Claims

Self-monitoring strategies used during or at the end of Social Studies lessons significantly improved fifth-graders' academic achievement compared to formal curriculum teaching

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · 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? Both experimental groups scored significantly higher on the Social Studies achievement test post-test than the control group (F=62.88, p=0.000). → Arslantas 2017 q2 i? Mean achievement rose from 17.25 to 28.25 in the first experimental group and from 17.65 to 30.11 in the second, versus 18.83 to 19.61 in the control group. → Arslantas 2017 (2)

Evidence

Arslantas 2017

Arslantas, S. & Kurnaz, A. (2017). The effect of using self -monitoring strategies in social studies course on self -monitoring, self -regulation and academic achievement. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 3(2), 452-463. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.327905

q2 · i? · causal · r2

ANOVA (Tukey) on post-test Social Studies Achievement Scale scores for the three groups found "F -value was found 62.88, whereas the P -value was 0.000", with significant differences between each experimental group and the control group.

"F -value was found 62.88, whereas the P -value was 0.000. As 0 .000 is lower than 0 .05 (0.000.05) according to the p 0.05 criterion for statistical significance, it can be said that there was a significant difference between the pretest scores."

Arslantas 2017 (2)

Arslantas, S. & Kurnaz, A. (2017). The effect of using self -monitoring strategies in social studies course on self -monitoring, self -regulation and academic achievement. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 3(2), 452-463. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.327905

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Descriptive statistics (Table 2) show pre-test means of 17.25, 17.65 and 18.83 and post-test means of 28.25, 30.11 and 19.61 for experimental 1, experimental 2 and control groups respectively; "the first and second experimental groups showed a large increase in post -test scores in comparison to the control group".

"Pre -test scores were clo se to one another in all three groups, while the first and second experimental groups showed a large increase in post -test scores in comparison to the control group."

Discussion

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.