup N
Sig
Dist
ribut
i
on
A
1
65
0.
170
Norm
al
A
2
65
0.
168
Norm
al
B
1
66
0.
122
Norm
al
B
2
64
0.
195
Norm
al
A
1
B
1
33
0.
059
Norm
al
A
1
B
2
32
0.
711
Norm
al
A
2
B
1
33
0.
641
Norm
al
A
2
B
2
32
0.
140
Norm
al
3.
2.
1.
The Test
of the Homogeneity
of Variances
Th
e Bartlett test was u
s
ed
to
test th
e hom
o
g
e
n
e
ity o
f
v
a
rian
ces. Based
o
n
th
e resu
lt of th
e
calcu
latio
n
,
it is id
en
tified
th
at th
e v
a
lu
e of
X
2
count
is eq
u
a
l to
2
.
37
07
, an
d th
at th
e v
a
lu
e o
f
X
2
table
is equ
a
l to
7.
85
f
o
r
α
wh
i
c
h
is equ
a
l to
0.05
an
d
dk
wh
i
c
h
is equ
a
l to
3, m
ean
in
g
t
h
at
H
o
is acce
pted. The
r
efore
,
it c
a
n
be
concl
ude
d t
h
at
t
h
e l
ear
ni
n
g
m
odel
and
t
h
e
assessm
ent
fo
rm
cont
ri
b
u
t
e
t
o
t
h
e
va
ri
anc
e
o
f
t
h
e
dat
a
on
t
h
e
in
feren
tial statistic learn
i
n
g
ach
i
ev
em
en
t ach
iev
e
d
b
y
su
b p
opu
latio
n
,
m
ean
ing
th
at A
1
B
1
, A
2
B
1
, A1B2 are
hom
oge
no
us
.
3.
2.
2.
The
Test of Reg
ression
Linea
r
ity
SPSS for
W
i
ndows 16.
0
wit
h
co
mp
are me
ans
p
r
o
c
ed
ure was u
s
ed
to
test th
e reg
r
essio
n
lin
earity
with
a criterion
th
at th
e num
b
e
r sh
ou
ld
b
e
sign
ifican
tl
y h
i
g
h
e
r th
an 0
.
095
. Th
e resu
lt o
f
calcu
l
a
tio
n
is
prese
n
t
e
d i
n
T
a
bl
e 4.
As ca
n be i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d f
r
o
m
Tabl
e 4, t
h
e resul
t
o
f
t
h
e l
i
neari
t
y
t
e
st
shows t
h
at
t
h
e n
u
m
bers
are sign
ifican
tl
y h
i
g
h
er t
h
an
0
.
0
5
, m
ean
in
g
th
at th
e st
ud
ents’ nu
m
e
ric ab
ilit
y is lin
early co
rrelated
with
th
e
in
feren
tial statistic learn
i
ng
ach
i
ev
em
en
t.
Tabl
e
4. T
h
e
S
t
at
i
s
t
i
c
s of F-t
e
st
of
AB
,
A
*
B
on
t
h
e
In
feren
t
ial Statistic Le
arn
i
n
g
Ach
i
ev
emen
t after t
h
e
Stu
d
e
n
t
s’ Nu
meric Ab
ility Was Con
t
ro
lled
Group of
Sa
m
p
le
Sig.
Conclusion
A
1
0.
304
L
i
nier
A
2
0.
678
L
i
nier
B
1
0.
221
L
i
nier
B
2
0.
543
L
i
nier
A
1
B
1
0.
847
L
i
nier
A
1
B
2
0.
425
L
i
nier
A
2
B
1
0.
499
L
i
nier
A
2
B
2
0.
417
L
i
nier
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
J
ERE
I
S
SN
:
225
2-8
8
2
2
Lear
ni
n
g
M
o
d
e
l
an
d
For
m
of
Asses
m
ent
To
w
a
rd
T
h
e
Inf
e
r
e
nsi
a
l
St
at
i
s
t
i
c
al
..
.. (
I
W
a
ya
n
Wi
di
a
n
a
)
14
1
A
s
all th
e
p
r
er
eq
u
i
sites
o
f
th
e
Co
v
a
r
i
an
ce
Analysis (
A
NAKO
VA
) w
e
r
e
all satisf
i
ed
,
th
e
A
NAK
OVA
anal
y
s
i
s
co
ul
d
be c
ont
i
n
ue
d t
o
t
e
st
t
h
e
hy
pot
heses
o
f
t
h
e
st
u
d
y
.
3.
3.
Hy
pothesis Tria
l
Priority was
g
i
v
e
n to
t
h
e trial
s
of th
e m
a
in
effect
hy
p
o
t
h
e
s
es,
nam
e
ly
, t
h
e t
r
i
a
l
of
hy
pot
hesi
s
1, t
h
e
t
r
i
a
l
of
hy
p
o
t
h
esi
s
2,
an
d t
h
e
t
r
i
a
l
of
hy
pot
hesi
s
3.
Th
e resu
lt of th
e an
al
ysis u
s
ing
the
statistical p
r
o
g
ram
o
f
SPSS
for
W
i
ndows
ve
rsion 16.00 is
pr
e
s
ente
d in the
followi
ng table.
Tab
l
e
5
.
Th
e F-test Statistics for
AB,
A*
B
on
th
e Stud
en
ts’ In
feren
tial Statistic Learn
i
ng
Ach
i
ev
em
en
t after
th
eir Nu
m
e
ric
Ab
ility W
a
s
C
o
n
t
ro
lled
Source of
Variance
JK
Db
RJK
F
Sig.
Corrected Model
1750.
