Mathematics test practice does not improve domain-general problem-solving ability¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The amount of mathematics content in the practice test was not associated with performance on a subsequent non-curricular problem-solving test (b = 0.36, SE = 1.81, p = 0.844). → Avvisati 2020

Evidence¶

Avvisati 2020¶

Avvisati, F., & Borgonovi, F. (2020). Learning Mathematics Problem Solving through Test Practice: a Randomized Field Experiment on a Global Scale. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 791–814. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09520-6

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Study 2 (N = 19,481), a separate random assignment within PISA 2012 to forms with varying mathematics content, with a criterial test of non-curricular problem-solving tasks. The coefficient for math practice on the problem-solving score was 0.36 (SE = 1.81), not statistically significant (p = 0.844 from Table 3).

"Math practice (in hours) 2.29 ** 2.65+ 0.95 0.36 (0.84) (1.48) (1.16) (1.81)"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Problem Solving — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Greater mathematics content in a practice test improves subsequent mathematics performance by a small amount (~2% of a standard deviation per hour of practice) — related
• The learning benefit of mathematics test practice is larger for boys than for girls — related
• Mathematics anxiety does not moderate the effect of mathematics test practice on subsequent performance — related
• Innovative learning is more effective than conventional learning for junior high school students' mathematical problem-solving ability (summary effect 0.95, 95% CI 0.71–1.19) — related