Both treatment groups significantly improved climate explanatory knowledge, with no reliable condition or teacher-expertise differences¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 Both groups improved climate explanatory knowledge from pretest to posttest with no Group effect. → Jacobson 2020 q3 i? A significant Group × Teacher Content Expertise interaction on climate explanatory knowledge was judged spurious because its pairwise comparisons contradicted each other and none differed from the overall average. → Jacobson 2020 (2)

Evidence¶

Jacobson 2020¶

Jacobson, Michael, Goldwater, Micah, Markauskaite, Lina, Lai, Polly, Kapur, Manu, Roberts, Gareth, & Hilton, Courtney. (2020). Schema abstraction with productive failure and analogical comparison: Learning designs for far across domain transfer. Learning and Instruction, 65, Article number: 101222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101222

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

Separate linear mixed model for the five explanatory climate items in the same quasi-experimental study. Both conditions improved; the article reports "no effect of Group" on explanatory climate knowledge.

"there was an effect for Time, F(1,92) = 11.363, p = 0.001, η2 = .11, with both conditions improving in their ability to explain climate knowledge, as evidenced by higher performance on the posttest (M = 1.056, SD = .3371) compared to the pretest (M = 0.896, SD = .3795). There was no effect of Group, F(1,92) = 0.085, p = 0.735, η 2 = .001"

Jacobson 2020 (2)¶

Jacobson, Michael, Goldwater, Micah, Markauskaite, Lina, Lai, Polly, Kapur, Manu, Roberts, Gareth, & Hilton, Courtney. (2020). Schema abstraction with productive failure and analogical comparison: Learning designs for far across domain transfer. Learning and Instruction, 65, Article number: 101222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101222

q3 · i? · causal · r2

The Group × Teacher Content Expertise interaction on explanatory climate knowledge was significant in the mixed model, but Bonferroni-corrected pairwise comparisons were non-significant and contradictory, so the authors concluded the interaction "was spurious".

"the two-way interaction between Group and Teacher Content Expertise was significant F(1,92) = 4.242, p = 0.042, η2 = .04."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Both one-model and two-model productive failure groups significantly improved weather and climate declarative knowledge, with no difference between conditions — related
• Both treatment groups significantly improved complex systems explanatory knowledge, and students taught by the content-expert teacher learned more than those taught by less expert teachers — related
• PF and DI groups showed no significant difference in climate declarative knowledge gains — related
• PF students scored significantly higher than DI students on climate explanatory knowledge — reports the opposite
• Ninth-grade students in a Productive Failure design scored significantly higher than Direct Instruction students on complex systems explanatory knowledge about climate — reports the opposite
• Both treatment groups improved near within domain transfer, but the One Model Group's benefit depended on having a content-expert teacher while the Two Models Group's did not — related