2
8
4
4
437.
57
1
32.
757
0.
000
In
tercep
t
4924.
8
3
0
1
4924.
8
3
0
368.
67
2
0.
000
X
485.
51
4
1
485.
51
4
36.
346
0.
000
A
54.
214
1
54.
214
4.
058
0.
046
B
90.
393
1
90.
393
6.
767
0.
010
A * B
500.
87
4
1
500.
87
4
37.
495
0.
000
Erro
rs
1669.
7
8
5
125
13.
358
Total
5682
49.
00
0
130
Total corr
ected
3420.
0
6
9
129
F t
a
bl
e =
3.
9
2
B
a
sed
on
w
h
at
i
s
pre
s
ent
e
d i
n
Tabl
e
5, i
t
ca
n
be i
n
t
e
pret
e
d
a
s
f
o
l
l
o
ws:
First
, it can be seen from
line A
of Ta
ble 5 that the val
u
e of F
count
i
s
equal
t
o
4.
05
8
,
and t
h
at
t
h
e
val
u
e o
f
F
table
is equ
a
l to
3
.
9, m
ean
in
g
t
h
at th
e
v
a
lu
e of
F
count
> the val
u
e
of F
table.
Therefore
,
H
o
wa
s n
o
t
accepted, m
e
a
n
ing that t
h
e i
n
fe
rential statistic learni
ng a
c
hivem
e
nt achieved
by the st
ude
nts
with t
h
e SSCS
l
earni
n
g
m
odel
was
di
f
f
ere
n
t
fr
om
t
h
at
achi
e
ved
by
t
h
o
s
e
with
th
e con
v
en
tio
n
a
l learn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l, after
th
eir
n
u
m
eric ab
ility was con
t
ro
lled
.
Based on
t
h
e corrected
m
e
an
, it can
b
e
stated
th
at t
h
e co
rrected m
ean
o
f
the
infere
ntial statistic learning ac
hievem
ent achieved
by
the students wit
h
the SSCS learni
ng
m
odel was 66.576
h
i
gh
er t
h
an
t
h
at of th
e inferen
tial statis
tic learn
i
n
g
ach
i
ev
em
en
t ach
iev
e
d
b
y
t
h
e stu
d
e
n
t
s wit
h
th
e
con
v
e
n
t
i
onal
l
earni
ng
m
odel
,
whi
c
h i
s
e
q
ual
t
o
6
5
.
2
29
.
Second
,
fr
om
l
i
n
e B
of
Ta
bl
e 5,
i
t
ca
n
be se
en t
h
at
t
h
e
val
u
e
of
F
count
is eq
u
a
l
to
6
.
76
7,
an
d th
at t
h
e
val
u
e of
F
table
is equ
a
l to
3
.
92 wh
ich
is m
ean
in
g
t
h
at th
e
v
a
l
u
e
o
f
F
count
> th
e v
a
lu
e of F
table
.
There
f
ore, H
O
was
acccepted,
m
eaning that the infere
n
tial statistic
learning achievem
e
nt
achieve
d by the stude
nts with the
per
f
o
r
m
a
nce assessem
e
nt
was di
ffe
rent
f
r
o
m
t
h
e i
n
ferent
i
a
l
st
ati
s
t
i
c
l
e
arni
ng achi
e
ve
m
e
nt
achi
e
ved
by
t
h
e
stu
d
e
n
t
s wit
h
th
e written
assessem
e
n
t
, after th
eir
nu
m
e
ri
c ab
ility was co
n
t
ro
lled. Based
o
n
t
h
e co
rrected
mean, it can
be stated that the co
rrected
m
ean
o
f
th
e in
feren
tial l
earni
n
g
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ve
d by
t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e pe
rf
orm
a
nce assessem
e
nt
was 6
6
.
7
42
higher t
h
an the corrected
m
ean
o
f
the in
feren
tial
learn
i
ng
ach
i
eve
m
en
t ach
iev
e
d
b
y
th
e
stud
ents with
t
h
e
written
assessem
e
n
t
, wh
ich
is equal to
65
.06
3
.
Third
, fr
om
line A
*
B
of Ta
bl
e 5, i
t
can
be
seen that the value of F
count
is eq
u
a
l to
37
.4
95
, an
d
t
h
at
the val
u
e
of F
ta
ble
is eq
u
a
l t
o
3.92
, m
ean
ing
t
h
at th
e v
a
l
u
e
of F
count
> t
h
e
value of
F
table.
There
f
ore, H
o
was no
t
accepted,
m
eaning that the interaction
bet
w
e
e
n the learni
ng
m
odel and the
assessm
ent form contributed to the
stu
d
e
n
t
s’i
n
feren
tial statistic le
arn
i
n
g
ach
iev
e
me
n
t
after t
h
eir
n
u
m
eric ab
ility was co
n
t
ro
lled
.
It
can be c
o
n
c
l
ude
d t
h
at
t
h
e i
n
t
e
ract
i
on
bet
w
ee
n t
h
e l
earni
ng m
odel
and t
h
e asse
ssm
ent
form
co
nv
in
ci
n
g
l
y co
n
t
ribu
ted
to
th
e in
feren
tial statistic
learn
i
ng
ach
iev
e
m
e
n
t
ach
iev
e
d
b
y
the stu
d
e
n
t
s; th
erefore,
th
e sim
p
le effect test was co
ntin
u
e
d. Th
e
GLM Un
iv
aria
te p
r
o
c
edu
r
e
with
th
e d
e
si
gn
X B A*
B assisted
with
t
h
e SPS
S st
at
i
s
t
i
cal
pro
g
ram
for
Wi
n
d
o
w
s
v
e
rsi
o
n
16
.0
0
w
a
s use
d
t
o
t
e
st
hy
p
o
t
h
esi
s
4 a
n
d
hy
pot
hesi
s
5. T
h
e
resu
lt
o
f
an
alysis is presen
ted
in
Tab
l
e 6.
