A one-way ANOVA on the same data verified the t-test finding that the experimental group outperformed the control group on total marks¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · q2 quasi-experiment
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? A separate one-way ANOVA on total marks confirmed the experimental group performed significantly better than the control group. → Wickramaarachchi 2014

q2 i? First-year ESL undergraduates who engaged in prw tasks before reading performed significantly better on total inferential comprehension scores than students who performed tasks without a pre-reading component. → Wickramaarachchi 2014

Evidence¶

Wickramaarachchi 2014¶

Wickramaarachchi, T.I. (2014). Writing-Reading Relationships: Effectiveness of Writing Activities as Pre-Reading Tasks to Enhance L2 Inferential Reading Comprehension. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 5(5). https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.5n.5p.213

q2 · i?

One-way ANOVA verification analysis on the same total-mark data (Table 3 reports Between Groups Sum of Squares 123.245, df 1, F 9.42, Sig. .004). The article states the test "verified the findings of the Independent two samples t-test". No effect size is printed.

"Based on the findings of the independent samples t-test and the one-way ANOVA test, in considering the total marks of all the students, the students of the experimental group have performed significantly better than the students from the control group."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Student interpreters who practiced with an automated scoring system outperformed the control group on total interpreting scores at post-test — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• The study rejects the null hypothesis that writing-based pre-reading tasks have no impact on sub-skills of inferential reading comprehension — related
• The prw group scored higher on six of seven inferential-comprehension sub-skills, but only the sequence sub-skill difference was statistically significant — related
• At post-test the experimental group significantly outperformed the control group on all six motor tests, at significance levels varying from p<0.05 to p<0.001 — related