There is no interaction between teaching technique and students' reading habit in teaching reading comprehension¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The technique-by-reading-habit interaction was not significant (Fobs = 2.1942 below the 0.05 critical value), so HT's advantage held for both high- and low-habit students. → Rosyida 2018

Evidence¶

Rosyida 2018¶

Rosyida, F., & Ghufron, M. A. (2018). Herringbone and Tri Focus Steve Snyder Technique: The Techniques for Teaching Reading Comprehension Viewed from Students' Reading Habit. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 603-616. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11341a

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Interaction term (columns by rows) of the two-way ANOVA on the post-test scores of the HT and TFSST classes, reported in Table 4; the null hypothesis of no interaction was accepted.

"Based on the analysis of two-way Anova, it was obtained that Fobs= 2.1942 is lower than Fα=4.4071. It means that there is no interaction between teaching technique and students reading habit."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Students with high reading habit have better reading comprehension than students with low reading habit — related
• Students' motivation to learn English reading increased significantly during Herringbone technique implementation — related
• The Herringbone technique is more effective than the Tri Focus Steve Snyder technique for teaching reading comprehension to ninth-grade EFL students — related