VLI and TCI groups did not differ significantly in creative thinking before instruction¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2018: local conditions change quickly
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? An independent samples t-test showed no significant pretest difference between VLI and TCI groups. → Soheila Shafiee Varzaneh & Roya Baharlooie 2015
Evidence¶
Soheila Shafiee Varzaneh & Roya Baharlooie 2015¶
Soheila Shafiee Varzaneh & Roya Baharlooie. (2015). The Effect of Virtual vs. Traditional Classroom Instruction on Creative Thinking of Iranian High School EFL Learners. English Language Teaching, 8(5). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n5p177
q2 · i? · causal · r2
Baseline check in the same quasi-experiment: independent samples t-test on OPT-era creative thinking scores for 60 VLI and 60 TCI learners found "no significant difference between the mean score of the two groups at the beginning of the study (P > 0.05)." Equivalence was not tested.
"the results of the t-test indicated that there was no significant difference between the mean score of the two groups at the beginning of the study (P > 0.05). So VLI and TCI groups did not differ significantly before mediation."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Virtual learning instruction produced significantly greater creative thinking gains than traditional classroom instruction in Iranian female EFL learners — related
- Low-proficiency learners showed the largest creative thinking gains under virtual learning instruction — related
- Both high and low proficiency VLI subgroups outperformed their TCI counterparts in posttest creative thinking — related
- VLI learners held more positive attitudes toward the learning situation than TCI learners — related
- Before the intervention, the control and experimental groups were statistically equivalent in geometric thinking — related
- The two groups did not differ significantly in writing quality before the treatment — related
- Before the FCI treatment, the experimental and control groups showed no statistically significant difference in writing ability — related
- High and low CT groups showed comparable prior coding knowledge before the AICA intervention — related
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.