The Effect of Scaffolded Reading Experience and Collaborative Strategic Reading on Students’ Reading Comprehension Skills across Different Reading Proficiency Levels
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of Scaffolded Reading Experience (SRE) and Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR) on the students' performance in ELT reading comprehension classes. A quasi-experimental approach using factorial design was employed with 28 participants, who were Indonesian college students in two complete classes of the Cultural Studies Faculty of Universitas Brawijaya Malang. The results showed that there were no significant differences in the performance of those students taught with SRE and those taught with CSR. A possible cause for this lack of difference could be the greater influence of other factors, including the classroom environment, the teachers’ experience, and the students’ ability. This study suggests that English lecturers can apply SRE and CSR as two alternative strategies to teach reading comprehension. Future researchers should conduct studies involving larger numbers of participants to identify the factors affecting the learning of reading comprehension.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it