Claims

EFL junior-high students taught listening comprehension with authentic materials scored significantly higher on a post-test than students taught with non-authentic materials

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · 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? The experimental group's post-test mean (78.95) exceeded the control group's post-test mean (70), with t = 5.09 higher than the t-table value 2.02 at df = 36, so the alternative hypothesis was accepted. → Dewi 2018

Evidence

Dewi 2018

Resti Citra Dewi. (2018). Utilizing Authentic Materials on Students' Listening Comprehension: Does it have Any Influence? Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.9n.1p.70

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Post-test comparison of the two groups in this experimental study (38 experimental, 38 control students). The table reports experimental mean "78,95" versus control mean 70, t = 5.09, df = 36, significant at the 0.05 level; no standardized effect size is printed.

"Post-Test experimental 38 78,95 8,79 5,09 36 0,000** Post-Test control 38 70 8,78"

Discussion

Learner Variables

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.