Abstract
Rosenthal's critique of Grieger's paper embodies many of the problems that much of the literature on the teacher expectancy effect does. Positive data are selectively emphasized, negative data are explained as “simply an unusual coincidence,” and statistical significance is confused with practical significance. This paper clarifies several of Rosenthal's statistical and design misunderstandings.
Full Text 
Sign-in/Register to access full text options
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Published version (
Free)
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
