Achievement goal motivation declined significantly in the control group over the four-week traditional teaching period¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The control group's achievement goal pretest-posttest difference was significant and in favour of pretest scores. → Akçakın 2018

Evidence¶

Akçakın 2018¶

Akçakın, V. (2018). Teaching Mathematical Functions Using Geometric Functions Approach and Its Effect on Ninth Grade Students’ Motivation. International Journal of Instruction, 11(1), 17-32. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.1112a

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Wilcoxon signed-rank test on the control group's SMTML achievement goal scores (Table 7: z=-2.060, p=.039, r=.27, based on positive ranks); all other control-group dimensions showed no significant change.

"On the other hand, there was a statistically significant difference in pretest and posttest scores of achievement goal ( p<.05) dimension. The difference w as found to be in favour of pretest scores."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Achievement Goal Orientation — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Using the geometric functions approach with dynamic mathematics software significantly raises ninth-graders' achievement goal motivation toward mathematics relative to software-only and traditional teaching — related
• The lecture-based control group showed no significant achievement change over the three-week period — related