Achievement effects of cooperative learning do not differ significantly across mathematics sub-fields, though geometry and algebra show the highest point estimates¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Effect sizes by sub-field ranged from d+ = 0.19 (measurement) to d+ = 0.82 (algebra), with no significant differences among sub-fields (QB = 2.59; p = 0.63). → Gulfer Capar 2015

Evidence¶

Gulfer Capar 2015¶

Gulfer Capar, Kamuran Tarim. (2015). Efficacy of the Cooperative Learning Method on Mathematics Achievement and Attitude: A Meta-Analysis Research. Educational Sciences Theory & Practice. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2015.2.2098

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Moderator analysis by mathematics sub-field (geometry, numbers, algebra, undefined, measurement) reported in Table 2 of the meta-analysis. The article reports "no significant differences was seen among the effect sizes" across sub-fields.

"the highest effect size was found in the geometry sub-field ( d+ = 0.67) and for algebra ( d+ = 0.82). The lowest effect size was found in the measurement sub-field ( d+ = 0.19). For the differences among grades, no significant differences was seen among the effect sizes (QB = 2.59; p = 0.63)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Achievement effects do not differ significantly across cooperative learning techniques; unstructured and STAD show the highest point estimates — related
• The effect of cooperative learning on mathematics achievement differs significantly by learning domain, with geometry showing the largest effect — reports the opposite