Experimental and control classes were equivalent in mathematical analogical ability before treatment¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? A pretest mean-equality t-test found no significant difference between the discovery and expository classes (p = .973). → Maarif 2016

Evidence¶

Maarif 2016¶

Maarif, S. (2016). Improving junior high school students' mathematical analogical ability using discovery learning method. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 2(1), 114-124. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1105169

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Pretest mean-similarity t-test (Table 2) comparing the two classes after normality and homogeneity checks: t = -.034, df = 70, p = .973, so H0 was accepted and initial ability treated as equal. Pretest means were 8.2222 (experiment) and 8.2500 (control).

"Pretest Variance Similarity Assumption -.034 70 .973"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Discovery learning produces significantly greater improvement in junior high students' mathematical analogical ability than expository teaching — related
• The lecture and academic controversy groups showed no significant difference in TUCE pretest scores, indicating equivalent prior economic knowledge — related
• Before treatment, the Logo and control groups showed no statistically significant difference in achievement on two-dimensional shapes — related
• Experimental and control groups were academically equivalent on the organic chemistry achievement test before the treatment — related
• Before treatment, the experimental and control groups showed no significant difference in overall language proficiency — related
• The three groups were equivalent on EPT pre-test scores before the intervention — related
• Groups were equivalent in mathematics achievement before the application — related