CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 115Science Education and PedagogyInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsEducational Strategies and Epistemologies

Hypothesis testing in science: group consensus and the acquisition of conceptual and procedural knowledge

Howe, Christine, Tolmie, Andy, Duchak-Tanner, Val, Rattray, Catherine·2000·Learning and Instruction
DOI 10.1016/s0959-4752(00)00004-9
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0959-4752(00)00004-9

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Studies taking groups out of class frequently detect positive associations between referring back to preceding activities or dialogue and eventual student outcomes.

    “studies that (unlike the above) take groups out of class and assess their consequences in 'controlled' contexts frequently detect positive associations between referring back to preceding activities or dialogue and eventual student outcomes”

    From Teacher–Student Dialogue During Classroom Teaching: Does It Really Impact on Student Outcomes? (2019) · cites this paper as Howe, Tolmie, Duchak-Tanner, & Rattray, 2000

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Howe, C., Tolmie, A., Duchak-Tanner, V., & Rattray, C.
Affiliations
University of Strathclyde (GB)
Corresponding author
Howe, Christine
ORCID
Howe, Christine
Venue
Learning and Instruction
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-08
Volume
10
Issue
4
Pages
361-391
ISSN
0959-4752 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0959-4752(00)00004-9
OpenAlex
W1977867624
Cited by
115
References
1
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 9
FWCI
7.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
Learning and Instruction (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Keywords
hypothesis testing, group consensus, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, science education, elementary school students, debate, learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review