The cooperative learning component's added benefit over direct instruction alone with CIRC materials was not statistically significant on main idea identification¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr3·q3
Currency · newest study 2012 · checked against its sources 2026-10-21 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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? In the Stevens et al. (1991) trial, the CIRC (direct instruction with cooperative learning) group versus the direct instruction without cooperative learning group showed an effect size of 0.33 on Main Idea Questions with p = 0.09, not statistically significant; direct instruction alone also significantly outperformed comparison (effect size 0.53, p < 0.01). → alternate-contrast
Evidence¶
alternate-contrast¶
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, What Works Clearinghouse. (2012, June). Beginning Reading intervention report: Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition®. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/109
q3 · i? · causal · r3
Alternate contrast from the same cluster randomized trial (Appendix D.3): CIRC versus Direct Instruction without cooperative learning on Main Idea Questions yielded effect size 0.33, improvement index +13, p = 0.09. The Direct Instruction without cooperative learning group versus comparison yielded effect size 0.53, +20, p < 0.01 on the same outcome.
"Main Idea Questions Grades 3 and 4 20 classes/ 319 students 6.40 (1.83) 5.79 (1.89) 0.61 0.33 +13 0.09"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Cooperative Learning Improves Achievement — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
- In a cluster randomized trial, CIRC produced a statistically significant positive effect on main idea identification (effect size 0.85) but not on inference questions — related
- In a quasi-experimental study, CIRC showed no statistically significant effect on comprehension outcomes after WWC clustering and multiple-comparison adjustments — related
- CIRC has potentially positive effects on comprehension for beginning readers, with an average improvement index of +12 percentile points across two studies — related
- Reading comprehension strategy programs in grades 3–6 yield a medium average effect size of 0.34 — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
circ-cooperative-component-benefit-unconfirmed |
title |
The cooperative learning component's added benefit over direct instruction alone with CIRC materials was not statistically significant on main idea identification |
description |
The cooperative learning component's added benefit over direct instruction alone with CIRC materials was not statistically significant on main idea identification |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2012 |
source_checked |
2026-10-21 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-07 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — alternate-contrast |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.