Adding reciprocal peer tutoring with audio prompting to incidental exposure produced stronger vocabulary gains than incidental exposure alone for fourth-grade struggling readers¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2011 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Mean correct selections were greater for the peer tutoring with audio prompting condition (M = 4.1 of 6) than for incidental learning alone (M = 1.2 of 6). → Mackiewicz 2011

Evidence¶

Mackiewicz 2011¶

Mackiewicz, S. M., Wood, C. L., Cooke, N. L., & Mazzotti, V. L. (2011). Effects of Peer Tutoring With Audio Prompting on Vocabulary Acquisition for Struggling Readers. Remedial and Special Education, 32(4), 345–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932510362507

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Simultaneous treatments design with eight fourth-grade struggling readers; posttest means by condition are reported in the Discussion, showing "greater for peer tutoring with audio prompting" (M = 4.1) versus incidental learning (M = 1.2). No effect size is printed.

"The mean performance for all participants was greater for peer tutoring with audio prompting (M = 4.1 correct selections of 6 total) compared to incidental learning (M = 1.2 correct selections of 6 total)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Incidental vocabulary exposure produces reliable learning, but learners pick up only a small share of the unknown words they meet — a broader claim this one bears on
• Lesson-probe data paths showed clear separation favoring the peer tutoring condition for most probes across all eight participants — related
• Combining intentional and incidental vocabulary learning produces greater gains and better retention than either mode alone — related
• Intentional vocabulary learning yields higher, faster gains and better retention than incidental learning through reading — related
• Tutoring sessions were implemented with high procedural fidelity (mean 93.4%) — related