Claims

Creative action increased in both experimental groups, with learners working creatively only fragmentally rising sharply

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2013 · 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 number of learners who worked creatively increased by 30% in the 1st and 33% in the 2nd experimental group, and fragmentally creative learners rose from 14% to 42% and from 10% to 50% respectively. → NataÔja van Gejeka 2013

Evidence

NataÔja van Gejeka 2013

NataÔja van Gejeka. (2013). Research into Learning Process in a Vocational Secondary School in the Context of Sustainable Development. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 2. https://doi.org/10.2478/jtes-2013-0012

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Structured observation of the two experimental groups before and after the semester-long experiment, reported as level percentages in Tables 3 and 4. The article calls the increase "very significant" and prints the percentages; no standardised effect size is printed.

"The number of learners who worked creatively only fragmentally increased very significantly: from 14% to 42% in the 1st experimental group and from 10% to 50% in the 2nd experimental group."

Discussion

Learner Variables

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.