Fidelity of implementation and percentage of instructional time on engaged reader processes added only 2% explained variance to comprehension post-test scores beyond controls¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? After controlling for pre-test scores and grouping, adding fidelity and CLASSIC time variables increased explained variance in QRI-5 comprehension post-test scores by only 2%, for a total of 27%. → Fatima Zehra Allahverdi 2025

Evidence¶

Fatima Zehra Allahverdi 2025¶

Fatima Zehra Allahverdi, Lynn Gelzheiser. (2025). Comparison of more effective and typical teachers' instructional quality and implementation of engaged reader processes. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-025-09725-8

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Multiple regression with 85 comprehension-needs-only students, controlling QRI-5 pre-test and group heterogeneity; predictors were CLASSIC percentage and fidelity of implementation. The article reports the added variables explained "only increased the explanation of the variance by 2%" (R2 change 0.02, F change 0.82, p > .05).

"Regression results indicate that adding the variables of CLASSIC and fidelity only increased the explanation of the variance by 2%, a total of 27% with the control variables added."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Time and Continuity — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• Homogeneous comprehension-needs groups spent less time on engaged reader processes but received better-aligned instruction than heterogeneous groups — related
• Teachers allocated on average five percent of intervention sessions to predicting and purpose setting, with fidelity of implementation averaging 45.4% — related