Claims

Literacy achievement differences showed no statistically significant effect of gender or of the method-by-gender interaction

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2012 · 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? Neither reading nor writing achievement differed significantly by gender, nor by the interaction of gender and teaching method. → Al-Hajaya 2012

Evidence

Al-Hajaya 2012

Nail Al-hajaya. (2012). Impact of the Systemic Approach on Literacy Achievement of Jordanian 1st Graders at Mu'tah University Model School. International Education Studies, Vol. 5, No. 1. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v5n1p100

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Two-way ANOVA on writing grades found no significant gender effect (p=0.395) and no significant method-by-gender interaction (p=0.8); the reading ANOVA likewise found no gender (p=0.689) or interaction (p=0.539) effect. No effect sizes are printed, so magnitudes are unreported.

"Table 5 shows statistically significant differences in student grades (M=16.0) on the writing test attributed to teaching method and in favor on the system approach, whereas no such differences were found can be attributable to gender or to interaction between gender and method."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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