Claims

Instruction in thematic choice produced positive effects on Chinese college students' use of topical Themes, interpersonal Themes, unmarked Themes, and conjunctive adjuncts in academic English writing

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · 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? After 10 weeks of thematic-choice instruction, the experimental group made better thematic choices (more topical and textual Themes, fewer interpersonal Themes) while the control group did not exhibit significant changes. → Wei 2016

Evidence

Wei 2016

Wei, J. (2016). Effects of Instruction on Chinese College Students’ Thematic Choice in Academic Writing. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(14). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1102949

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Quasi-experimental study with an experimental group (CE, n=30) receiving 10-week thematic-choice instruction and a control group (CC, n=30) receiving regular essay-writing lessons; 120 pre/post essays analyzed. The conclusion reports the CE group "make better thematic choices after the instruction" while CC "did not exhibit significant changes".

"Research results show that CE group make better thematic choices after the instru ction as they used more topical and textual Themes, and less interpersonal Themes after the instruction while C C group did not exhibit significant changes."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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