Intervention effects of SRI did not differ by student background or ability variables¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2016 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? No significant interaction effects were determined for age, gender, SES, or ethnic/linguistic background, and effects were not dependent on nonverbal intelligence, vocabulary, or decoding skills. → Droop 2016

Evidence¶

Droop 2016¶

Droop, M.; van Elsäcker, W.; Voeten, M. J. M.; Verhoeven, L. (2016). Long-Term Effects of Strategic Reading Instruction in the Intermediate Elementary Grades. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2015.1065528

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Interaction analyses added to the multilevel models of the randomized trial tested whether intervention effects varied by student characteristics; the article reports no significant interactions for any background or ability variable.

"No signi ficant interaction effects were determined for age, gender, SES, or ethnic/linguistic background. The intervention effects were also not dependent on the level of the student’s nonverbal intelligence, vocabulary, or decoding skills."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Prior Knowledge — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it
• Reading and Language — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it

Related Claims¶

• Game design, not learner age or linguistic background, determines DGBL effectiveness; adventure games outperform non-adventure games — related
• Before intervention, treatment and control kindergartners did not differ on age, demographics, vocabulary, phoneme segmentation, letter knowledge, or reading — related
• Age, gender, class level and voluntary programme choice do not significantly predict job search anxiety in the adjusted model — related
• Exploratory moderation analyses found no significant moderators (age, gender, SES, baseline self-control, baseline life events) of the life events–self-control relation — related
• No clear differential effects of morphology instruction by child factors: age, reading ability, SES, or linguistic background — related
• Age, gender, developmental status, SES, and sample region do not significantly moderate the inhibitory control–mathematical ability correlation — related
• Background variables (need for cognition, test anxiety, mindset, puzzle experience) showed no consistent moderating patterns across the three experiments — related