Download 4.3.3 Descriptive Statistics of the PET Reading Comprehension Test

Participants’ scores on Cognitive strategies, as depicted in Table 4.5, range from 30 to 53 with a mean
of 40.92. Since, the ratio of skewness over its standard error (.152/.221= .687) and the ratio of kurtosis
by its standard error (-1.018/.438= .0023) are within the ranges of ±1.96, it is determined that the
distribution is normal. The frequency of scores for the instrument is presented in Figure 4.3.
4.3.1.3 Compensation Strategies
The third category existing in SILL is the Compensation strategies descriptive analysis of this category
is shown in Table 4.6.
Table 4.6 Descriptive Statistics of the Compensation Strategies
Std.
N
Min
Max
Mean
Variance
Skewness
Kurtosis
Compensation strategies
Valid N (listwise)
120 10.00 22.00 16.71 .238
120
2.612
6.827 -.095 .221
Std. Error
Statistic
Std. Error
Statistic
Statistic
Statistic
Std. Error
Statistic
Statistic
Statistic
Statistic
Deviation
-.405 .438
Participants’ scores on Compensation strategies, as depicted in Table 4.6, range from 10 to 22 with a
mean of 16.71. Since, the ratio of skewness over its standard error (-.095/.221= -.429) and the ratio of
kurtosis by its standard error (-.405/.438= -.924) are within the ranges of ±1.96, it is determined that
the distribution is normal. The frequency of scores for the instrument is presented in Figure 4.4.
4.3.1.4 Meta-cognitive Strategies
The descriptive statistics of the next category being Meta-cognitive strategies is shown in table 4.7.
Table 4.7 the Descriptive Statistics of the Meta-cognitive Strategies
Std.
N
Min
Max
Mean
Variance
Skewness
Kurtosis
Valid N (listwise)
.6076
Statistic
Statistic
6.656
44.313
Std. Error
31.70
Std. Error
Statistic
Statistic
45.00
Statistic
19.00
Std. Error
120
Statistic
Meta Cognitive
Statistic
Statistic
Deviation
-.146
.221
-.944
.438
120
Participants’ scores on Meta-cognitive strategies, as described in Table 4.7, range from 19 to 45 with
a mean of 31.70. Since, the ratio of skewness over its standard error (-.146/.221= -.660) and the
ratio of kurtosis by its standard error (-.944/.438= -1.155) are within the ranges of ±1.96, it is
determined that the distribution is normal. The frequency of scores for the instrument is presented
in Figure 4.5.
4.3.1.5 Affective Strategies
The descriptive statistics of the next category being Affective strategies is shown in table 4.8.
Table 4.8 the Descriptive Statistics of the Affective Strategies
Std.
N
Min
Max
Mean
Variance
Skewness
Kurtosis
Std. Error
Statistic
Std. Error
16.97 .2804
Statistic
24.00
Statistic
Statistic
10.00
Statistic
Statistic
Std. Error
Statistic
Statistic
Deviation
Affective strategies
120
Valid N (listwise)
120
3.07186
9.436
.118
.221
-.398
.438
Participants’ scores on Affective strategies, as depicted in Table 4.8, range from 10 to 24 with a mean
of 16.97. Since, the ratio of skewness over its standard error (.118/.221=.533) and the ratio of kurtosis
by its standard error (-.398/.438= -.908) are within the ranges of ±1.96, it is established that the
distribution is normal. The frequency of scores for the instrument is presented in Figure 4.6.
4.3.1.6 Social Strategies
The descriptive statistics of the next category being Social strategies is shown in table 4.9.
Social Strategies
120 11.00 26.00
Valid N (listwise)
120
18.47
.344
3.775
14.251
Std. Error
Kurtosis
Statistic
Std. Error
Variance Skewness
Statistic
Statistic
Deviation
Statistic
Std.
Mean
Std. Error
Max
Statistic
Min
Statistic
Statistic
N
Statistic
Table 4.9 the Descriptive Statistics of the Social Strategies
.083 .221 -.844 .438
Participants’ scores on Social strategies, as depicted in Table 4.9, range from 11 to 26 with a mean of
18.47. Since, the ratio of skewness over its standard error (.083/.221=.375) and the ratio of kurtosis
by its standard error (-.844/.438= -1.92) are within the ranges of ±1.96, it is established that the
distribution is normal. The frequency of scores for the instrument is presented in Figure 4.7.
4.3.1.7 Comparing the SILL’s categories
To compare the results of the different parts of SILL questionnaire the mean of the categories are
represented in Table 4.10 and Figure 4.8.
Table 4.10 Descriptive Statistics of the SILL Categories' Means
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
Statistic
Statistic
Statistic
Statistic
Std. Error
Statistic
Memory Strategies
120
16.00
38.00
25.9583
.42032
4.60434
Cognitive strategies
120
30.00
53.00
40.9250
.52449
5.74553
Compensation Strategies
120
10.00
22.00
16.7167
.23851
2.61278
Meta-cognitive Strategies
120
19.00
45.00
31.7000
.60768
6.65677
Affective Strategies
120
10.00
24.00
16.9750
.28042
3.07186
Social Strategies
120
11.00
26.00
18.4750
.34462
3.77511
Valid N (listwise)
120
4.3.2 Descriptive Statistics of the Survey of Reading Strategies (SORS)
Another instrument of the present study was the SORS questionnaire to determine the extent of
participants’ use of reading strategies. The descriptive statistics related to the overall strategy use is
presented in Table 4.11.
Table 4.11 Descriptive Statistics of the SORS Questionnaire Administration
2.03
4.34
3.25
.052
.570
.326
Valid N (listwise)
120
-.269
.221
-.760
Participants’ scores on reading strategies, as depicted in Table 4.11, range from 2.03 to 4.34 with a
mean of 3.327. Since, the ratio of skewness over its standard error (-.269/.221=-1.21) and the ratio of
kurtosis over its standard error (-.760/.438=.00017) are within the ranges of ±1.96, it is concluded that
the distribution is normal. The frequency of scores for the instrument is presented in Figure 4.2.
Std. Error
Statistic
120
Kurtosis
Statistic
Statistic
SORS
Skewness
Std. Error
Std. Error
Variance
Statistic
Deviation
Statistic
Std.
Mean
Statistic
Max
Statistic
Min
Statistic
N
.438
4.3.3 Descriptive Statistics of the PET Reading Comprehension Test
The PET reading comprehension test was the last instrument which was used to collect the required data for the
dependent variable of the study. The descriptive statistics related to the obtained scores of the test appears below
in Table 4.12.
Table 4.12 Descriptive Statistics of the PET Reading Comprehension Test Administration
Valid N (listwise)
120
19.81
.446
4.888
23.899
-.040
.221
-.784
Std. Error
Kurtosis
Statistic
Std. Error
Skewness
Statistic
Variance
Statistic
28
Statistic
10
Deviation
Std. Error
120
Std.
Mean
Statistic
Statistic
Comprehension
Max
Statistic
Reading
Min
Statistic
N
.433