Claims

Cooperative TGT significantly improves Grade 11 students' mathematics understanding compared with conventional teaching over a five-week intervention

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (3 entries) · causal r1–r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2016 · checked against its sources 2026-11-01 (automated, 3 of 3 entries) · 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.

q3 i3 There was a significant interaction between group type (experimental vs control) and time period on mathematics understanding, with partial eta squared = 0.28. → Veloo 2016 q3 i3 The main effect of group on mathematics understanding was significant, F(1,62)=11.24, partial eta squared = 0.15, favouring the TGT group. → Veloo 2016 (2) q3 i? At post-test 1 the experimental group's mathematics understanding score (14.53) was higher than the control group's (11.09). → Veloo 2016 (3)

Evidence

Veloo 2016

Veloo, A., Md-Ali, R., & Chairany, S. (2016). Using Cooperative Teams-Game-Tournament in 11 Religious School to Improve Mathematics Understanding and Communication. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 97-123. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1134733

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

Mixed between-within subjects ANOVA in a randomized pretest-posttest control group study of 64 Grade 11 students (32 experimental, 32 control) at Madrasah Aliyah, Riau. The article reports "significant interaction between group type and time periods" with Wilks Lambda = .72, F(2,61) = 11.80, p < .05, partial eta squared = 0.28.

"There was significant interaction between group type and time periods, Wilks Lambda = .72, F (2, 61) = 11.80, p < .05, partial eta squared ( λ) = 0.28)."

Veloo 2016 (2)

Veloo, A., Md-Ali, R., & Chairany, S. (2016). Using Cooperative Teams-Game-Tournament in 11 Religious School to Improve Mathematics Understanding and Communication. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 97-123. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1134733

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

Between-subject effect test from the same mixed ANOVA on mathematics understanding across the three time periods. The article reports the group main effect as significant with F(1,62) = 11.24, p < .05, partial eta squared = 0.15, described as a big effect size per Cohen (1988).

"The main effect for experimental group and control group was significant, F (1, 62) = 11.24, p < .05, partial eta squared (λ) = 0.15), suggesting a difference in the effectiveness of the cooperative TGT on mathematics understanding."

Veloo 2016 (3)

Veloo, A., Md-Ali, R., & Chairany, S. (2016). Using Cooperative Teams-Game-Tournament in 11 Religious School to Improve Mathematics Understanding and Communication. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 97-123. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1134733

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Descriptive means from Table 3 for the post-test 1 mathematics understanding scores: experimental group M = 14.53 (SD = 2.03) versus control group M = 11.09 (SD = 1.91), a printed difference of 3.44 attributed by the authors to the TGT effect.

"Figure 2 shows that the post 1 mathematics understanding score for the experimental group (14.53) is higher than the control group (11.09)."

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.