Claims

In the first six weeks, comprehension gains on the Checkpoints measure did not differ significantly between intervention and comparison groups

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2015 · 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.

q3 i? The mean pre-to-posttest 1 difference on the Checkpoints comprehension measure was similar across groups and not statistically significant. → Graham 2015

Evidence

Graham 2015

Graham, L., Graham, A., & West, C. (2015). From Research to Practice: The Effect of Multi-Component Vocabulary Instruction on Increasing Vocabulary and Comprehension Performance in Social Studies. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 8(1), 147-160. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1078850

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Difference score analysis on the 20-item multiple-choice Checkpoints comprehension test (mean differences 2.75 experimental vs 2.36 control, p = 0.263) found no significant group difference in the first six weeks. The authors attribute this to higher Checkpoints pretest scores leaving "less room for improvement as compared to the CBM te st."

"The mean difference on the Checkpoints measure was very similar between the two groups, and was not statistically significant."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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