After critical reading instruction, the experimental group preferred reviewing over summarizing an ironical text while the control group did not¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Before the program, preference for summarizing versus reviewing did not differ significantly between the experimental and control groups (summarization χ2(2)=.181, p>.05; review χ2(2)=.153, p>.05). → Karabay 2015 q2 i? After the program, the difference between the two groups in preference for review was statistically significant (χ2(1)=4.353, p<.05). → Karabay 2015 (2)

Evidence¶

Karabay 2015¶

Aysegul Karabay. (2015). The guiding effects of a critical reading program on the use of external reading strategies when confronting an ironical text. Educational Research and Reviews. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2015.2419

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Chi-square analysis of strategy preferences in the pre-test with 60 pre-service teachers in one experimental and one control group of 30 each. The article reports no statistically significant pre-program difference between the "experimental group and control group".

"Before the program, a Chi-square analysis revealed that the difference between the experimental group and control group was not statistically significant (for summarization [ χ2 (2) = .181, p>.05]; for review [χ2 (2) = .153, p>.05])."

Karabay 2015 (2)¶

Aysegul Karabay. (2015). The guiding effects of a critical reading program on the use of external reading strategies when confronting an ironical text. Educational Research and Reviews. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2015.2419

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Chi-square analysis of post-test review preference in the same two-group quasi-experimental design. The article reports a statistically significant between-group difference "for review" with χ2 (1) = 4.353, p< .05; no effect size is printed.

"However, after the program, a Chi-square analysis revealed that the difference between the two groups was statistically significant ( for review [ χ2 (1) = 4.353, p< .05])."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Before critical reading instruction, pre-service teachers mostly summarized and read the ironical text superficially — related
• After PCRI, most experimental-group teachers inferred the deeper ironic meaning of the text while most control-group teachers took it literally — related
• Critical readers underlined and took notes of more critical points (ironies, questions, metaphors) and summarized less than less-critical readers — related