Claims

Cooperative learning produces a medium, positive, significant effect on mathematics achievement compared with traditional methods (d++ = 0.59)

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2015 · checked against its sources 2026-10-31 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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.

q3 i2 Across 26 studies (36 comparisons, 1988–2010), the random-effects combined effect size of cooperative learning on mathematics achievement was d++ = 0.59 (95% CI 0.38–0.80), a medium effect under Cohen's classification. → 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 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r2

Meta-analysis of 26 experimental studies (n = 36 comparisons) from 1988–2010 with pre/post-test and control or equated group designs, computed with MetaWin 2.0 under a random effects model. The combined effect size was "the effect size mean ES = 0.59", classified as medium per Cohen (1988).

"In general, according to the random effect size model, the upper limit of the confidence interval was found to be 0.80, the lower limit was 0.38 and the effect size mean ES = 0.59. This indicated that the cooperative learning method was more influential than the traditional learning method for academic achievement."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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