Claims

The two intact classes did not differ significantly in overall English proficiency before the study

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2019: local conditions change quickly

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? A pre-study proficiency test showed no significant difference between class A and class B in overall English proficiency. → Davoudi 2016

Evidence

Davoudi 2016

Davoudi, M., & Yousefi, D. (2016). The Effect of Keyword Method on Vocabulary Retension of Senior High School EFL Learners in Iran. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(11). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1099563

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Independent-samples t-test comparing the two intact classes on an English proficiency test before the study; class A mean was 15.60 and class B mean was 15.88, with homogeneity of variances assumed (F= 2.738, Sig.= .107).

"Therefore, the results of t-test ( t= .151 , sig= .881˃ .05) indicated that there is no signifi cance differences between two classes from overall English proficiency point of view."

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.