Before the intervention, the control and experimental groups were statistically equivalent in geometric thinking¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1–r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? An independent-samples t-test found no significant pre-test mean difference between control (M = 18.84, SD = 4.18) and experimental (M = 18.32, SD = 3.74) groups, t(148) = 0.803, p = 0.423. → Armah 2018 q3 i? A chi-square test found no significant difference in van Hiele level distribution between groups at pretest (χ² = 0.189; df = 3; p > 0.05). → Armah 2018 (2)

Evidence¶

Armah 2018¶

Armah, R.B., Cofie, P.O., & Okpoti, C.A. (2018). Investigating the effect of van Hiele Phase-based instruction on pre-service teachers' geometric thinking. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 4(1), 314-330. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.383201

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Independent-samples t-test on pre-test VHGT scores of the 150 randomly selected pre-service teachers, confirming both groups started at nearly the same conceptual level before treatment.

"The results of this test (Table 2) revealed that there wa s no statistically significant difference in mean scores between the control group (M = 18.84, SD = 4.18 ) and experimental group (M = 18.32, SD = 3.74 ) conditions; t (148) = 0.803, p = 0.423 > 0.05 ."

Armah 2018 (2)¶

Armah, R.B., Cofie, P.O., & Okpoti, C.A. (2018). Investigating the effect of van Hiele Phase-based instruction on pre-service teachers' geometric thinking. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 4(1), 314-330. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.383201

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Chi-square test on the 2×4 contingency table of group by van Hiele level (VHL 0–3) at pretest, since no pre-service teacher attained Level 4 or 5 before instruction.

"the test reveals that there is no statistically significant difference in the van Hiele Levels of geometric thinking between the control and experimental groups at the pretest (χ2 = 0.189; df = 3; p > 0.05)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Most entering pre-service teachers in the sample were at van Hiele Levels 0–2, and none attained Level 5 before or after instruction — related
• Paired-samples t-tests show a significant mean-score gain from pre- to post-test in the VHPI group but not in the conventional-instruction group — related
• Before the intervention, experimental and control groups showed no significant difference in self-esteem pre-test scores, though descriptively favoring the control group — related
• Before the FCI treatment, the experimental and control groups showed no statistically significant difference in writing ability — related
• Experimental and control groups were homogeneous in idiom knowledge before treatment — related
• The experimental and control groups differed significantly on the pre-test before the intervention — reports the opposite
• The experimental and control groups did not differ significantly in programming knowledge at pretest — related
• The lecture and academic controversy groups showed no significant difference in TUCE pretest scores, indicating equivalent prior economic knowledge — related
• Pre-service teachers taught with van Hiele Phase-based Instruction attained significantly higher van Hiele levels of geometric thinking than those taught with conventional instruction — related