Peer support significantly improves oral production in both reading aloud and speaking among low English achievers¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1–r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · 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? Among low English achievement students, the peer-supported group scored significantly higher than the non-peer group on all six aspects of reading aloud (p < .05 for all). → Muslem 2017 q2 i? Among low English achievement students, the peer-supported group scored significantly higher than the non-peer group on all six aspects of speaking (p < .05 for all). → Muslem 2017 (2)

Evidence¶

Muslem 2017¶

Muslem, A., & Abbas, M. (2017). The Effectiveness of Immersive Multimedia Learning with Peer Support on English Speaking and Reading Aloud. International Journal of Instruction, 10(1). http://www.e-iji.net/dosyalar/iji_2017_1_13.pdf

q2 · i? · causal · r1

ANOVA on the low-achievement subsample (n = 28 with peer support, 27 without) for reading aloud. For example, integration means were 7.75 versus 6.77, F(1,54) = 21.575, p = .000, with "p < .05 for all the aspects".

"Low achievement students in the peer -supported group reported consistently highe r mean scores for all dimensions of oral production in reading and the results of ANOVA tests reported significant differences, i.e., that p < .05 for all the aspects."

Muslem 2017 (2)¶

q2 · i? · causal · r2

ANOVA on the low-achievement subsample (n = 28 with peer support, 27 without) for speaking. For example, rate means were 6.82 versus 5.92, F(1,54) = 24.384, p = .000, with "p < .05 for all the aspects".

"Low achievement students in the peer -supported group reported consistently higher mean scores for all dimensions of oral production in reading and the results of ANOVA tests reported significant differences, i.e., that p < .05 for all the aspects."

Discussion¶

Page metadata

Field	Value
`status`	`review`
`generated`	by `process:wiki-ingest` on `2026-11-03`
`trust`	unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.