Evidence Record

Evidence summary

A meta-analysis identified 19 eligible studies and 48 studywise effect sizes on interventions teaching expository text structures, reporting that such instruction can improve comprehension while outcomes vary with intervention features.

Exact claim supported or contradicted

Supports only the general mechanism boundary that recognizing or signaling structure can aid comprehension in studied educational contexts. It does not validate the pilot's writer-to-purpose recommendations.

Source provenance

Peer-reviewed Reading Research Quarterly meta-analysis. Publisher abstract and study description were inspected; effect sizes and risk-of-bias details were not extracted in this cycle.

Relevant excerpt or data

The abstract reports 21 identified studies, 19 included, and 48 studywise effect sizes, with analysis of structure types and instructional features.

Interpretation

Text architecture is plausibly consequential, but reader knowledge and instruction interact with the structure. This favors conditional rather than universal recommendations.

Limitations

The interventions teach text structures; they do not experimentally compare Darwin, Euclid, legal opinions, philosophy, and RFCs. Full quantitative results were not reviewed, so no effect magnitude is claimed.

Counterevidence

Structure cues can add load, and transfer across age, language, expertise, and genre remains uncertain.

Reproduction or verification notes

Retrieve the full paper and extraction tables before using an effect estimate.