An Integrated SQ3R-5E Instructional Module for Grade 7 Chinese Narrative Reading Comprehension: Classroom-Based Quasi-Experimental Evidence

This study examined whether students receiving an integrated SQ3R-5E instructional module demonstrated greater improvement in Chinese narrative reading comprehension than students receiving conventional instruction. A quasi-experimental pre-test, post-test, and delayed post-test design was conducted in two public junior secondary schools in Shanxi Province, China. Two intact Grade 7 classes were assigned to the experimental and control conditions, with 40 students in each group. The experimental group received the SQ3R-5E module for six weeks, while the control group received conventional teacher-led Chinese reading instruction. Students’ reading comprehension was assessed using a Chinese Reading Comprehension Test covering four sub-dimensions: retrieval, inferencing, integrating, and evaluation. The same test was administered at the pre-test, post-test, and delayed post-test. Results showed no significant pre-test differences between the two groups. At post-test, the experimental group demonstrated significantly higher baseline-adjusted performance than the control group across all four sub-dimensions. At delayed post-test, the observed advantages were more clearly sustained for retrieval, integrating, and evaluation, whereas the evidence for sustained differential improvement in inferencing was weaker. These findings suggest that the SQ3R-5E module may provide useful classroom-based support for Chinese narrative reading instruction, while also indicating that different comprehension processes may require different levels of instructional support. Given the use of intact classes from different schools, the findings should be interpreted as classroom-based quasi-experimental evidence rather than definitive causal evidence.

5E instructional model; Chinese narrative reading; Grade 7 students; quasi-experimental study

1. Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. Colorado Springs, Co: BSCS, 5(88-98). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Capin, P., Dahl-Leonard, K., Hall, C., Yoon, N. Y., Cho, E., Chatzoglou, E., Reiley, S., Walker, M., Shanahan, E., Andress, T., & Vaughn, S. (2025). Reading comprehension instruction: Evaluating our progress since Durkin’s seminal study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 29(1), 85–114. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2024.2418582 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Duke, N. K., & Cartwright, K. B. (2021). The science of reading progresses: Communicating advances beyond the simple view of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(S1), S25–S44. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.411 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Duke, N. K., Ward, A. E., & Pearson, P. D. (2021). The science of reading comprehension instruction. The Reading Teacher, 74(6), 663–672. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1993 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Elleman, A. M. (2017). Examining the impact of inference instruction on the literal and inferential comprehension of skilled and less skilled readers: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(6), 761–781. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000180 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Filderman, M. J., Austin, C. R., Boucher, A. N., O’Donnell, K., & Swanson, E. A. (2022). A meta-analysis of the effects of reading comprehension interventions on the reading comprehension outcomes of struggling readers in third through 12th grades. Exceptional Children, 88(2), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029211050860 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101(3), 371–395. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.3.371 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Hall, C. S., Vaughn, S., Barnes, M. A., Stewart, A. A., Austin, C. R., & Roberts, G. (2020). The effects of inference instruction on the reading comprehension of English learners with reading comprehension difficulties. Remedial and Special Education, 41(5), 259–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932518824983 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Kendeou, P., van den Broek, P., Helder, A., & Karlsson, J. (2014). A cognitive view of reading comprehension: Implications for reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(1), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12025 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Kim, Y. S. G., Dore, R., Cho, M., Golinkoff, R., & Amendum, S. J. (2021). Theory of mind, mental state talk, and discourse comprehension: Theory of mind process is more important for narrative comprehension than for informational text comprehension. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 209, 105181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2021.105181 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Lau, K. L., & Qian, Q. (2025). Enhancing students’ classical Chinese reading through a two-year flipped self-regulated learning intervention program. Reading and Writing, 38, 293–327. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10516-9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. List, A., Campos Oaxaca, G. S., Du, H., Lee, H. Y., & Lyu, B. (2024). Critical culturalized comprehension: Exploring culture as learners thinking about texts. Educational Psychologist, 59(1), 1–19. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2023.2266028 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2022). Chinese curriculum standards for compulsory education (2022 edition). Beijing Normal University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A26/s8001/202204/W020220420582344386456.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Mullis, I. V. S., & Martin, M. O. (2019). PIRLS 2021 assessment frameworks. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. https://pirls2021.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2019/04/P21_Frameworks.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. National Reading Panel (US), Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.https://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/smallbook [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 assessment and analytical framework. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/dfe0bf9c-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Okkinga, M., van Steensel, R., van Gelderen, A. J., van Schooten, E., Sleegers, P. J., & Arends, L. R. (2018). Effectiveness of reading-strategy interventions in whole classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(4), 1215–1239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-018-9445-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Peng, P., Wang, W., Filderman, M. J., Zhang, W., & Lin, L. (2024). The active ingredient in reading comprehension strategy intervention for struggling readers: A Bayesian network meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 94(2), 228–267. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231171345 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Polanin, J. R., Austin, M., Taylor, J. A., Steingut, R. R., Rodgers, M. A., & Williams, R. (2024). Effects of the 5E instructional model: A systematic review and meta-analysis. AERA Open, 10. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584241269866 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Rice, M., & Wijekumar, K. K. (2024). Inference skills for reading: A meta-analysis of instructional practices. Journal of Educational Psychology, 116(4), 569–589. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000855 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Robinson, F. P. (1946). Effective study. Harper & Brothers. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Roediger, H. L., III, & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Ruiz-Martín, H., & Bybee, R. W. (2022). The cognitive principles of learning underlying the 5E model of instruction. International Journal of STEM Education, 9, 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00337-z [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Sabatini, J., Kennedy, A., Wry, E., & von Davier, M. (2024). PIRLS 2026 reading assessment framework. In M. von Davier & A. Kennedy (Eds.), PIRLS 2026 assessment frameworks. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/pirls2026/frameworks/chapter-1-reading-assessment-framework.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. RAND Corporation. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Sohn, H., Acosta, K., Brownell, M. T., Gage, N. A., Tompson, E., & Pudvah, C. (2023). A meta-analysis of interventions to improve reading comprehension outcomes for adolescents with reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 38(2), 85–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12307 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Sun, Y., Wang, J., Dong, Y., Zheng, H., Yang, J., Zhao, Y., & Dong, W. (2021). The relationship between reading strategy and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 635289. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.635289 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Tanner, K. D. (2010). Order matters: Using the 5E model to align teaching with how people learn. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 9(3), 159–164. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-06-0082 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. van der Sande, L., van Steensel, R., Fikrat-Wevers, S., & Arends, L. R. (2023). Effectiveness of interventions that foster reading motivation: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 35(1), 21. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09719-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Zhang, H., Lin, J., Cheng, X., & Li, J. (2022). The dimensionality of morphological awareness in reading comprehension among Chinese early adolescent readers. PLOS ONE, 17(10), e0276546. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276546 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study