Cited by 79Educational Methods and OutcomesScience Education and PedagogySTEM Education

Effect of design thinking approach on students’ achievement in some selected physics concepts in the context of STEM learning

Simeon, Moses Irekpita, Samsudin, Mohd Ali, Yakob, Nooraida·2022·International Journal of Technology and Design Education

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10798-020-09601-1

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Simeon, M. I., Samsudin, M. A., & Yakob, N.
Affiliations
  • University of Abuja (NG)
  • Universiti Sains Malaysia (MY)
Corresponding author
Simeon, Moses Irekpita
Venue
International Journal of Technology and Design Education
Published
2020-06-16
Volume
32
Issue
1
Pages
185-212
ISSN
  • 0957-7572 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-1804
OpenAlex
W3036401735
Cited by
79
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 7
FWCI
12.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Journal of Technology and Design Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Methods and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Education › STEM Education
Keywords
design thinking, physics achievement, STEM education, gender differences in achievement, high school physics, constructivism, teacher professional development, physics teacher education

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review