Situated learning instruction did not produce a statistically significant post-test achievement advantage over traditional instruction in vocational English vocabulary¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·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? The post-test mean of the experimental group (32.02) was higher than the control group (28.29), but the difference was not statistically significant (t = 1.44, p > .05). → Özüdoğru and Özüdoğru 2017
Evidence¶
Özüdoğru and Özüdoğru 2017¶
Melike Özüdoğru, Fatma Özüdoğru. (2017). The Effect of Situated Learning on Students' Vocational English Learning. Universal Journal of Educational Research 5(11): 2037-2044. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.051120
q2 · i? · causal · r2
Independent samples t-test comparing post-test scores of the experimental and control groups (58 students each, randomly assigned sections) on the 32-item researcher-developed achievement test. The article reports "no statistically significant difference (t = 1.44, p > .05)"; equivalence was not tested.
"As revealed in Table 5, the post -test mean score of experimental group was higher than that of the control group; however, this result showed no statistically significant difference (t = 1.44, p > .05)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.