Integrated literacy and content-area instruction significantly improves comprehension, including on standardized measures (g = 0.40 overall; g = 0.25 standardized)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 Integrated instruction improved comprehension overall (g = 0.40, n = 149), with significant effects for both researcher-developed (g = 0.54) and standardized (g = 0.25) comprehension measures. → HyeJin Hwang 2021

Evidence¶

HyeJin Hwang 2021¶

HyeJin Hwang, Sonia Q. Cabell & Rachel E. Joyner (2021). Effects of Integrated Literacy and Content-area Instruction on Vocabulary and Comprehension in the Elementary Years: A Meta-analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2021.1954005

q3 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r2

Random-effects meta-analysis of 149 comprehension effect sizes from 35 studies. The pooled effect was "g = 0.40", CI [.19, .62], p < .001; heterogeneity was substantial (I2 = 81.58), suggesting moderator analysis.

"Integrated literacy and content-area instruction improved students' comprehension (n = 149, g = 0.40, CI = [.19, .62]). The overall effect size was significant (p < .001) and large in light of Kraft's (2020) benchmarks"

HyeJin Hwang 2021 (2)¶

HyeJin Hwang, Sonia Q. Cabell & Rachel E. Joyner (2021). Effects of Integrated Literacy and Content-area Instruction on Vocabulary and Comprehension in the Elementary Years: A Meta-analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2021.1954005

q3 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r2

Measure-type subgroup analyses for comprehension. Both researcher-developed (g = 0.54) and standardized outcomes (g = 0.25, CI [.04, .46]) were significant, unlike the vocabulary pattern. Converting to U3, about 69% and 60% of treatment students exceeded the control mean on researcher-developed and standardized measures respectively.

"The overall effect sizes for both researcher-developed (n = 123, g = 0.54, CI = [.17, .92], p < .01) and standardized comprehension outcomes (n = 26, g = 0.25, CI = [.04, .46], p < .05) were large (Kraft, 2020) and significant"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Integrated instruction significantly improves content knowledge of taught science and social studies material (g = 0.89), but not on standardized knowledge measures — related
• Integrated instruction did not significantly improve standardized vocabulary outcomes — related
• Integrated literacy and content-area instruction significantly improves vocabulary in the elementary years (g = 0.91) — related
• Integrating oral and written English language instruction into content-area teaching shows positive impacts on content-area acquisition in five RCTs — related
• CALI significantly improves social studies knowledge (g = 2.27) and science knowledge (g = 2.10) in K-4 students compared to business-as-usual control. — related
• Comprehension strategy instruction shows a large overall effect, but reliability is undermined by few standardized measures — related