The experimental group's distribution across motivational levels shifted toward higher levels from pre-test to post-test while the control group's did not¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · 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? In the experimental group the low level fell from 29.5% to 17.3% and the high level rose from 24.9% to 29.7%, while the control group showed no such improvement. → Korsun 2017
Evidence¶
Korsun 2017¶
Igor Korsun. (2017). The Formation of Learnersí Motivation to Study Physics in Terms of Sustainable Development of Education in Ukraine. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 117ñ128. https://doi.org/10.1515/jtes-2017-0008
q2 · i? · causal · r1
Results of measurements in the control group (CG) and experimental group (EG) reported in Table 2 as percentages. In the EG the "low" level fell from 29.5 to 17.3 and the high level rose from 24.9 to 29.7, whereas the CG's low level rose from 29.5 to 30.7.
"low 29.5 29.5 30.7 17.3 average 46.0 45.6 46.4 53.0 high 24.5 24.9 22.9 29.7"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Descriptive means moved in opposite directions: the treatment group's critical thinking disposition mean rose while the control group's fell — related
- By the end of the course the experimental group's final grade distribution was markedly skewed toward higher grades and poor project presenters fell from 22% to 5%, versus 28% in the control group — related
- In the experimental group the share of teachers with adequate self-esteem rose to 58% and low self-esteem fell to 13% during the training program, while the control group stayed the same — related
- Experimental (ABSI) group's achievement scores increased significantly from pre-test to post-test, while the control group's did not — related
- Low-scoring experimental-group students moved from 25% scoring below 25% at pre-test to none scoring below 25% at post-test, with scores reaching as much as 56.8% — related
- The Smartboard-taught experimental group showed a significant within-group increase in motivation from pre- to post-treatment — related
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.