Claims

Procedural and strategic supports during reading tended to positively affect comprehension compared to no-treatment controls, with exceptions when compared against mobilization

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2023 · 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? When compared to control groups receiving no treatment, procedural and strategic supports during reading tended to positively affect comprehension and learning, per the review's synthesis. → Courtney Hattan 2023 q2 i? Exceptions occurred in comparisons against knowledge mobilization: benefits appeared for both perspective taking and mobilization in one study, and only for relational reasoning in another. → Courtney Hattan 2023 (2)

Evidence

Courtney Hattan 2023

Courtney Hattan, Patricia A. Alexander, and Sarah M. Lupo. (2023). Leveraging What Students Know to Make Sense of Texts: What the Research Says About Prior Knowledge Activation. Review of Educational Research. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Leveraging+What+Students+Know+to+Make+Sense+of+Texts+Prior+Knowledge+Activation

q2 · i? · review · r3

The review's synthesis across twelve articles in this category, which included teacher prompting, periodic questioning, written prompts, metacognitive support devices, conditional knowledge questionnaires, and perspective taking. The review hedges with tended to, citing multiple studies.

"When compared to a control group not receiving any treatment, these procedural and strategic supports tended to positively effect comprehension and learning"

Courtney Hattan 2023 (2)

Courtney Hattan, Patricia A. Alexander, and Sarah M. Lupo. (2023). Leveraging What Students Know to Make Sense of Texts: What the Research Says About Prior Knowledge Activation. Review of Educational Research. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Leveraging+What+Students+Know+to+Make+Sense+of+Texts+Prior+Knowledge+Activation

q2 · i? · review · r3

The review reports these two head-to-head comparisons as exceptions to the positive pattern, and also notes Carr and Thompson (1996) found both teacher prompting and spontaneous activation had positive results on readers' text comprehension.

"Two studies compared strategic or procedural supports to knowledge mobilization. Wetzels et al. (2011b) found benefits for both perspective taking and mobilization, while Hattan & Alexander (2021) only found benefits for relational reasoning."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id procedural-strategic-supports-tended-positive-versus-control
title Procedural and strategic supports during reading tended to positively affect comprehension compared to no-treatment controls, with exceptions when compared against mobilization
description Procedural and strategic supports during reading tended to positively affect comprehension compared to no-treatment controls, with exceptions when compared against mobilization
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2023
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-20
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 2 — courtney-hattan-2023, courtney-hattan-2023-2

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