Claims

First-grade students whose parents received numeracy training and delivered a home numeracy intervention made significantly larger GMADE Total Test gains than the control group

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2016 · 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 i2 After adjusting for pretest scores, the experimental group significantly outperformed the control group on the GMADE Total Test with a large effect size (partial eta-squared = .13). → Lore 2016

Evidence

Lore 2016

Lore, M. D., Wang, A. H., & Buckley, M. (2016). Effectiveness of a Parent-Child Home Numeracy Intervention on Urban Catholic School First Grade Students. Journal of Catholic Education, 19(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.15365/joce.1903082016

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

One-way between-groups ANCOVA comparing the treatment group (n = 12) and control group (n = 48) on posttest GMADE Total Test scores with pretest as covariate. The article reports "a large effect size (partial eta-squared = .13)". Posttest means were 45.67 (treatment) vs 32.17 (control).

"after adjusting for the preintervention GMADE Total Test scores, there was a significant difference between the experimental group and the control group on the GMADE Total Test score (F(1, 58) = 8.59, p = .005) with a large effect size (partial eta-squared = .13)"

Discussion

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.