The experimental group's geometry achievement did not change significantly between posttest and one-month retention test¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Within the experimental group, the difference between post-test and retention test scores was not significant (z=1.900, p>0.05). → Kesan 2013

Evidence¶

Kesan 2013¶

Kesan, C. & Çalıskan, S. (2013). The effect of learning geometry topics of 7th grade in primary education with dynamic Geometer's Sketchpad geometry software to success and retention. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1008875

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks test comparing the experimental group's (n=21) post-test and retention test scores; the article reports no significant difference. Note the article's own sentence mislabels the group as the control group.

"there was not a significant difference between the means of post-test and retention test of the students in experimental group (z=1,900; p>0,05). This shows that the control group's academic achievement gained at the end of computer-aided geometry teaching has not changed within a month after the training."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The control group's geometry achievement did not change significantly between posttest and one-month retention test — related
• Seventh graders learning geometry with GSP dynamic geometry software scored significantly higher on a geometry achievement posttest than peers taught by traditional methods — related
• GSP-taught students retained significantly more geometry learning one month after instruction than traditionally taught students — related
• Unpretested groups showed no significant difference between their own post-test and retention test scores — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Within the integrated STEM group, academic achievement declined significantly from post-test to one-year permanence test, while the control group's decline was not significant — reports the opposite
• Within-group score changes across pre-test, post-test and retention test were significant in both pretested groups, with larger variance explained in the experimental group — related
• The web-based ITS did not significantly influence retention one month after instruction — related
• Retention scores four weeks after treatment significantly favored both experiment groups over control group 2 — related
• Geometry achievement and retention showed no significant gender differences in either the GSP or the traditional teaching group — related
• Achievement declined significantly from post-test to one-month follow-up in both groups, with no significant between-group difference in the decline — related