Under traditional learning, high academic students' creative thinking improvement exceeded low academic students'¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Under traditional learning, high academic students improved 1.27% more than low academic students, with different LSD notations (a and b). → Yusnaeni 2017

Evidence¶

Yusnaeni 2017¶

Yusnaeni, Corebima, A. D., Susilo, H. & Zubaidah, S. (2017). Creative Thinking of Low Academic Student Undergoing Search Solve Create and Share Learning Integrated with Metacognitive Strategy. International Journal of Instruction, 10(2), 245-262. http://www.e-iji.net/dosyalar/iji_2017_2_16.pdf

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Descriptive corrected-mean comparison from Table 4 for the traditional learning condition (high academic 102.24%, low academic 100.93% improvement); percentages are descriptive, not tested effect sizes.

"the creative thinking ability of the high and low academic ability students is different (a and b), but the high academic ability students show an increase of their ability 1, 27% higher than that of the low academic ability students."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Creativity — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• SSCS alone also reversed the ability gap: low academic students improved 17.66% more than high academic students — related
• Under SSCS+MS, low academic students' creative thinking improvement exceeded high academic students' (descriptive corrected means) — reports the opposite
• SSCS+MS learning improves low academic students' creative thinking ability 36.18% more than high academic students — related
• Under conventional learning, pre-service teachers at all ability levels obtain the lowest critical thinking scores, with upper and middle groups statistically equal — related