Access Program students improved by about 24 points on the diagnostic test over one year¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · 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? Access students' paired pre-post scores differed significantly (M = 18.19 vs M = 42.62; t199 = 72.962, sig. .001). → Iqbal 2018
Evidence¶
Iqbal 2018¶
Iqbal, M., & Rafi, M. S. (2018). A Comparative Study of English Language Teaching Practices at the Access Program and Public Schools. Bulletin of Education and Research, 40(3), 231-249. https://pu.edu.pk/journals/index.php/ber/
q2 · i? · causal · r1
Paired samples t test (Table 4) on 200 Access students tested at admission and after one year. The article reports the post-test was 24 points higher (95% CI [23.77, 25.09]); no effect size is printed.
"yes ther e is statistically significant difference in the result of pre and post -tests (M=18.19vs M=42.62 with t199 = 72.962 and sig. (2-tailed) = .001 that is less than p value of .05)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- After one year, Access Program students significantly outperform public school students who had also qualified for the program on a diagnostic English test — related
- Public school students improved by only about 8 points over the same year — related
- The complete sample showed a significant overall pre-to-post gain of about 16 points — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.