The SMTV group significantly outperformed the DMTV group on the delayed retention test¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2010 · 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? On the retention test the experimental group mean (61.00) was significantly higher than the control group mean (52.13), p = .002. → Malik Behlol & Hukam Dad 2010
Evidence¶
Malik Behlol & Hukam Dad 2010¶
Malik Behlol & Hukam Dad. (2010). Effectiveness of Structural Method of Teaching Vocabulary. English Language Teaching, 3(3). https://www.ccsenet.org/elt
q2 · i? · causal · r1
Delayed/retention test administered with the same instrument to both groups to cover the interaction of time of measurement and treatment effects. t = 3.22, df = 46, p = .002; the retention null hypothesis was rejected.
"The mean of the experimental group was found 61.00 and that of control group was 52.13. The standard deviations were 9.33 and 9.73 respectively."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- High, average and low achievers taught with SMTV each significantly outperformed their DMTV counterparts on the posttest — related
- High, average and low achievers taught with SMTV each significantly outperformed their DMTV counterparts on the retention test — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- Ninth-grade students taught vocabulary with the structural method significantly outperformed students taught with the definitional method on the posttest — 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.