Claims

Male students taught with the Target-Task Model significantly outperformed female students on the PTCE

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · 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? ANCOVA showed a significant gender difference in post-test scores of students taught with the Target-Task Model (Gender F = 4.819, p = .032), with males outperforming females. → Olaniyan 2015

Evidence

Olaniyan 2015

Olaniyan, A. O., & Omosewo, E. O. (2015). Effects of a Target-Task Problem-Solving Model on Senior Secondary School Students' Performance in Physics. Science Education International, 25(4), 522-538. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1086539

q2 · i? · causal · r1

ANCOVA of post-test PTCE scores for the 60 experimental-group students by gender (29 male, 31 female). Gender F = 4.819, Sig. .032. Table 5 printed mean gains of 18.15 for males and 12.84 for females; the text states "The male students performed better than female students".

"The P value (.032) is less than the P alpha level of 0.050. (P<0.050), and shows that the null hypothesis needs to be rejected."

Discussion

Learner Variables

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.