Eleventh-grade students taught with the discourse analysis method showed larger pretest-to-posttest gains in textual analysis skill than the traditionally taught control group¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · 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 group's textual analysis mean rose from 2,95 to 7,05 while the control group's rose from 2,25 to 3,16. → Kapanadze 2018
Evidence¶
Kapanadze 2018¶
Dilek Ünveren Kapanadze. (2018). THE EFFECT OF USING DISCOURSE ANALYSIS METHOD ON IMPROVING COGNITIVE AND AFFECTIVE SKILLS IN LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE TEACHING. European Journal of Education Studies, Volume 4, Issue 5. https://www.oapub.org/edu
q2 · i? · causal · r1
Same pretest-posttest control group quasi-experiment (20 experimental, 24 control eleventh-graders). The article states the achievement level of the experimental group in textual analysis "changed positively and on large scale"; no effect size is printed.
"In terms of textual analysis skill, as a result of t test conducted on pretest and post test scores of treatment and control groups; it was observed that arithmetic mean of control group was increased from 2,25 to 3,16 whereas it increased from 2,95 to 7,0 5 in experimental group."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Eleventh-grade students taught with the discourse analysis method showed larger pretest-to-posttest gains in making discourse skill than the traditionally taught control group — related
- Eleventh-grade students taught literature with the discourse analysis method showed larger pretest-to-posttest gains in reading comprehension than the traditionally taught control group — related
- Eleventh-grade students taught with the discourse analysis method showed larger pretest-to-posttest gains in use of language skill than the traditionally taught control group — related
- The experimental and control groups did not differ significantly in writing scores at pre-test, supporting attribution of post-test differences to the instructional methods — related
- Both groups improved from pretest to posttest, with the blended group's posttest means exceeding the control group's — a broader claim this one bears on
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.