Claims

Jigsaw cooperative learning produced higher achievement than traditional teaching in the 7th-grade unit "Science within Time"

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 taught with the jigsaw technique scored significantly higher than the traditionally taught control group on the swtAT post-test. → 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

Pre-test/post-test control group quasi-experiment with 53 7th graders (experimental n=25, control n=28) taught the unit for five weeks. The article reports a significant post-test difference favoring jigsaw, with means "XExperimental = 73,60; XControl = 51,28"; no effect size is printed.

"there is a significant difference in the mean scores of the control and experimental group's swtAT post -test. t (51) = 9 ,76; 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.