Claims

Instructional strategy (Pre-question, genre-based, or combined) shows no significant main effect on science undergraduates' reading comprehension achievement

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · no dated study recorded · 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? Post-test reading comprehension achievement did not differ significantly across Pre-question, Genre, Pre-question/Genre and Control groups. → Fola-Adebayo 2014

Evidence

Fola-Adebayo 2014

Fola-Adebayo, T.J., 2014, 'Influence of Pre-question and genre-based instructional strategies on reading', Reading & Writing 5(1), Art. #51, 9 pages. https://doi.org/10.4102/rw.v5i1.51

q3 · i? · causal · r2

ANCOVA on pre-post data from a randomised block experiment with 285 first-year undergraduates at two Nigerian specialised universities, three experimental groups and one control over four weeks. The article reports F(3,260) = 2.5; p > 0.05, so Ho1 was accepted.

"the main effect of instructional strategy is not significant on the achievement of the undergraduates in reading comprehension ( F(3,260) = 2.5; p > 0.05)"

Discussion

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.