Claims

Jigsaw I produced no significant difference in attitudes toward the Turkish course compared with conventional teaching

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · checked against its sources 2026-11-01 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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? Post-experiment attitudes toward the Turkish course were similar between the Jigsaw I experimental group and the conventional-teaching control group. → Akif ARSLAN 2016

Evidence

Akif ARSLAN 2016

Akif ARSLAN. (2016). Effect of Jigsaw I technique on teaching Turkish grammar. Educational Research and Reviews. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2016.2709

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Mann Whitney U test on TCAS post-test scores of the same 56-student quasi-experiment: U = 373,000, p > 0.05, non-significant; line averages were 27.85 (control) and 29.07 (experimental), descriptive only.

"It is seen that the U value regarding the difference in the attitudes of the students towards Turkish course in experiment and control groups in th e final tests 373,000 and p>0.05 was found to be non -significant."

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.