The treatment group's advantage did not extend to the organization subscale of writing¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q2
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.
q2 i? The treatment group did not achieve significantly greater gains than the control group on the organization subscale. → Mermelstein 2015
Evidence¶
Mermelstein 2015¶
Mermelstein, A. D. (2015). Improving EFL learners’ writing through enhanced extensive reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 27(2), 182–198. http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl
q2 · i? · causal · r2
Group-gain comparison in the results section of the one-year university ER study. The article reports no significant TG-over-CG gain for organization; no effect size is printed for this null comparison.
"The one subscale where the TG did not achieve significant gains over the CG was organization."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- EFL learners in an enhanced extensive reading treatment group significantly outperform a control group on five of six writing subscales — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
- Both the treatment and control groups achieved significant pre-to-post gains on all six writing subscales — related
- Enhanced extensive reading yields small-to-large effect sizes across writing subscales, with the largest effects in spelling/mechanics and fluency — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.