Claims

The traditionally taught control group also improved significantly from pre-test to post-test

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · 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? The control group's mean EMSAT score rose from 25.50 (SD=2.51) to 34.65 (SD=3.20), a significant paired difference (t = -31.511, p = 0.000). → Oluwadare 2015

Evidence

Oluwadare 2015

Oluwadare, F. A. (2015). ICT Use in Preschool Science Education: A Case Study of Some Private Nursery Schools in Ekiti State. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(31). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1083397

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Paired samples t-test within the control group (128 children) receiving traditional story-based teaching, experiments on dissolving materials, and bin-sorting recycling activities. Table 3 prints t = -31.511, df = 136, mean difference -9.130, significance 0.000; no effect size is printed.

"The mean grade for the pre-test in the study was 25.50 (SD=2.51) compared to 34.65 (SD=3.20) for the post-test. At α = .05 and df=136, the critical value of the t ratio was less than 0.0 01"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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