Section-by-section analyses in the infants and girls' series show the later-working group's advantage across proficiency levels, while the boys' series shows the reverse in every section.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1–r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 1911 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In the infants' series the differences between final tests steadily favoured the sections of the later-working group. → W. H. Winch 1911 q2 i? In the boys' series every section working earlier in the morning made a greater advance than those working later. → W. H. Winch 1911 (2)

Evidence¶

W. H. Winch 1911¶

W. H. Winch. (1911). Mental Adaptation During the School Day as Measured by Arithmetical Reasoning.—Part II. The Journal of Educational Psychology. https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Mental+Adaptation+During+the+School+Day+as+Measured+by+Arithmetical+Reasoning

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Analysis of Table VI (third series, infants): marks compared section by section from the highest to the lowest preliminary-mark bands for the 9.40 A.M. and 10.25 A.M. groups; the article states the final-test differences favour the later-working sections. No effect size is printed.

"The differences between the results of the final tests seem steadily to favor the sections of the later -working group."

W. H. Winch 1911 (2)¶

W. H. Winch. (1911). Mental Adaptation During the School Day as Measured by Arithmetical Reasoning.—Part II. The Journal of Educational Psychology. https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Mental+Adaptation+During+the+School+Day+as+Measured+by+Arithmetical+Reasoning

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Analysis of Table X (fifth series, boys): each preliminary-mark section of the 9.40 A.M. group advanced more than the corresponding section of the 11.30 A.M. group. The article attributes this reversal to the many boys who began paid work at 6.30 A.M. No effect size is printed.

"In the case of every section we find the children working their final tests earlier in the morning have made a greater advance on their preliminary work than those working later."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• In a Standard I infants class, the group working arithmetical reasoning tests at 10.25 A.M. improved more on preliminary records than the group working at 9.40 A.M. — related
• In a boys' school where three-fourths of pupils rose early for work, the earlier-working group (9.40 A.M.) improved more (about 14 per cent) than the later-working group (11.30 A.M., 9 per cent). — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• In a London girls' school class, the group working problematic arithmetic later in the morning improved about 5 or 6 per cent more than the early group — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Improvement by practice continues in both morning and afternoon groups, but the morning group improves faster across weeks — reports the opposite
• In a Standard VII girls' class, the later-working group (11.25 A.M.) improved 21 per cent on preliminary records versus 15 per cent for the earlier-working group (10 A.M.). — related
• The equal-group tests showed high test-retest and between-group correlations, supporting the reliability of the arithmetical-reasoning marking method. — related
• In a London boys' school class, the group working problematic arithmetic later in the morning improved about 5 per cent more than the group working it early — a narrower finding that bears on this claim