Claims

Peer support does not significantly improve reading-aloud oral production among high English achievers

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · 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 high English achievement students, the peer-supported group showed no significant difference from the non-peer group in reading aloud on any aspect (p > .05 for all). → Muslem 2017

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 high-achievement subsample (n = 12 with peer support, 13 without) for reading aloud. For example, pausing means were 7.00 versus 6.92, F(1,24) = .057, p = .814, with "no significant differences" on all aspects.

"High achievement students in the peer -supported group reported similar mean scores for all dimensions of oral production in reading and the results of ANOVA tests reported no 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.