After controlling for pretest, TTPS intervention students solved more problems on the posttest than comparison peers¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q3·i3large
Currency · newest study 2016 · checked against its sources 2026-11-03 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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 ANCOVA holding pretest constant showed intervention students outperformed comparison students on problem-solving posttest (d = .84). → Bostic et al. 2016
Evidence¶
Bostic et al. 2016¶
Jonathan D. Bostic, Stephen J. Pape, Tim Jacobbe. (2016). Encouraging Sixth-Grade Students' Problem-Solving Performance by Teaching Through Problem Solving. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, Volume 8, Number 3. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1094896
q3 · i3 · causal · r1
ANCOVA with pretest problem-solving performance as covariate in the teaching experiment (N = 58 analyzed). The article reports "d = .84" favoring the intervention group on the five-problem posttest.
"Students in the intervention group performed better than their comparison group peers (Mint = 2.83, SDint = 1.34; Mcom = 1.73, SDcom = 1.28; F(1, 55) = 77.84, p < .005, d = .84)"
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Problem Solving — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
- TTPS intervention students improved their problem-solving performance from pretest to posttest while comparison students did not — related
- Comparison students outperformed TTPS intervention students on the unit test of unit-specific content — reports the opposite
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.