Claims

ELL first graders who learned ASL signs with sight vocabulary moved from zero pretest words to perfect posttest scores

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2011 · 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? All three ELL students in the ASL group, who knew none of the required sight vocabulary on the pretest, achieved 100% mastery of the targeted words on the posttest. → Sherman 2011

Evidence

Sherman 2011

Sherman, J. (2011). Signing for Success: Using American Sign Language to Learn Sight Vocabulary. SRATE Journal, 20(2). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ959527

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Subgroup result of the five-week inquiry project: the article reports that the three ELL students' "pretest scores indicated they knew none of the required sight vocabulary" and that all three reached perfect posttest scores. Descriptive report of three students; no effect size printed.

"On their posttest evaluation, all three achieved a perfect score of 100% mastery of the targeted words."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.