Claims

The differentiation approach, designed for gifted students, also significantly increased mathematics achievement of non-gifted students.

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · checked against its sources 2026-11-03 (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.

q2 i? Non-gifted 6th-grade students taught with the differentiation approach scored significantly higher on current and enriched objectives than non-gifted students taught with the Ministry of National Education curriculum. → Altintas 2015

Evidence

Altintas 2015

Altintas, E., & Ozdemir, A. S. (2015). Evaluating a Newly Developed Differentiation Approach in Terms of Student Achievement and Teachers' Opinions. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2015.4.2540

q2 · i? · causal · r1

A quasi-experimental comparison with non-gifted 6th graders in a public school (n = 60) on Tables and Graphics content. The differentiation-approach group outperformed the national-curriculum group on both current and enriched objective scores, with "a significant difference ... that favored the experimental group". No effect size was reported.

"However, after implementation, there was a significant difference between the non-gifted students' current (U = 1.00, p = .00 < .05) and enriched (U = .50, p = .01 < .05) scores in the control and experimental groups that favored the experimental group."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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