Claims

CG-based instruction's gains continued increasing between the immediate and delayed posttest while traditional-instruction gains were only maintained

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2010 · 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? From Posttest 1 to Posttest 2 the COG group improved by a further 4.6 points, whereas TRAD and CTRL deteriorated minimally (0.47 and 0.07 of a point). → Jakub Bielak 2010

Evidence

Jakub Bielak 2010

Jakub Bielak, Mirosųaw Pawlak. (2010). Teaching English tense and aspect with the help of cognitive grammar: An empirical study. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 1(3), 365-400. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1136451

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Delayed-posttest comparison in the quasi-experiment. The article reports COG gains "kept increasing from Posttest 1 to Posttest 2 to yield an improvement of 4.6 points", while TRAD deteriorated by 0.47 of a point and CTRL by 0.07 of a point; descriptive values only, no effect size printed.

"This is different from the gains of COG, which were not just maintained but kept increasing from Posttest 1 to Posttest 2 to yield an improvement of 4.6 points."

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.