Strategy variety for drawing attention was higher in the no-instruction and peer tutoring groups, while frequency was higher in the instruction groups¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitativer2·q2
Currency · newest study 2023 · 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 variety of metacognitive strategies used for drawing attention processes was higher in the no-instruction group and the peer tutoring group, but frequency of use was higher in the instruction groups, especially peer tutoring. → Yurttaş-Kumlu 2023
Evidence¶
Yurttaş-Kumlu 2023¶
Yurttaş-Kumlu, G. D., & Yürük, N. (2023). Investigation of cognitive and metacognitive strategies used by preservice science teachers exposed to explicit and peer tutoring reading strategies instruction. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 10(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.1082537
q2 · i? · qualitative · r2
Graphic 2 analysis in the qualitative multiple-case study found variety of strategies for drawing attention was higher in the no-instruction and peer tutoring groups, while the article reports frequency was higher in instruction groups, "especially in the peer tutoring strategy instruction group".
"the variety of the metacognitive strategy used to perform drawing attention processes was higher in the group without strategy instruction groups and the peer tutoring strategy instruction group."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Self-Regulation — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
- Monitoring ideas was the metacognitive process with the greatest strategy variety, and its use was highest in the peer tutoring instruction group — related
- For facilitation of memorization, strategy variety was highest in the peer tutoring group while frequency was highest in the explicit instruction group — related
- Metacognitive strategies and products of metacognitive processes were more diverse and frequent in reading strategy instruction groups than in the no-instruction group — related
- Preservice science teachers exposed to explicit reading strategy instruction showed the highest diversity and frequency of cognitive strategy use while reading a science text — related
- Children's drawings suggested they noticed the robot's embedded integration elements and shifted attention from the robot to peer communication — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
drawing-attention-variety-no-instruction-peer-tutoring |
title |
Strategy variety for drawing attention was higher in the no-instruction and peer tutoring groups, while frequency was higher in the instruction groups |
description |
Strategy variety for drawing attention was higher in the no-instruction and peer tutoring groups, while frequency was higher in the instruction groups |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2023 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-02 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — yurttaş-kumlu-2023 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.