Claims

Students taught mathematics with Cluster-Based Instruction achieved significantly higher post-test scores than students taught with Full Inclusive Instruction in Indonesian inclusive primary schools

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? Mathematics achievement of students in the CBI setting (mean = 7.01, SD = 1.37) was significantly better than that of students in the FII setting (mean = 5.04, SD = 1.53). → Gunarhadi 2016

Evidence

Gunarhadi 2016

Gunarhadi, Sunardi, Mohammad Anwar, Tri Rejeki Andayani, Abdull Sukor Shaari. (2016). +THE EFFECT OF CLUSTER-BASED INSTRUCTION ON MATHEMATIC ACHIEVEMENT IN INCLUSIVE SCHOOLS. International Journal of Special Education, 31(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1099973

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Quasi-experimental post-test only control group study with two intact third-grade classes of 34 students each in Surakarta, Indonesia. Independent-samples T-test showed the CBI group's mean was significantly higher: "t = 6.16, p < .01". No effect size was printed.

"mathematic achievement of students in the CBI setting (mean = 7.01 , SD = 1.37) was significantly better than that of students in the FII setting ( mean = 5.04, SD = 1.53 ), t = 6.16, p < .01)"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.