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
S
SN
:
2
252
-88
22
IJER
E
V
o
l
.
5,
No
. 2,
Ju
ne
2
0
1
6
:
13
5 – 1
4
7
14
2
Tab
l
e
6
.
Th
e Test-t Statistics o
f
th
e
Param
a
t
e
r
o
f
t
h
e Mean
o
f
th
e
In
terferen
tial Statistic Learn
i
n
g
Achi
e
v
em
ent
am
ong Al
l
Le
ve
l
s
of
t
h
e
Lear
ni
ng
Fact
o
r
s
f
o
r
Every
Level
o
f
t
h
e
Assessm
ent
F
o
rm
Fact
or
by
Co
n
t
ro
llin
g th
e Stud
en
ts’
Numeric Ab
ility
Pa
ra
m
e
ter
B
Std. Er
ror
T
Sig.
In
tercep
t
50.
820
2.
730
18.
613
0.
000
[B=
B
1]
-
2
.
490
0.
955
-
2
.
607
0.
010
[B=
B
2]
0
a
-
-
-
[A=A1]
* [B=B1]
5.
515
0.
992
5.
560
0.
000
[A=A1]
* [B=B2]
-
2
.
822
0.
915
-
3
.
085
0.
003
[A=A2]
* [B=B1]
0
a
-
-
-
[A=A2]
* [B=B2]
0
a
-
-
-
X
0.
856
0.
142
6.
029
0.
000
Based
o
n
th
e
resu
lt of an
alysis presen
ted
i
n
Tab
l
e
6
,
it can
b
e
in
terpreted th
at:
First,
fr
om
l
i
n
e
[(
A=
1)
*(B
=
1
)
of Tabl
e 6,
i
t
can be
see
n
t
h
at
t
h
e
v
a
l
u
e of
t
count
is eq
u
a
l to 5
.
56
0, an
d
th
at
th
e v
a
lu
e o
f
t
table
i
s
eq
ual
t
o
1.
19
8
0
, m
ean
ing
th
at t
h
e
v
a
lu
e
of t
count
>
th
e v
a
lu
e of
t
table.
Therefore, H
o
wa
s
not accepte
d,
meaning that, as far
as the students wit
h
the perform
a
nce assessm
ent are concerne
d, the
i
n
fere
nt
i
a
l
st
at
i
s
t
i
c
l
earni
ng
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ve
d by
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e SSC
S l
earni
ng m
odel
was
di
ffe
re
nt
fr
om
t
h
at
achi
e
ve
d
by
t
h
e st
u
d
ent
s
wi
t
h
t
h
e C
o
n
v
ent
i
o
nal
Lear
ni
n
g
m
odel
.
B
a
sed o
n
t
h
e c
o
rrect
e
d
mean
, it can
b
e
id
en
tified
th
at
th
e corr
ected
mean
of th
e in
feren
tial statis
tic learni
ng achi
e
vem
e
nt achieved
by
th
e stu
d
e
n
t
s with
th
e p
e
rforman
ce assessmen
t is 6
9
.
49
9 h
i
g
h
e
r th
an
that o
f
th
e in
feren
tial statist
i
c
learn
i
ng
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ve
d
by
t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s
wi
t
h
t
h
e C
o
n
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
Learni
n
g
M
odel
,
w
h
i
c
h
i
s
equal
t
o
63
.9
8
4
.
Second
, f
r
om
li
ne [(
A=1
)
*(B
=
2)]
o
f
Tabl
e
6, i
t
can be see
n
t
h
at
t
h
e val
u
e of t
count
is eq
u
a
l to
-3.085
,
and t
h
at the va
lue of t
table
i
s
e
qual
t
o
1.
9
8
0
,
m
eani
ng t
h
at
t
h
e val
u
e o
f
t
count
> th
e v
a
lu
e
o
f
t
table.
Th
e
r
efo
r
e,
H
o
was not accepted, m
eaning that, as far as
the student
s
with the writt
en assessm
ent are conce
r
ne
d, the
i
n
fere
nt
i
a
l
st
at
i
s
t
i
c
l
earni
ng
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ve
d by
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e SSC
S l
earni
ng m
odel
was
di
ffe
re
nt
fr
om
t
h
at
achi
e
ve
d by
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e co
n
v
ent
i
o
nal
l
earn
i
ng m
odel
.
B
a
sed o
n
t
h
e co
r
r
ect
ed
mean
, as far as th
e stu
d
e
n
t
s with
th
e written
assessm
en
t are
co
n
cern
e
d
,
it can
b
e
id
en
tified
th
at th
e co
rrected
mean
o
f
th
e i
n
feren
tial statist
i
c learn
i
ng
achiev
e
m
e
n
t
ach
ie
v
e
d
b
y
th
e stud
en
ts
with
th
e
SSCS learn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l
is 6
3
.652
lower th
an
th
at of th
e learn
i
ng ach
iev
e
m
e
n
t
ach
iev
e
d
b
y
t
h
e stud
en
ts with
th
e Con
v
e
n
tio
n
a
l
Learni
ng
m
ode
l
,
w
h
i
c
h i
s
eq
u
a
l
t
o
6
6
.
4
74
.
