Claims

Experimental and control classes had equivalent pretest narrative writing scores before treatment

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · 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? Pretest means were similar in the experimental class (66.03) and the control class (67.19), which the authors take as equal initial ability. → Kusumawarti 2020

Evidence

Kusumawarti 2020

Kusumawarti, E., Subiyantoro, S., & Rukayah. (2020). The Effectiveness of Visualization, Auditory, Kinesthetic (VAK) Model toward Writing Narrative: Linguistic Intelligence Perspective. International Journal of Instruction, 13(4), 677-694. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13442a

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Descriptive analysis of pretest scores (Table 1) in the quasi-experimental study: experimental class mean 66.03 (SD 3.29, n=61), control class mean 67.19 (SD 3.83, n=53). The equivalence statement is descriptive; no statistical test of pretest differences is reported.

"the average score of the pretest is not much different, namely in the experimental class 66.03 and the control class 67.19. Pretest results show that the class used in this study has the same initial ability."

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.