The TR group (timed reading only) made statistically significant reading rate gains of about 15 to 27 swpm across four scoring methods¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The TR group's reading rate increased significantly under all four scoring methods, including a medium effect size (d = -1.01) for the last-minus-first method. → Shimono 2018

Evidence¶

Shimono 2018¶

Shimono, T. R. (2018). L2 reading fluency progression using timed reading and repeated oral reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 30(1). http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Paired-samples t tests for the TR group (n = 18, middle-proficiency classes) reading 30 timed readings over 10 weeks; the pretest-to-posttest gain was about 15 swpm with a medium effect size, and all four scoring methods reached significance under the Holm-Bonferroni procedure.

"The last minus the first scoring method saw a gain of about 15 swpm, t(17) = -4.26, p = .001, and a medium effect size (d = -1.01)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Reading Fluency — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• The comparison group showed a statistically significant decrease in reading rate from pretest to posttest — related
• The TROR group (timed reading plus repeated oral reading with chunking and prosody) made statistically significant reading rate gains of about 13 to 27 swpm across four scoring methods — related
• The TR group's comprehension results were mixed: a significant 11% average-method gain but a significant 12% decrease on the three-extremes passages — related