Claims

Male-female achievement difference among students given prior topics and instructional objectives is not statistically significant

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · 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? Among treatment-group students, males (mean 71.02) scored descriptively higher than females (mean 68.96), but the ANCOVA gender effect was not significant (F-cal 1.059 < 3.85, p < 0.05). → Mbah 2015

Evidence

Mbah 2015

Mbah, B. A. (2015). Effects of prior knowledge of topics and the instructional objectives on students' achievement in Literature-in-English. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(20). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1079053

q2 · i? · causal · r1

ANCOVA of posttest scores by gender in the same 120-student quasi-experiment. The gender main effect was not significant at the .05 level; the null hypothesis of no significant difference was accepted. No effect size was printed.

"Table 4 above shows that the f-cal value, 1.059 is less than the table value of 3.85 at 0.05 level of significance. The null hypothesis of no significant difference between the mean achievement scores of students taught literature-in-English with prior knowledge o f topics and instructional objectives and those tau ght with conventional method is accepted"

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.