Claims

Jigsaw cooperative learning produced better retention of knowledge after 11 weeks than traditional teaching

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · 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 group scored significantly higher than the control group on the swtAT retention test administered 11 weeks after teaching. → Yapıcı 2016

Evidence

Yapıcı 2016

Hakkı Yapıcı. (2016). Use of jigsaw technique to teach the unit "science within time" in secondary 7th grade social sciences course and students' views on this technique. Educational Research and Reviews, 11(8), 773-780. https://www.academicjournals.org/ERR

q2 · i? · causal · r1

The same quasi-experiment administered swtAT as a retention test after 11 weeks to both groups (experimental n=25, control n=28). The article reports a significant difference favoring the jigsaw group; no effect size is printed.

"there is a significant difference between the experimental and control groups in terms of retention of knowledge after 11 weeks (t (51)= 9,74; p<0,05)"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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