The applied-science group's zoology semester grades exceed their grades in other subjects by more than the pure-science group's¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 1909 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Section B's zoology average was 4.26% above its average in other subjects, versus 1.18% for Section A, suggesting a somewhat greater advantage for the applied approach on semester grades. → Gilbert 1909

Evidence¶

Gilbert 1909¶

Gilbert, J. P. (1909). An experiment on methods of teaching zoology (preliminary report). The Journal of Educational Psychology. https://psycnet.apa.org/journal/edu

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Comparison of semester grades in zoology against grades in all other subjects for the same students. Section A averaged 81.53% in zoology vs 80.35% in other subjects; Section B 82.73% vs 78.47%. After probable error, a very slight advantage favors the economic approach.

"Section B has an average in zoology which is 4.26% higher than the average in other subjects."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• On a test of setting up experiments and interpreting phenomena, the applied-science group showed a decided advantage (60% vs 35% correct on first reports) — related
• A larger percentage of applied-science pupils averaged above 85 in the semester's work (46.6 vs 29.4) — related
• The applied-science approach shows a slight advantage over the pure-science approach on pure-science-type examination grades in secondary-school zoology — related