The Effects of Visualization on Mathematics Achievement in Reference to Thesis Studies Conducted in Turkey: A Meta-Analysis

Abstract

In this study, it is aimed to determine the effect of visualization on mathematics achievement in the thesis studies conducted in Turkey. In this context, the findings obtained from individual studies are combined via meta-analysis. For this purpose, Council of Higher Education (CoHE) National Thesis Center database was thoroughly scanned by using keywords. A total of 35 thesis studies, 26 of which are master's thesis and 9 of which are doctoral dissertations were reached as a result of the scanning performed. 34 theses are included in the meta-analysis in line with their inclusion criteria and 42 effect sizes were calculated pertaining to these thesis. To examine the normal distribution of effect sizes and to perform other analyses, statistical programs of MetaWin and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) were used respectively in the study. In the calculation of effect sizes, quantities of studies included in meta-analysis Hedges's g was used and confidence level in calculations of effect sizes was taken as 95%. The average effect size value calculated in accordance with random effect model was found as 0.811 with the standard error of 0.076. Positivity of effect size shows that the implication effect is in favour of the experimental group. Basing on this, it can be said that visualization has a moderate effect on mathematics achievement.

The Effectiveness of Dynamic Geometry Software Applications in Learning Mathematics: A Meta-Analysis Study

“…This means a small sample size should be considered more in teaching settings. This is in line with the findings of [37] and [53] that the effect size of the study group in small samples was greater than those in large samples. However, it is different from the results of [49], [52], [55] that study groups in small samples had smaller effect sizes.…”

A meta‐analysis on the effectiveness of intervention in children with primary speech and language delays/disorders: Focusing on China and the United States

“…Because the samples in many of the studies were small, Hedges' g was used to reduce the small sample size bias (Lakens, 2013). If an effect size (Hedges' g) value is between 0 and 0.20, it has a low effect level, a value between 0.21 and 0.5 denotes a small effect, a value between 0.51 and 1.00 indicates a moderate effect, and a value greater than 1.00 indicates a large effect size (Turgut & Turgut, 2018). The dependency of ESs in our meta-analysis occurred in the following two situations: (1) an effect size was computed by comparing each of the several treatment groups with the same control group; (2) each participant was measured using several different measures of outcome (i.e.…”

Enhancing Spatial Visualization in CABRI 3D-Assisted Geometry Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…Additionally, in a meta-analysis report focusing on spatial visualization, Hawes et al [50] revealed that the intervention of mathematics lesson had positive modest effect on students' spatial visualization skills. On the other hand, Turgut and Turgut [51] reported that the spatial training had positive moderate effect on students' spatial visualization skills. These previous meta-analysis studies show that a few interventions such as mathematics learning and spatial training have positive modest and even moderate effect on students' spatial visualization skills.…”

“…A lot of relevant meta-analysis studies also had investigated and examined the involvement of some substantial factors such as class capacity [43,[45][46][47][48]51], educational level [43][44][45][46][47][48][49]51], intervention duration [44,45,48,50,51], student engagement [43,45], instrument [45], geometry material [48], and participant [48]. Several studies found that some factors such as class capacity, educational level, intervention duration, student engagement, participant, and instrument were the significant factors affecting the gap of students' mathematics achievement in CABRI 3D-assisted mathematics learning [43][44][45]47], the difference of students' geometry achievement in CABRI 3D-assisted geometry learning [48], and the heterogeneity of students' spatial visualization skills in spatial intervention [50].…”

“…Several studies found that some factors such as class capacity, educational level, intervention duration, student engagement, participant, and instrument were the significant factors affecting the gap of students' mathematics achievement in CABRI 3D-assisted mathematics learning [43][44][45]47], the difference of students' geometry achievement in CABRI 3D-assisted geometry learning [48], and the heterogeneity of students' spatial visualization skills in spatial intervention [50]. A few studies, however, found that a few factors such as class capacity, educational level, intervention duration, and geometry material did not affect students' heterogeneous mathematics achievement in the mathematics learning using CABRI 3D software [46], the gap of students' geometry achievement in the geometry lesson using CABRI 3D software [48], and the difference of students' spatial visualization skills in spatial training [51]. From these relevant studies, it can be indicated that some substantial factors such as class capacity, educational level, intervention duration, and participant have a potential role in affecting the gap of students' spatial visualization skills in CABRI 3D-assisted geometry learning.…”