Claims

The control group taught by the traditional method showed no significant pre-test to post-test improvement

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2012 · 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 control group's paired t-test was not significant (t = -.267, df = 24, p = .792); equivalence was not tested. → Abdullah Sarani & Leila Farzaneh Sahebi 2012

Evidence

Abdullah Sarani & Leila Farzaneh Sahebi 2012

Abdullah Sarani & Leila Farzaneh Sahebi. (2012). The Impact of Task-based Approach on Vocabulary Learning in ESP Courses. English Language Teaching, 5(10). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n10p118

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Paired-sample t-test on the 25 control-group students taught technical vocabulary by the traditional translate-and-answer method over thirteen weeks. Means moved only from 17.88 to 18.04 and the article reports the difference was not significant; no effect size is printed.

"the t-observed (-.267) was less than t-critical (2.064), at 0.05 level of significance, therefore it can be concluded that the difference between the mean of the pre-test and that of the post-test in control group was not significant."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.