The cohort covariate's contribution to explained variance in all three writing measures fell well below the small-effect threshold¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r3 · q3 · i0 negligible
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i0 The f2 effect size for cohort membership was 0.003 for text quality, 0.006 for handwriting fluency, and 0.001 for attitude, all below the 0.02 small-effect value. → Skar 2023

Evidence¶

Skar 2023¶

Skar, G. B., Graham, S., & Huebener, A. (2023). The Long-Term Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Children's Writing: a Follow-up Replication Study. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09729-1

q3 · i0 · associational · r3

Three-level random-intercept regression models (lme4 in R) compared R2 with and without the cohort covariate. Table 2 prints R2 differences of 0.003 (text quality), 0.006 (handwriting fluency), and 0.001 (attitude), with f2 "well below the small effect threshold".

"The effect size f2 = R21−R2 was given in parentheses; an intuitive interpretation for f2 is that values of 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35 represent small, medium, and large effects (Lorah, 2018). Thus, the cohort covariate is well below the small effect threshold for all three outcome measures."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Writing Skills — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• One year after emergency remote instruction, Norwegian second-graders showed no statistically significant differences from a pre-pandemic cohort in writing quality, handwriting fluency, or attitude toward writing — related
• In the prior first-grade study, the During COVID-19 cohort scored significantly lower than the Before COVID-19 cohort on all three writing measures immediately after remote instruction ended — related
• Cohort effects on activity emotions are minimal across fourteen years, with cohort accounting for only 0.2% to 1.2% of variance in mean emotion scores — related