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¶

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 TROR group's reading rate increased significantly under all four scoring methods, with gains of about 15, 13, 27, and 21 swpm and small effect sizes. → 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 on treatment-passage rates for the TROR group (n = 20, lower-proficiency classes) using four scoring methods with Holm-Bonferroni adjustment; the average method showed a "significant reading rate increase of about 15 swpm" with d = -0.71. All four methods reached significance.

"Evaluating the TROR group in terms of the average scoring method showed a significant reading rate increase of about 15 swpm, from 84 to 99 swpm, t(19) = -3.18, p = .005. The standardized effect size index, Cohen’s d, was -0.71, which constitutes a small effect size."

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
• Reading rate gains in both treatment groups were accompanied by comprehension increases during the treatment, with rates generally below the 70% threshold — related
• The TR group (timed reading only) made statistically significant reading rate gains of about 15 to 27 swpm across four scoring methods — related
• The TROR group showed significant comprehension gains on the average and last-minus-first scoring methods, but not on the extreme methods — related
• The three groups differed significantly on posttest reading rate but not on posttest comprehension in a MANCOVA with pretest covariates — related