The two groups did not differ significantly in age or psychology pretest scores before the treatment¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · 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 i? One-way ANOVA showed no statistically significant differences between the treatment and control groups on age (F (1, 108) = .652, p = .42) or pretest scores (F (1, 108) = .258, p = .613); no effect size beyond the printed ES values of .006 and .002 was interpreted. → Tran 2014
Evidence¶
Tran 2014¶
Tran, V. D. (2014). The Effects of Cooperative Learning on the Academic Achievement and Knowledge Retention. International Journal of Higher Education, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v3n2p131
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Baseline ANOVA on the 40-item psychology achievement test administered to both intact classes before treatment. The article reports "no statistically significant difference in psychology pretest scores"; equivalence was not formally tested beyond this comparison.
"The results of the ANOVA analysis show no statistically significant difference in psychology pretest scores (F (1, 108) = .258; p = .613) between the experimental group (M = 18.86, SD = 4.58) and the control group (M = 19.31, SD = 4.79)"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The three groups were equivalent on EPT pre-test scores before the intervention — related
- Experimental and control groups were equivalent in vocabulary before the glossing treatment — related
- No significant pre-test difference existed between the two groups' entry listening knowledge — related
- The two groups did not differ significantly on the pretest before instruction — related
- Before treatment, the experimental and control groups showed no significant difference in overall language proficiency — related
- Before treatment, the Logo and control groups showed no statistically significant difference in achievement on two-dimensional shapes — related
- The four groups were homogeneous in general English proficiency before treatment (placement-test ANOVA sig .881) — related
- The four groups were equivalent in prior science knowledge before the intervention — related
- The two intact classes did not differ significantly in overall English proficiency before the study — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.