Claims

Reading strategy instruction in L2 (English) produced significantly greater gains in English reading comprehension than regular instruction

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2012 · 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 experimental group gained significantly more than the control group on the English reading comprehension test from pretest to posttest. → Talebi 2012

Evidence

Talebi 2012

Seyed Hassan Talebi. (2012). Reading in L2 (English) and L1 (Persian): An Investigation into Reveres Transfer of Reading Strategies. English Language Teaching, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n3p217

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Repeated measure ANOVA on pre/post English reading test scores of control and experimental groups (each 30 students per proficiency cell as printed in Table 1); the group-by-change interaction was significant (F=286.318; P<.000), with the experimental group gaining "a gain of 2.60 scores" versus .05 for controls.

"From the table we find that experimental group had a gain of 2.60 scores (From 15.05 to 17.65) whereas the control group ha d a gain of only .05 scores (from 14.48 to 14.53)."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.