Claims

Jigsaw II students achieved significantly higher academic achievement than animation students in the Light unit

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · 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? Jigsaw II students scored significantly higher on the post-AAT than animation students, while reading-writing-presentation students scored between the two without significant differences. → Koç 2016

Evidence

Koç 2016

Koç, Y., Yildiz, E., Çaliklar, Ş., & Şimşek, Ü. (2016). Effect of Jigsaw II, reading-writing-presentation, and computer animations on the teaching of “Light” Unit. Educational Research and Reviews. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2016.2861

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Quasi-experimental posttest comparison of 71 seventh-graders in three intact school groups (JIIG n=24, RWPG n=22, AG n=25). ANOVA on post-AAT showed a significant group effect, with LSD tests showing Jigsaw II significantly higher than animations, and reading-writing-presentation not significantly different from either.

"ANOVA results regarding post -AAT shown in Table 5 indicate statistically significant differences between the academic achievements of the JIIG, RWPG, and AG students in terms of the “Light” unit covered in the science lesson [F (2,68) =6.057; p<0 .05]."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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