Th
e GLM
Univ
ariat p
r
o
c
edu
r
e
with
th
e d
e
sign
: X A
A*
B th
e statistical p
r
o
g
ram
o
f
SPSS for
W
i
n
d
o
w
s
ve
rsi
o
n
1
6
.
0
0
was
u
s
ed t
o
t
e
st
hy
p
o
t
h
esi
s
6 a
n
d
h
y
pot
he
si
s 7
.
T
h
e res
u
l
t
i
s
p
r
es
ent
e
d i
n
Ta
bl
e
7.
Tab
l
e
7
.
Th
e T-test Statistics o
f
th
e
Param
e
t
e
r
o
f
t
h
e Mean
o
f
th
e
Inferen
t
i
a
l Statistic Learn
i
n
g
Ach
i
ev
emen
t
am
ong
Al
l
t
h
e
Assessm
ent
Fo
rm
Fact
ors f
o
r
Every
Level
o
f
t
h
e Lea
r
ni
n
g
F
act
or
by
C
o
nt
r
o
l
l
i
ng t
h
e St
u
d
e
nt
s’
Nu
m
e
ric Ab
ilit
y
Pa
ra
m
e
ter
B
Std. Er
ror
t
Sig.
In
tercep
t
50,
820
2,
730
18,
613
0,
000
[A
=
A
1]
-
2
,
822
0,
915
-
3
,
085
0,
003
[A
=
A
2]
0
a
-
-
-
[A=A1]
* [B=B1]
5,
846
0,
920
6,
352
0,
000
[A=A1]
* [B=B2]
0
a
-
-
-
[A=A2]
* [B=B1]
-
2
,
490
0,
955
-
2
,
607
0,
010
[A=A2]
* [B=B2]
0
a
-
-
-
X
0,
856
0,
142
6,
029
.0
,0
0
Based
o
n
th
e
resu
lt of th
e an
alysis in
Tab
l
e
7, it can
b
e
i
n
terp
reted
th
at:
First
, from
lin
e [(A=
1
)*(B=1) it can be seen that the value of t
count
i
s
equal
t
o
6.
3
5
2
,
and t
h
at
t
h
e
val
u
e of
t
table
is equ
a
l to
1.98
0, m
ean
in
g
t
h
at th
e
v
a
lu
e
o
f
t
count
> th
e
v
a
lu
e
o
f
t
table.
There
f
ore, H
o
was not
accepted, m
e
a
n
ing that the
infere
n
tial statistic learning
achievem
e
nt
achieve
d by the stude
nts wit
h
the
p
e
rform
a
n
ce assessm
en
t was
d
i
fferen
t
fro
m
th
at ach
iev
e
d by th
e stud
en
ts
with
th
e written
assessm
e
n
t
. As
far
as the stude
nts with the SSCS learning
m
e
thod are conce
r
ned, it can be s
een that the correct
ed m
ean
of the
in
feren
tial statistic learn
i
ng
ach
i
ev
em
en
t ach
i
e
v
e
d b
y
t
h
e st
ud
en
ts with th
e
p
e
rf
or
m
a
n
ce assessm
en
t is 69
.4
99
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
J
ERE
I
S
SN
:
225
2-8
8
2
2
Lear
ni
n
g
M
o
d
e
l
an
d
For
m
of
Asses
m
ent
To
w
a
rd
T
h
e
Inf
e
r
e
nsi
a
l
St
at
i
s
t
i
c
al
..
.. (
I
W
a
ya
n
Wi
di
a
n
a
)
14
3
h
i
gh
er th
an
th
at o
f
th
e i
n
ferential statist
i
c lea
r
n
i
n
g
ach
iev
e
men
t
ach
iev
e
d
b
y
th
e
stud
en
ts with
t
h
e
written
test
,
wh
ich
is equ
a
l
to
63
.65
2
.
Second
, f
r
om
li
ne [(
A=2
)
*(B
=
1)
of Ta
bl
e 7,
i
t
can be seen t
h
at
t
h
e val
u
e
of t
count
is eq
u
a
l to
-2
.6
07,
and that t
h
e
va
lue of t
table
is eq
u
a
l t
o
1
.
98
0,
mean
in
g th
at t
h
e
v
a
lu
e of t
count >
th
e v
a
lu
e
of
table
. T
h
erefore, H
o
was acce
pted,
meaning t
h
at,
as far as
the st
ude
nts
with the Conve
n
tional
Learning m
o
del are conce
r
ned, t
h
e
in
feren
tial statistic learn
i
ng
ach
iev
e
m
e
n
t
ach
iev
e
d
b
y
th
e stud
en
ts with th
e
p
e
rfo
r
m
a
n
ce test
was
different
fro
m
th
at o
f
th
e in
feren
tial statistic
learn
i
n
g
ach
i
ev
em
e
n
t ach
iev
e
d
by th
e stu
d
e
n
t
s with
th
e written
test.
Based
on the
c
o
rrected m
ean, as fa
r a
s
the
s
t
ude
nts
w
ith
t
h
e co
nv
en
tional learn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l are con
c
ern
e
d, it
can be i
d
e
n
tified that the c
o
rrected
m
ean
of th
e inferen
tial statistic
learn
i
ng
ach
iev
e
men
t
ach
iev
e
d
by th
e
stu
d
e
n
t
s
with
t
h
e
p
e
rform
a
n
ce test is 6
3
.984
5 lower t
h
an
th
at ach
iev
e
d
b
y
th
e st
u
d
e
n
t
s with
the written
test,
wh
ich
is equ
a
l
to
66
.47
4
.
3.
4.
