Both SRE approaches produced significant but small effects on basic story comprehension measures¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i2 Treatment main effects on multiple-choice and short-answer Part 1 comprehension quizzes were significant with small effect sizes (.08 and .09). → Liang 2011

Evidence¶

Liang 2011¶

Liang, L. A. (2011). Scaffolding Middle School Students' Comprehension and Response to Short Stories. RMLE Online, 34(8). ISSN 1940-4476. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ925248

q2 · i2 · causal · r2

ANCOVA of basic comprehension quiz scores (multiple-choice 0–10 points; short-answer Part 1 0–4 points) during the experimental weeks. Both SRE treatments fostered basic understanding of the stories, with effect sizes of ".08" and ".09".

"A significant main effect was noted for treatment on the multiple-choice quizzes, F(1, 158) = 13.98, p < .001, with an effect size of .08; for Part 1 of the short-answer quizzes, F(1, 158) = 15.49, p < .001, with an effect size of .09;"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Approach-specific SRE instruction produced large treatment effects on the assessments aligned to each approach's purpose — related
• No significant treatment effect on identifying question types (short-answer Part 2) — related
• Students in both treatment groups were highly engaged with the stories, with no marked difference between approaches — related
• Evidence on whether initial short-answer questions produce more learning than initial multiple-choice questions is mixed, with recent studies finding little or no difference — related
• Each approach improved only its own targeted knowledge: gains on approach-aligned posttests but not on opposite-approach measures — related