Claims

Iranian intermediate EFL learners taught reading with CALL software scored significantly higher on reading comprehension than learners taught the same texts from printed pages

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2012 · 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 (CALL) group significantly outperformed the control (printed-text) group on the reading comprehension post-test. → Mahnaz Saeidi & Mahsa Yusefi 2012

Evidence

Mahnaz Saeidi & Mahsa Yusefi 2012

Mahnaz Saeidi & Mahsa Yusefi. (2012). The Effect of Computer-Assisted Language Learning on Reading Comprehension in an Iranian EFL Context. EUROCALL Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden, Proceedings. Research-publishing.net. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED574943

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Quasi-experimental comparison of two intact groups of Iranian female intermediate EFL learners (40 analyzed) taught the same texts over ten sessions, via three software packages versus printed pages. The article reports "a significant difference in post-test scores" favoring the experimental group, t(38) = -5.741, p = .0001; no effect size is printed.

"there was a significant difference in post-test scores for the experimental group (M = 16.10, SD = 1.17) and control group (M = 13.80, SD = 1.36), t(38) = -5.741, p = .0001"

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.