Claims

The Small Group Activity group outperformed the Individual Activity group on all five measured speaking aspects (vocabulary, fluency, grammar, pronunciation, comprehension)

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? Mean scores for the Small Group Activity group were higher than the Individual Activity group means in all 5 aspects of speaking skills measured, and the per-aspect gains were larger for the Small Group Activity group. → Muslem 2017

Evidence

Muslem 2017

Muslem, A., Mustafa, F., Usman, B., & Rahman, A. (2017). The Application of Video Clips with Small Group and Individual Activities to Improve Young Learners' Speaking Performance. Teaching English with Technology, 17(4), 25-37. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1159095

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Descriptive comparison of mean pre-test/post-test scores per speaking aspect (rubric adapted from Brown, 2000), scored by two evaluators. SGA changes ranged from 1.00 (fluency) to 1.57 (vocabulary); IA changes ranged from 0.50 to 0.68. The article reports the SGA increases as significantly higher; no effect size was printed.

"Table 4 shows that the mean scores for the SGA gro up were higher than the means for those in the IA group in all 5 aspects of speaking skills measured namely vocabulary, fluency, grammar, pronunciation and comprehension."

Discussion

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.