In a London boys' school class, the group working problematic arithmetic later in the morning improved about 5 per cent more than the group working it early¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 1911 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Group A (9.40 A.M.) improved 6.3 per cent on its preliminary record while Group B (11.25 A.M.) improved 11.4 per cent, a balance of about 5 per cent favoring the later working group. → Winch 1911

Evidence¶

Winch 1911¶

Winch, W. H. (1911). Mental adaptation during the school day as measured by arithmetical reasoning.—Part I. The Journal of Educational Psychology. https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Mental+adaptation+during+the+school+day%22+Winch+1911

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Results of the first series in a London municipal boys' school (Standard III, about 40 boys), where a class split into two equal groups on preliminary tests worked the same problematic-arithmetic tests at 9.40 or 11.25 A.M. The article reports "a balance in favor of the later working group of about 5 per cent"; no standardized effect size is printed.

"Group A improved 6.3 per cent, on its preliminary record; Group B improved 11.4 per cent. There is, therefore, a balance in favor of the later working group of about 5 per cent."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• About one in seven boys in the afternoon group ceased to improve and tended downwards, compared with one in the morning group — related
• In a London girls' school class, the group working problematic arithmetic later in the morning improved about 5 or 6 per cent more than the early group — related
• Late-afternoon memory work shows relative inefficiency of about 5-6 per cent compared with early-morning work in 13-year-old boys — related
• Improvement by practice continues in both morning and afternoon groups, but the morning group improves faster across weeks — related
• In one very poor neighborhood school the exception occurred: the earlier-working group improved more rapidly than the later-working group — reports the opposite
• In a Standard VII girls' class, the later-working group (11.25 A.M.) improved 21 per cent on preliminary records versus 15 per cent for the earlier-working group (10 A.M.). — related
• In a Standard I infants class, the group working arithmetical reasoning tests at 10.25 A.M. improved more on preliminary records than the group working at 9.40 A.M. — related
• In a boys' school where three-fourths of pupils rose early for work, the earlier-working group (9.40 A.M.) improved more (about 14 per cent) than the later-working group (11.30 A.M., 9 per cent). — reports the opposite
• Section-by-section analyses in the infants and girls' series show the later-working group's advantage across proficiency levels, while the boys' series shows the reverse in every section. — a broader claim this one bears on