Claims

Post-test percentage scores rose on all eight tested communicative sub-skills under the multimedia package

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2014 · checked against its sources 2026-11-01 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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? Table 1 reports higher percentage scores for the Interactive Multimedia Package than the conventional method on each of the eight tested skills, e.g. fluency in response 18.18 vs 6.24. → G. Singaravelu 2014

Evidence

G. Singaravelu 2014

G. Singaravelu. (2014). Efficacy of Multimedia Package in Communicative Skill in English. i-manager's Journal on English Language Teaching, Vol. 4 No. 4, October - December. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1068384

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Descriptive table of percentage scores for eight skills (fluency in response, narrating a story, skill of questioning, describe a picture, letter writing, reporting, essay writing, using appropriate words); the multimedia package percentages are higher on each listed skill. No statistical test is reported for these comparisons.

"The Table1 clarifies the percentage of scores in conventional method and innovative method as follows in Fluency in response, Narrating a story, Skill of questioning, Describe a picture, Letter writing, Reporting, Essay writing and Using appropriate words."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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