Claims

A contextual teaching and learning curriculum produced no statistically significant difference in pre/posttest gain versus a scientific-basis curriculum in a postsecondary agricultural biotechnology course

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2012 · 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 experimental (contextual) treatment had a greater raw gain score (30.00 vs 26.72) but the difference was not statistically significant (p=.48), so the null hypothesis was not rejected. → Curry 2012

Evidence

Curry 2012

Curry, Wilson, Flowers, & Farin. (2012). Scientific Basis vs. Contextualized Teaching and Learning: The Effect on the Achievement of Postsecondary Students. Journal of Agricultural Education. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2012.01057

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Quasi-experimental non-equivalent control-group study with two treatment groups (n=16 experimental, n=22 comparison) taught the same seven environmental biotechnology units via distance education in different semesters, assessed with an identical 25-item pre/posttest. The t-test on gains was "not a statistically significant difference (p=.48)". No effect size was printed.

"A t–test showed that even though the experimental treatment had a greater raw gain score, it was not a statistically significant difference (p=.48). Thus, the null hypothesis was not rejected."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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