Claims

Standard V pupils show low pre-test achievement in English grammar under conventional methods relative to the experimental group

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? In the pre-test, pupils scored 18% in English grammar under the conventional method while the experimental group scored 82%, which the author takes to show problems with conventional methods. → Singaravelu 2012

Evidence

Singaravelu 2012

Singaravelu, G. (2012). Discovery Learning Strategies in English. i-manager's Journal of English Language Teaching, Vol. 2 No. 1, January - March 2012. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1070208

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Descriptive pre-test percentages reported in the data analysis: 18% for pupils taught through the conventional method and 82% for the experimental group; the author states this 'substantiated that Students of standard V had problems in learning grammar by using conventional methods'.

"In the pre-test, students score 18% marks in learning English grammar through conventional method and the Experimental group students score 82% marks."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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