Discussion
The
res
u
lt of t
h
e
pres
ent st
udy s
h
ow
s t
h
at
th
e
h
ypo
th
esis wh
ich stat
ed t
h
at the
learning m
odel a
n
d
th
e assessm
en
t form
sig
n
i
fican
tly p
o
s
itiv
ely
co
n
t
ribu
ted
t
o
th
e inferen
tial statistic learn
i
n
g
ach
i
ev
em
en
t after
th
e stud
en
ts’ nu
m
e
ric ab
ilit
y
was co
n
t
ro
lled can
b
e
em
p
i
rically an
d
statistically p
r
o
v
e
d
an
d
tested
, m
e
an
i
ng
t
h
at
t
h
e
SSC
S
l
earni
ng
m
odel
an
d t
h
e
pe
r
f
o
r
m
a
nce asse
ssm
ent
,
whi
c
h
we
re
vi
ewe
d
t
o
be
s
upe
ri
o
r
i
n
t
h
i
s
p
r
esen
t stud
y were
p
r
o
v
ed
t
o
im
p
r
o
v
e
th
e in
feren
tial statistic ach
iev
e
men
t
ach
iev
e
d b
y
th
e stu
d
e
nts o
f
th
e
Depa
rt
m
e
nt
of t
h
e P
r
e-sc
h
ool
Teac
her
s
’
Trai
ni
n
g
,
Fa
cul
t
y
of E
d
u
cat
i
on,
Gane
s
h
a U
n
i
v
e
r
si
t
y
m
o
re
effectiv
ely, after th
eir nu
m
e
ric ab
ility was co
n
t
ro
lled.
Su
ch
a resu
lt i
s
m
a
d
e
to
b
e
clearer
with
th
e resu
lt
o
f
calculatio
n
in
wh
ich
it was
ob
tained
th
at th
e
val
u
e o
f
F
count
fo
r va
ri
at
i
on A
i
s
equal
t
o
4.
0
5
8
,
t
h
e val
u
e o
f
F
count
for v
a
riatio
n
B is eq
ual to
6
.
767
, and
th
at
the
val
u
e of F
count
fo
r
v
a
riation
A*
B is equ
a
l to
37
.49
5
, an
d th
at th
e
v
a
lu
e
o
f
F
count
for the
corrected m
odel i
s
eq
u
a
l t
o
3
2
.757
, m
ean
in
g th
at th
e effect of t
h
e learn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l on
t
h
e inferen
tial statistic l
earn
i
n
g
ach
ieve
m
e
n
t
ach
iev
e
d
b
y
th
e stud
en
ts
b
e
fore th
eir
n
u
m
eric ab
ility
was co
n
t
ro
lled
was sig
n
i
fican
tly d
i
fferen
t
from th
e
effect of th
e learn
i
n
g
m
o
d
e
l o
n
t
h
e in
feren
tial statis
t
i
c
l
e
arni
ng ac
hi
eve
m
ent
achi
e
ved
by
t
h
e st
ude
n
t
s aft
e
r
th
eir
n
u
m
eric ab
ility was con
t
ro
lled
.
In
g
e
n
e
ral, th
e effect o
f
th
e nu
m
e
ric ab
ility on
t
h
e i
n
feren
tial
statisti
c
l
earni
n
g
ac
hi
ev
em
ent
i
s
5
1
.
2
0
%
, w
h
i
c
h ca
n
be
part
i
a
l
l
y
ex
pl
ai
ned
as
fol
l
ows
.
First
, th
e result o
f
th
e h
y
p
o
t
h
e
sis ex
am
in
at
io
n
wh
ich
shows th
at t
h
e inferen
tial statist
i
c learn
i
ng
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ve
d
by
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s
wi
t
h
t
h
e
SSC
S
l
earni
ng m
odel
i
s
hi
g
h
er
t
h
a
n
t
h
at
achi
e
ved
by
t
h
e
stude
nts with
the Conve
n
tional Lear
ning
m
odel can be
accepted.
Theref
ore
,
it can be conclude
d that
statistical
ly,
as far as th
e inferen
tial statistic
learn
i
n
g
prov
i
d
ed at the
De
partm
e
nt of the
Pre-s
c
hool Tea
c
hers
’
Trai
ni
n
g
, Fac
u
l
t
y
of Ed
uca
t
i
on, Ga
nes
h
a
Uni
v
e
r
si
t
y
of
Ed
u
cation
is co
n
c
ern
e
d
,
t
h
e in
feren
tial statistic
learning ac
hievem
ent achieved by t
h
e st
u
d
e
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e S
S
C
S
m
odel
l
earni
ng
was
hi
g
h
e
r t
h
a
n
t
h
at
ob
t
a
i
n
ed
by
t
h
e
st
u
d
ent
s
wi
t
h
t
h
e C
o
n
v
e
nt
i
onal
Lear
ni
ng
m
odel
;
t
h
e
di
ffe
re
nce i
s
2.
99
%.
Su
ch
a con
c
lusio
n
is em
p
i
rically su
pp
orted
b
y
th
e informatio
n
ob
tain
ed
thro
ugh
o
b
serv
ation
and
in
terv
iew after th
e SSCS learn
i
n
g
m
o
d
e
l an
d
t
h
e co
nv
entio
n
a
l learn
i
ng m
o
d
e
l were
atten
d
e
d.
