Multiple-strategy comprehension training appears to produce better comprehension than single-strategy training¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2008 · 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? All of the strong experimental studies supporting comprehension strategy instruction taught more than one strategy to the same students, and the panel concludes multiple-strategy training results in better comprehension than single-strategy training. → Kamil 2008
Evidence¶
Kamil 2008¶
Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C., Salinger, T., and Torgesen, J. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and intervention practices: A Practice Guide (NCEE #2008-4027). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/PracticeGuide/8
q2 · i? · review · r2
Panel synthesis of the experimental studies meeting WWC standards behind Recommendation 2, citing examples such as main-idea finding with summarizing and connections-predictions-inference training. The claim is hedged ("It appears") and no effect size is printed.
"It appears that multiple-strategy training results in better comprehension than sin- gle-strategy training. All the strong stud- ies that support this recommendation in- clude teaching more than one strategy to the same group of students."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Academic and Critical Literacy — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
-
Strategy Instruction Improves Academic Performance — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
-
Reciprocal Teaching Improves Reading Comprehension — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
- Whether strategy instruction works better in authentic content-area tasks is untested, and the one meta-analytic comparison recorded found larger gains in strategic ability in language-arts than in content-area classes — related
- Metacognitive Strategies Improve Learning — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
multiple-strategy-training-better-comprehension-than-single-strategy |
title |
Multiple-strategy comprehension training appears to produce better comprehension than single-strategy training |
description |
Multiple-strategy comprehension training appears to produce better comprehension than single-strategy training |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2008 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-09 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — kamil-2008 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.