Experiment group vocabulary gains persisted at the five-month follow-up, with no significant posttest-to-follow-up decline¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · checked against its sources 2026-11-02 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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.

q3 i? Pretest versus follow-up differences were significant on both subtests (receptive z=-4.019, p=0.000; expressive z=-4.032, p=0.000), while posttest versus follow-up differences were not significant. → Okyay 2017

Evidence¶

Okyay 2017¶

Okyay, O. & Kandir, A. (2017). Impact of the Interactive Story Reading Method on Receptive and Expressive Language Vocabulary of Children. European Journal of Educational Research, 6(3), 395-406. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1149725

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Wilcoxon analysis for 22 experiment group children on pretest, posttest and follow-up (approximately five months after posttest): pretest-follow-up significant for receptive (z=-4.019, p=0.000) and expressive (z=-4.032, p=0.000); posttest-follow-up not significant (z=-2.263, p=0.429; z=-.889, p=0.374).

"the children in the experiment group are observed to exhibit a statistically significant difference in terms of their pre -test and follow -up test scores in the Receptive Language Vocabulary Sub -Test"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

Communication Skills — outcome: instruction changes it
Oral Language — outcome: instruction changes it
Vocabulary — outcome: instruction changes it

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.