Claims

Students completing all or extra STAR Lite components returned to good academic standing at higher rates than comparison students

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2022 · 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? Participants completing all or extra program components returned to good academic standing at a higher rate than the comparison group, while those completing none or some returned at a lower rate. → Liu 2022

Evidence

Liu 2022

Liu, C., Bruner, J., & Ammigan, R. (2022). Success Training for Academic Resiliency: An Advising Intervention Program for Undergraduate Students on Probation. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education, 11(2). https://ojed.org/jise

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Descriptive analysis of return-to-good-standing rates disaggregated by program completion level (none, some, all, extra) across four cohorts of STAR Lite participants and a 41-student comparison group. The article reports "Participants that completed all the STAR Lite program or extra components of the program returned to good academic standing at a higher rate than the comparison group." No inferential test or effect size accompanies this contrast.

"Participants that completed all the STAR Lite program or extra components of the program returned to good academic standing at a higher rate than the comparison group while students that completed none or only some of the program returned to academic standing at a lower rate."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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