Low critical-thinking students do worse in contextual than non-contextual instruction for argumentative writing¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? For students with low critical thinking ability, the contextual group scored significantly lower (mean 66.77) than the non-contextual group (mean 70.46). → Hasani 2016

Evidence¶

Hasani 2016¶

Hasani, A. (2016). Enhancing argumentative writing skill through contextual teaching and learning. Educational Research and Reviews, 11(16), 1573-1578. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1113515

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Tukey post-hoc comparison for the low critical-thinking subgroup (n = 13 per group). Means were "66.77 and 70.46" for contextual and non-contextual respectively, a significant difference favoring non-contextual instruction.

"The mean score of argumentative writing ability with contextual and non -contextual in low critical thinking ability is 66.77 and 70.46 , respectively (Table 1) and statistically significant"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Critical Thinking — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it
• Writing Skills — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it

Related Claims¶

• High critical-thinking students write better arguments under contextual than non-contextual instruction — related
• Contextual teaching and learning produces higher argumentative writing scores than non-contextual instruction in university students — reports the opposite
• Instructional model interacts with critical thinking ability in affecting argumentative writing skill — a broader claim this one bears on