The three groups did not differ in prior achievement before the Force and Motion intervention¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · 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? A Kruskal-Wallis H test on pre-test scores found no statistically significant difference among EG1, EG2 and CG at p < 0.05, supporting group homogeneity. → Sabriye Seven 2017
Evidence¶
Sabriye Seven 2017¶
Sabriye Seven, Asiye Pinar Koksal, Gulsen Kocak. (2017). The Effect of Carrying out Writing to Learn Activities on Academic Success of Fifth Grade Students in Secondary School on the Subject of "Force and Motion". Universal Journal of Educational Research 5(5): 744-749. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050506
q2 · i? · causal · r1
Kruskal-Wallis H test of pre-test scores across the three groups (EG1 N = 11, mean rank 24.50; EG2 N = 19, mean rank 22.29; CG N = 20, mean rank 29.10), yielding χ2 = 2.223 and p = .329, described as "no statistically significant difference between the groups".
"When Table 6 is examined, it is observed that there is no statistically significant difference between the groups at a significance level of p < 0.05."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Writing-to-learn activities were implemented over four weeks within a seven-week study plan with identical teaching across groups — related
- Keeping a journal as a writing-to-learn activity showed no statistically significant achievement difference from conventional instruction — related
- Writing poems as a writing-to-learn activity produced significantly higher Force and Motion achievement than conventional instruction in fifth-grade students — related
- The experimental and control groups did not differ significantly in programming knowledge at pretest — related
- The three study groups differed significantly in prior knowledge of electrochemical cells before instruction, with the CLMG group starting highest — related
- Training location (home, school, or both) did not affect GL learning gains — 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.