Variation in instructional dosage did not explain variation in writing instruction effect sizes¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr3·q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · 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.
q3 i? The moderation effect of total instruction length was not statistically significant in linear or nonlinear models. → Young-Suk Grace Kim 2021
Evidence¶
Young-Suk Grace Kim 2021¶
Young-Suk Grace Kim, Dandan Yang, Marcela Reyes, Carol Connor. (2021). Writing instruction improves students' writing skills differentially depending on focal instruction and children: A meta-analysis for primary grade students. Educational Research Review 34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100408
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3
Meta-regression of dosage (weeks × sessions per week × session length) on effect sizes. Dosage information was missing in 6 of 24 studies (22% of effect sizes), limiting this analysis.
"the moderation effect of dosage was not statistically significant in either linear models (β = 0.000, p = .77, k = 129, N = 18) or nonlinear models (β = 0.000, p = .95, k = 129, N = 18)"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Writing intervention effects for US ELL students do not vary significantly by study quality indicators, participant characteristics, or intervention characteristics — related
- No instruction characteristic (dosage, program availability, literacy domain) significantly moderated effects, though phonics and spelling instruction approached significance descriptively favoring treatments that included them — related
- The dose–response relation for K-3 intensive mathematics interventions is linear, with no support for a nonlinear (quadratic) curve — related
- Dosage significantly predicts intervention effects in a linear model (β = 0.03 per hour), but the dosage main effect is no longer significant after controlling for moderators — related
- Outcome proximity moderates the dose–response relation: distal outcomes outperform proximal outcomes at dosages at or below 5.43 h, while proximal outcomes exceed distal outcomes at or above 22.6 h — related
- Number of treatment sessions received was not associated with end-of-treatment performance — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.