There is no interaction between reading strategy and English proficiency in academic content-area reading comprehension¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · 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? Two-way ANOVA found no significant strategy-by-proficiency interaction (F = .180, p = .673), suggesting PRWR applies across proficiency levels. → Azhar Aziz Lubis; Gunadi Harry Sulistyo 2018
Evidence¶
Azhar Aziz Lubis; Gunadi Harry Sulistyo 2018¶
Azhar Aziz Lubis; Gunadi Harry Sulistyo. (2018). PRWR: Evidence of Its Effectiveness in Teaching Academic Content-Area Reading across English Proficiency. Dinamika Ilmu, Vol. 18 No. 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.21093/di.v18i1.1070
q2 · i? · causal · r1
Two-way ANOVA on posttest scores of the 58 students with strategy (PRWR vs TRA) and English proficiency (high vs low) as factors; the Groups*TOEFL interaction yielded F = .180, p = .673, so "there was no interaction between the reading strategy and English proficiency".
"This turned out that the obtained p-value was .673, meaning that it was greater than the level of significance .05 (sig .673 > .05). This means that the null hypothesis was accepted and the alternative hypothesis was rejected, and thus there was no interaction between the reading strategy and English proficiency."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Students taught with the PRWR reading strategy achieve better academic content-area reading comprehension than students taught with Translation and Reading Aloud — related
- Students with high English proficiency taught with PRWR achieve better reading comprehension than high-proficiency students taught with Translation and Reading Aloud — related
- The Proficiency × Material interaction on reading comprehension was significant, indicating heterogeneous material effects across proficiency strata — related
- There is no interaction between teaching technique and students' reading habit in teaching reading comprehension — related
- Teaching strategy and curiosity interact: INSERT suits high-curiosity students while SQ3R suits low-curiosity students — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.