The experimental and control groups were not equivalent at pre-test, with more positive results in the experimental group¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Pre-test comparison of the two intact groups showed significant differences in all dimensions and the total score, favouring the experimental group. → Muñoz-Repiso and Caballero-González 2019

Evidence¶

Muñoz-Repiso and Caballero-González 2019¶

García-Valcárcel Muñoz-Repiso, A., & Caballero-González, Y. (2019). Robotics to develop computational thinking in early Childhood Education. Comunicar, 59, XXVII. https://doi.org/10.3916/C59-2019-06

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Pre-test equivalence check comparing intact groups formed by the school; the article reports significant mean differences on all dimensions and the total, with no effect size printed. Allocation was not random because the school required working with intact groups.

"The data obtained show that the groups were not equivalent, as significant differences can be observed between both groups when comparing the means of all dimensions and the total score (complete test), with more positive results seen in the experimental group"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The two intact classes did not differ significantly in overall English proficiency before the study — related
• The two groups did not differ significantly in age or psychology pretest scores before the treatment — reports the opposite
• The two intervention groups were equivalent at baseline except in practical reasoning, where group 1 scored higher — reports the opposite
• The experimental and control groups differed significantly on the pre-test before the intervention — reports the opposite
• Control and experimental groups were equivalent at pre-test but differed significantly at post-test in mathematics achievement — reports the opposite