[Full Picture] (PDF) Instruction in Metacognitive Strategies to Increase Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students' Reading Comprehension

Extension usage examples:

‹ Previous example Next example ›

Here's how our browser extension sees the article:

(PDF) Instruction in Metacognitive Strategies to Increase Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students' Reading Comprehension

Source: researchgate.net

May be slightly imbalanced

Summary Analysis Research

Article summary:

1. This study examined the use of a metacognitive strategy, the Comprehension, Check, and Repair Strategy, on strategic reading behavior, nonstrategic reading behavior, and reading comprehension of students who are deaf or hard of hearing (D/HH).

2. Results showed an increase in strategic reading behavior for all three students involved in the study and an increase in reading comprehension for Student A and possibly for Student B.

3. Social validity data indicated high acceptability of the intervention with teachers continuing to use the strategy with their students after the study ended and introducing it to other students they worked with.

Article analysis:

This article is generally reliable and trustworthy as it provides evidence-based research on how metacognitive strategies can be used to improve reading comprehension among deaf or hard-of-hearing students. The authors provide a detailed description of their methodology and results which are supported by data from frequency counts and social validity surveys. The article also includes a discussion section which provides insights into potential implications of their findings.

The article does not appear to have any major biases or one-sided reporting as it presents both sides of the argument fairly. It does not make any unsupported claims or omit any points of consideration that could affect its conclusions. Furthermore, there is no promotional content or partiality present in the article as it focuses solely on providing evidence-based research on how metacognitive strategies can be used to improve reading comprehension among deaf or hard-of-hearing students.

The only potential issue with this article is that it does not mention any possible risks associated with using metacognitive strategies to improve reading comprehension among deaf or hard-of-hearing students. This could be due to lack of research in this area but should still be noted as a potential limitation when interpreting the results of this study.

Topics for further research:

Metacognitive strategies for deaf students Reading comprehension strategies for deaf students Risks associated with metacognitive strategies for deaf students Social validity of metacognitive strategies for deaf students Evidence-based research on metacognitive strategies for deaf students Implications of metacognitive strategies for deaf students