Number relationships instruction shows no differential benefit by preschool registration group (EC, COMM, or PFA)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q3
Currency · newest study 2013 · 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.
q3 i? Neither the main effect of registration group nor the Treatment × Registration Group interaction on posttest scores was statistically significant. → Jung 2013
Evidence¶
Jung 2013¶
Jung, M., Hartman, P., Smith, T., & Wallace, S. (2013). The Effectiveness of Teaching Number Relationships in Preschool. International Journal of Instruction, 6(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1085361
q3 · i? · causal · r1
Linear model (Model 4) on the same sample with EC, COMM, and PFA registration groups, using pretest and age as covariates. The article also reports a non-significant Treatment × Registration Group interaction, F(2, 66) = 0.44, p = .65.
"Results indicated no statistically significant main effect for registration group ( F(2, 65) = 0.04, p = .96)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The effect of number relationships instruction on posttest scores does not differ by child age — related
- Number relationships instruction shows no differential benefit by gender — related
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.