Achievement declined significantly from post-test to one-month follow-up in both groups, with no significant between-group difference in the decline¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The difference in score drop between the experimental group (X=8.04) and control group (X=5.22) from final to follow-up test was not significant (t=1.502, p(.266)>.05). → Er 2017 q2 i? Within the experimental group, final-test and follow-up test scores differed significantly (t= 10.681, p(.000)<.05), indicating knowledge loss over one month. → Er 2017 (2)

Evidence¶

Er 2017¶

Harun Er. (2017). The Impact of Teaching the Subjects under "Science in Time" Unit in the Social Studies Class in the 7th Grade Using Jigsaw Technique on the Academic Success of the Students. Universal Journal of Educational Research 5(5): 838-847. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050516

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Independent t test comparing final-minus-follow-up score differences between the jigsaw and control groups (n=23 each) found "no significant difference between the groups"; equivalence was not tested and no effect size is printed.

"The results of the t-test conducted to see whether the post-test and follow -up test results of the experimental and control groups was significant revealed that there was no significant difference between the groups (t=1.502, p(.000)>.05)."

Er 2017 (2)¶

Harun Er. (2017). The Impact of Teaching the Subjects under "Science in Time" Unit in the Social Studies Class in the 7th Grade Using Jigsaw Technique on the Academic Success of the Students. Universal Journal of Educational Research 5(5): 838-847. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050516

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Dependent t test within the jigsaw group (n=23) one month after instruction; the control group also declined significantly (t=3.581, p (.002) <5). No effect size is printed.

"As a result of the dependent t test a meaningful difference between the experiment group final test and follow -up test results was determined (t= 10.681, p(.000)<.05)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Knowledge gained through performing-arts teaching persisted: permanence-test scores four weeks later showed no significant drop from posttest and remained higher than the control group — related
• Experiment group vocabulary gains persisted at the five-month follow-up, with no significant posttest-to-follow-up decline — related
• Non-verbal communication gains persisted at a two-month follow-up, with no statistically significant decline from post-test — related
• The experimental group's geometry achievement did not change significantly between posttest and one-month retention test — related
• Writing gains from written corrective feedback decline between post-test and delayed post-test — related
• Technology-supported teaching produced higher learning retention four months later, while control-group retention fell below its pre-test level — related
• 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
• Learning from interactive whiteboard lessons supported by visual materials persisted, with only a small significant decline four weeks after the post-test — related
• Teaching 7th-grade social studies with the jigsaw technique produced higher post-test achievement scores than traditional instruction — related