Un
li
k
e
th
e
con
v
e
n
t
i
onal
l
earni
ng m
odel
i
n
whi
c
h t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s t
e
nde
d t
o
be passi
v
e
, l
i
s
t
e
n t
o
and
m
a
ke a not
e of w
h
at
was ex
pl
ai
ne
d,
t
h
e SSC
S l
ear
ni
n
g
m
odel
m
a
de t
h
e st
u
d
e
n
t
s
feel that they were as
ke
d to think about and plan
th
e real world
’
s p
r
ob
lem
s
clo
s
ely related
to statistics an
d
th
eir so
l
u
tion
s
th
ro
ugh
stru
ctu
r
ed
ex
ercises. Th
e
stu
d
e
n
t
s also
st
ated
th
at learn
i
n
g
th
e i
n
feren
t
ial stat
istics w
a
s n
o
t
d
i
fficu
l
t
an
y lo
n
g
er bu
t
in
terestin
g. Vi
ewed
fr
om
t
h
e pat
t
e
rns
of t
h
e a
n
s
w
ers
gi
ve
n by
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s,
it can be stated that they
we
re able to 1) create
math
e
m
atica
l/s
tatistica
l
m
o
d
e
ls fo
r t
h
e prob
lem
s
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
;
2) choo
se an
d
d
e
term
in
e th
e strateg
y
u
s
ed
to
answer t
h
e
problem
s
; 3) expl
ain or i
n
terpret
the
result
of
a
n
al
y
s
i
s
;
and
4
)
expl
ai
n
pi
ct
ure
s
/
g
ra
ph
s i
n
w
r
i
t
i
ng.
Second
, th
e resu
lt o
f
th
e hyp
o
t
h
e
sis ex
amin
atio
n
shows th
at th
e in
feren
tial stati
s
tic learn
i
n
g
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ve
d by
t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e per
f
o
rm
ance assessm
ent
was hi
ghe
r t
h
a
n
t
h
at
o
b
t
a
i
n
ed
by
t
h
e
stude
nts with the written asse
ssm
ent after th
eir num
eric
ability was controlled could
be accepted. Therefore
,
it can
b
e
con
c
lu
d
e
d
t
h
at statistically,
as far
as th
e inferen
tial statistic lear
n
i
ng
at th
e
Dep
a
rtm
e
n
t
o
f
the Pre-
sch
ool
Teac
he
rs’ T
r
ai
ni
ng
,
Facul
t
y
of
Ed
ucat
i
o
n
,
Gane
sha
Uni
v
ersi
t
y
of
Ed
ucat
i
o
n
i
s
conc
er
ned
,
t
h
e
i
n
fere
nt
i
a
l
st
at
ist
i
c
l
earni
ng a
c
hi
evem
ent
achi
e
ve
d by
t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e pe
rf
orm
a
nc
e t
e
st
was hi
g
h
e
r t
h
a
n
th
at ach
iev
e
d
by th
e stu
d
e
n
t
s with
th
e written
test after th
eir n
u
m
eric ab
ili
ty was co
n
t
ro
ll
ed
; th
e d
i
fferen
ce is
0.
36
&.
Su
ch
a con
c
lusio
n
is em
p
i
rically su
pp
orted
b
y
th
e informatio
n
ob
tain
ed
thro
ugh
o
b
serv
ation
and
in
terv
iew after th
e learn
i
ng
p
r
o
cess
with
th
e p
e
rfo
r
m
a
n
ce assessm
en
t
was atten
d
e
d
.
Th
e stud
en
ts felt th
at
during t
h
e learning activity,
what t
h
ey
di
d
and
pe
rf
o
r
m
e
d was
ap
p
r
eci
at
ed t
h
r
o
u
g
h
t
h
e
fee
dbac
k
p
r
o
v
i
ded
by
t
h
e l
ect
urer. F
r
om
what
was obs
er
ved f
r
o
m
t
h
e devel
o
pm
ent
of t
h
e st
u
d
e
nt
s’ pe
rf
orm
a
nce w
h
en t
h
ey
were
an
swering
t
h
e
statistical p
r
o
b
l
e
m
s, it can
b
e
stated
th
at th
ey
were g
e
tting
mo
tiv
ated
t
o
st
ud
y.
Third
, th
e
resu
lt o
f
th
e
h
ypo
th
esis ex
am
i
n
atio
n wh
ich
sh
ows th
at the in
teraction
b
e
tween
the
learning m
odel and the asses
s
m
ent form
contribute
d
to
th
e
stu
d
e
n
t
s’ inferen
tial st
atistic learni
ng ac
hieve
m
ent
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.
I
S
SN
:
2
252
-88
22
IJER
E
V
o
l
.
5,
No
. 2,
Ju
ne
2
0
1
6
:
13
5 – 1
4
7
14
4
after their
num
eric ability wa
s controlled ca
n
be
acce
pted.
There
f
ore, it c
a
n
be c
o
nclude
d that
, statisti
ca
lly
,
as far as the infere
ntial statis
tic learning at the De
part
m
e
nt of the Pre-school Teach
ers
’
Training, Fac
u
lty of
Ed
ucat
i
o
n
,
Ga
nes
h
a U
n
i
v
er
si
t
y
of Edu
cat
i
o
n i
s
conce
r
ned
,
t
h
e l
earni
n
g
a
c
hi
evem
ent
achi
e
ve
d by
t
h
e s
t
ude
nt
s
wi
t
h
t
h
e S
S
C
S
l
earni
n
g
m
odel
was
n
o
t
al
way
s
hi
ghe
r t
h
an
t
h
at
obt
ai
ne
d
b
y
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s
wi
t
h
t
h
e c
o
n
v
e
n
t
i
ona
l
learn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l if v
i
ewed
fro
m
th
e in
teg
r
ated
assessm
e
n
t form
(th
e
p
e
rfo
r
m
a
n
ce assessm
en
t an
d
written
assessm
ent).
Su
ch
a con
c
lusio
n
is em
p
i
rically
su
pp
orted
b
y
th
e informatio
n
ob
tain
ed
thro
ugh
o
b
serv
ation
and
in
terv
iew after th
e learn
i
n
g
pro
cess with
t
h
e learn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l wh
ich was i
n
teg
r
ated
with
t
h
e assessm
en
t form
was at
t
e
nde
d.
M
a
ny
st
ude
nt
s
st
at
ed t
h
at
t
h
ey
fel
t
t
h
at
t
h
ey
were ap
pre
c
i
a
t
e
d as t
h
ey
were as
ked t
o
be
in
vo
lv
ed
in
th
e p
r
o
cess; howev
er, m
a
n
y
o
t
h
e
rs also
stated
t
h
at th
ey felt mo
re co
m
f
o
r
tab
l
e wh
en
th
e learn
e
d
un
de
r t
h
e p
r
e
v
i
ous l
e
a
r
ni
ng at
m
o
sphere.
The
l
earni
n
g
i
n
no
v
a
t
i
on m
a
de by
t
h
e l
ect
urer m
a
de t
h
e st
u
d
e
n
t
s
feel
th
at th
ey h
a
d
t
o
o
m
a
n
y
activ
ities to
d
o
, an
d th
at th
ey fo
und
th
at it was i
m
p
o
ssib
l
e and d
i
fficu
lt fo
r t
h
em
to
adapt t
o
the
ne
w learning atmosphe
re a
n
d way.
Four
th
, th
e
resu
lt of th
e h
y
po
th
esis ex
am
in
atio
n
wh
ic
h
sho
w
s th
at t
h
e inferen
tial statist
i
c learn
i
ng
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ve
d by
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e S
S
C
S
l
earni
ng m
odel
whi
c
h wa
s i
n
t
e
g
r
at
ed
wi
t
h
t
h
e
per
f
o
r
m
a
nce assessm
ent
was hi
ghe
r t
h
a
n
t
h
at
obt
ai
ne
d by
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e con
v
e
n
t
i
onal
l
ear
ni
n
g
m
odel
whic
h was i
n
tegrate
d
with the
perfor
m
a
nce assessm
ent can be accepte
d. T
h
ere
f
ore, it can be conclude
d that,
statistically, as far a
s
the i
n
fere
ntial statistic learni
ng ta
king
place at the De
partm
e
nt of t
h
e Pre-s
c
hool
Teachers’ Trai
ning, Faculty of
Edu
cation, Ga
nes
h
a
Uni
v
ersity of
Edu
cation is c
o
ncerne
d, the le
arni
ng
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ve
d by
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e S
S
C
S
l
earni
ng m
odel
whi
c
h wa
s i
n
t
e
g
r
at
ed
wi
t
h
t
h
e
per
f
o
r
m
a
nce assessm
ent
was hi
ghe
r t
h
a
n
t
h
at
obt
ai
ne
d by
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e con
v
e
n
t
i
onal
l
ear
ni
n
g
m
odel
wh
ich
was in
t
e
g
r
ated
with
t
h
e
p
e
rform
a
n
ce assessm
en
t after th
ei
r
n
u
meric ab
ility
was co
n
t
ro
lled; th
e
diffe
re
nce is
2
0
.
5
2
%
.
Su
ch
a con
c
lusio
n
is em
p
i
rically su
pp
orted
b
y
th
e informatio
n
ob
tain
ed
thro
ugh
o
b
serv
ation
and
in
terv
iew after th
e learn
i
ng
pro
cess with
th
e SSCS lear
ni
n
g
m
odel
and t
h
e con
v
ent
i
o
nal
l
earni
n
g
m
odel
were
at
t
e
nded
.
A
s
o
p
p
o
se
d t
o
t
h
e
con
v
e
n
t
i
onal
l
earni
ng m
odel
i
n
w
h
i
c
h t
h
e st
ude
nt
s t
e
n
d
e
d
t
o
be
passi
ve
,
m
a
de a
not
e
of a
nd l
i
s
t
e
ned t
o
w
h
at
was ex
pl
ai
ne
d
by
t
h
e l
ect
ure
r
,
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s w
i
t
h
t
h
e SSC
S l
earni
ng m
odel
st
at
ed
t
h
at
du
ri
n
g
t
h
e
l
earni
n
g
pr
oc
ess t
h
ey
were aske
d t
o
th
ink ab
ou
t wh
at is p
l
an
n
e
d
to
do to
an
swer th
e real
world’s
p
r
o
b
l
em
s wh
ich
are
clo
s
ely related to
statistics
through st
ruct
ured exe
r
cise
s.
Th
e stud
en
ts felt th
at
they we
re a
p
preciated and motivated t
o
lea
r
n. T
h
ey fe
lt t
h
at th
ey
were
co
m
f
o
r
tab
l
e i
n
the learning
proces
s
wh
ich
was adju
sted to
t
h
e time an
d
wh
en an
d th
e
pro
ces
s
during
which t
h
e asse
ssm
ent was a
d
m
i
nistered.
Fifth
, th
e result o
f
th
e h
y
p
o
t
h
e
sis ex
am
in
atio
n
wh
ich
shows th
at th
e inferen
tial statisti
c learn
i
ng
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ve
d by
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e S
S
C
S
l
earni
ng m
odel
whi
c
h wa
s i
n
t
e
g
r
at
ed
wi
t
h
t
h
e
co
nv
en
tio
n
a
l l
earn
i
n
g
m
o
d
e
l was lo
wer than
th
at ob
tained
b
y
th
e studen
t
s with
th
e
co
nv
en
tio
n
a
l l
earn
i
n
g
m
odel which was integrated with th
e written test can be accepted. There
f
ore, statistically,
as far as the
i
n
fere
nt
i
a
l
st
at
i
s
t
i
c
l
earni
n
g
at
t
h
e
Depa
rt
m
e
nt
o
f
t
h
e P
r
e-s
c
ho
ol
Teac
he
r
s
’ T
r
ai
ni
n
g
,
F
acul
t
y
of
Ed
uc
at
i
on,
Gane
sha
U
n
i
v
ersi
t
y
of
Ed
uc
at
i
on i
s
c
o
ncer
ned
,
t
h
e
l
ear
ni
ng
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ve
d
by
t
h
e st
ude
nt
s
wi
t
h
t
h
e
SSCS learn
i
n
g
m
o
d
e
l wh
ich
was in
tegrated with
th
e con
v
en
tio
n
a
l assessmen
t was lo
wer th
an
th
at
o
b
tain
ed
b
y
th
e st
ud
en
ts with th
e conv
en
tion
a
l learnin
g
wh
ich
was in
tegrated
with
th
e conv
en
ti
o
n
a
l assessm
e
n
t after
th
eir
n
u
m
eric ab
ility was con
t
ro
lled
;
t
h
e
d
i
fferen
ce is 3.92%.
Su
ch
a con
c
lusio
n
is em
p
i
rically su
pp
orted
b
y
th
e informatio
n
ob
tain
ed
thro
ugh
o
b
serv
ation
and
in
terv
iew after th
e learn
i
ng
pro
cess with
th
e SSCS lear
ni
n
g
m
odel
and t
h
e con
v
ent
i
o
nal
l
earni
n
g
m
odel
were
at
t
e
nded
.
T
h
e
st
ude
nt
s
had
t
h
ei
r o
w
n c
h
arac
t
e
ri
st
i
c
s and
co
m
f
ort
du
ri
n
g
t
h
e l
ear
ni
n
g
pr
ocess.
M
a
ny
st
ude
nt
s
neede
d
t
h
e p
r
e
s
ent
a
t
i
on
of c
once
p
t
s
i
n
t
h
e
begi
n
n
i
n
g
as wh
at was
p
r
esen
ted
in
th
e co
nv
en
tio
n
a
l learn
i
n
g
p
r
o
cess
b
e
fo
re th
ey were supp
o
s
ed
to
d
o
t
h
e in
feren
tial statistic assig
n
men
t
s. Su
ch
an
in
itial p
r
esen
tat
i
o
n
of
co
n
c
ep
ts tu
rn
ed
ou
t to
m
o
tiv
ate th
e stu
d
e
n
t
s to
learn
.
After th
ey acq
u
i
red
th
e in
itial
co
n
c
ep
ts, th
ey
were
su
ppo
sed
to
do th
e assi
g
n
m
en
ts p
r
ov
id
ed
th
e lectu
r
er. Th
en
, th
ey were su
pp
o
s
ed
t
o
j
o
i
n
t
h
e
written
test
o
r
t
h
e
pape
r a
n
d
penc
i
l
t
e
st
whi
c
h
re
qui
red
o
n
e c
o
r
r
ect
ans
w
er
f
o
r
one
i
t
e
m
.
Sixth
,
t
h
e result o
f
t
h
e
h
ypo
th
esis ex
am
in
at
io
n
wh
ich
shows t
h
at th
e i
n
feren
tial statistic learn
i
ng
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ve
d by
t
h
e
st
ude
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e SSC
S l
ear
ni
n
g
m
odel
and t
h
e per
f
o
r
m
a
nce t
e
st
was hi
g
h
er
th
an
t
h
at ob
tain
ed b
y
t
h
e stud
en
ts
with
t
h
e SSCS le
arn
i
ng
m
o
d
e
l with
th
e writte
n
test after th
ei
r numeric
ability was c
o
ntrolled ca
n
be accepte
d.
Th
ere
f
ore, statistically, as far
as the i
n
fe
re
ntial statistic lea
r
ni
ng
provide
d
at the De
partm
e
nt of
Pre
-
sc
hool Teachers’ Trai
ning, Faculty of
Education, Gane
sha
University
of
Ed
ucat
i
on i
s
c
once
r
ned
,
t
h
e l
earni
n
g
achi
e
vem
e
nt
achi
e
ved by
t
h
e st
u
d
e
nt
s wi
t
h
t
h
e
SSC
S l
earni
ng
m
odel
wh
ich
was in
teg
r
ated
with
th
e p
e
rfo
rm
an
ce assessm
en
t is
hi
ghe
r t
h
an t
h
at
obt
ai
ne
d
by
t
h
e st
ud
ent
s
wi
t
h
t
h
e
co
nv
en
tio
n
a
l l
earn
i
n
g
m
o
d
e
l wh
ich
was in
tegrated
with th
e p
e
rform
a
n
ce assessm
en
t after th
eir nu
m
e
ric
ab
ility was contro
lled
;
th
e d
i
fferen
ce is 5.24%.
Su
ch
a con
c
lusio
n
is em
p
i
rically su
pp
orted
b
y
th
e informatio
n
ob
tain
ed
thro
ugh
o
b
serv
ation
and
in
terv
iew after th
e learn
i
ng
pro
cess with
th
e SSCS lear
ni
n
g
m
odel
and t
h
e con
v
ent
i
o
nal
l
earni
n
g
m
odel
were
Evaluation Warning : The document was created with Spire.PDF for Python.