Nabil, Rana, and Yusuf examine two fictional research reports prepared for a university seminar. Their task is to explain apparently conflicting findings about a digital reading tool without forcing an oversimplified verdict.
01Read the Arabic conversation
تَفْسِيرُ نَتَائِجَ بَحْثِيَّةٍ مُتَعَارِضَةٍ
نَبِيلٌ: أَمَامَنَا تَقْرِيرَانِ افْتِرَاضِيَّانِ أُعِدَّا لِهَذِهِ الْحَلْقَةِ. يَقُولُ الْأَوَّلُ إِنَّ أَدَاةَ التَّعْلِيقِ الرَّقْمِيِّ تُحَسِّنُ الْفَهْمَ، وَيَقُولُ الثَّانِي إِنَّهَا لَمْ تُحَقِّقْ تَحَسُّنًا وَاضِحًا. كَيْفَ نَعْرِضُ هَذَا التَّعَارُضَ؟
رَنَا: لِنَبْدَأْ بِمَعْنَى الْفَهْمِ فِي كُلِّ تَقْرِيرٍ. قَدْ تَتَطَابَقُ الْكَلِمَةُ فِي الْعُنْوَانَيْنِ، بَيْنَمَا يَقِيسُ أَحَدُهُمَا تَذَكُّرَ الْمَعْلُومَاتِ، وَيَقِيسُ الْآخَرُ الِاسْتِدْلَالَ عَلَى مَعْنًى غَيْرِ مُصَرَّحٍ بِهِ.
يُوسُفُ: فِي الْأَوَّلِ أَرْبَعَةٌ وَعِشْرُونَ مُتَطَوِّعًا مِنْ نَادٍ لِلْقِرَاءَةِ. أَجَابُوا عَنْ أَسْئِلَةٍ قَصِيرَةٍ مُبَاشَرَةً بَعْدَ اسْتِخْدَامِ الْأَدَاةِ، وَقَالَ مُعْظَمُهُمْ إِنَّهُمْ أَصْبَحُوا أَكْثَرَ ثِقَةً فِي فَهْمِ النُّصُوصِ.
نَبِيلٌ: أَمَّا الثَّانِي فَيَشْمَلُ مِئَةً وَعِشْرِينَ طَالِبًا فِي مُقَرَّرٍ إِلْزَامِيٍّ. اخْتَبَرَ قُدْرَتَهُمْ عَلَى تَفْسِيرِ نُصُوصٍ جَدِيدَةٍ بَعْدَ أُسْبُوعَيْنِ، دُونَ إِتَاحَةِ الْأَدَاةِ أَثْنَاءَ الِاخْتِبَارِ. الْمَهَمَّتَانِ مُخْتَلِفَتَانِ إِذَنْ.
رَنَا: وَالثِّقَةُ فِي الْفَهْمِ لَيْسَتْ هِيَ الْأَدَاءَ نَفْسَهُ. لَا نُهْمِلُ رَأْيَ الْمُشَارِكِينَ، لَكِنَّنَا نَفْصِلُ بَيْنَ شُعُورِهِمْ بِالتَّحَسُّنِ وَقُدْرَتِهِمْ عَلَى تَفْسِيرِ نَصٍّ لَمْ يَقْرَؤُوهُ مِنْ قَبْلُ.
يُوسُفُ: هُنَاكَ فَرْقٌ آخَرُ: قَارَنَ الْأَوَّلُ نَتَائِجَ الْمَجْمُوعَةِ بِنَتَائِجِهَا السَّابِقَةِ، وَلَمْ يَضُمَّ مَجْمُوعَةَ مُقَارَنَةٍ. أَمَّا الثَّانِي فَوَزَّعَ الطُّلَّابَ عَشْوَائِيًّا بَيْنَ اسْتِخْدَامِ الْأَدَاةِ وَالْقِرَاءَةِ الْمُعْتَادَةِ دَاخِلَ الْمُقَرَّرِ.
نَبِيلٌ: إِذَنْ نُرَجِّحُ الثَّانِي لِأَنَّ عَيِّنَتَهُ أَكْبَرُ وَتَوْزِيعَهُ أَقْوَى؟ أَخْشَى أَنْ يَبْدُوَ عَرْضُنَا مُتَرَدِّدًا إِذَا اكْتَفَيْنَا بِسَرْدِ الْفُرُوقِ دُونَ تَوْضِيحِ مَا يُمْكِنُ الِاعْتِمَادُ عَلَيْهِ.
رَنَا: نُرَجِّحُ دَلِيلًا بِالنِّسْبَةِ إِلَى سُؤَالٍ مُحَدَّدٍ، لَا فِي كُلِّ شَيْءٍ. الثَّانِي أَنْسَبُ لِسُؤَالِ الِاسْتِدْلَالِ الْمُتَأَخِّرِ فِي هَذَا الْمُقَرَّرِ، وَالْأَوَّلُ يَصِفُ تَجْرِبَةَ مُتَطَوِّعِينَ يَقْرَؤُونَ بِاهْتِمَامٍ مُسْبَقٍ.
يُوسُفُ: حَتَّى الْمُقَارَنَةُ السَّابِقَةُ وَاللَّاحِقَةُ فِي الْأَوَّلِ تَحْتَاجُ إِلَى فَحْصٍ. يَذْكُرُ الْمُلْحَقُ أَنَّ نَصَّ الِاخْتِبَارِ الْأَخِيرِ أَقْصَرُ، وَلَا يُوَضِّحُ هَلْ تَمَّ التَّحَقُّقُ مِنْ تَكَافُؤِ صُعُوبَةِ النَّصَّيْنِ.
نَبِيلٌ: قِصَرُ النَّصِّ لَا يَجْعَلُهُ أَسْهَلَ بِالضَّرُورَةِ. نَسْتَطِيعُ أَنْ نَقُولَ إِنَّ تَكَافُؤَ الصُّعُوبَةِ غَيْرُ مُوَضَّحٍ، لَكِنْ لَا يَحِقُّ لَنَا أَنْ نُقَرِّرَ أَنَّ التَّحَسُّنَ كُلَّهُ نَتَجَ عَنْ سُهُولَةِ الِاخْتِبَارِ.
رَنَا: صَحِيحٌ؛ عَلَيْنَا أَلَّا نَسْتَبْدِلَ اسْتِنْتَاجًا مُتَسَرِّعًا بِآخَرَ. نُسَجِّلُ احْتِمَالًا لَمْ يُحْسَمْ، وَنَطْلُبُ مَعْلُومَاتٍ إِضَافِيَّةً عَنِ الْأَسْئِلَةِ وَطَرِيقَةِ تَصْحِيحِهَا قَبْلَ الْحُكْمِ عَلَى الْمُقَارَنَةِ.
يُوسُفُ: وَفِي الثَّانِي نَقَصَ عَدَدُ مَنْ أَكْمَلُوا الِاخْتِبَارَ الْمُؤَجَّلَ. يَعْرِضُ التَّقْرِيرُ الْعَدَدَ الْإِجْمَالِيَّ، لَكِنَّهُ لَا يُبَيِّنُ خَصَائِصَ الْغَائِبِينَ فِي كُلِّ مَجْمُوعَةٍ. لِذَلِكَ يَبْقَى أَثَرُ الْغِيَابِ غَيْرَ وَاضِحٍ.
نَبِيلٌ: كُنْتُ أَعُدُّ التَّوْزِيعَ الْعَشْوَائِيَّ ضَمَانًا كَافِيًا. الْآنَ أَرَى أَنَّ عَلَيْنَا تَتَبُّعَ مَا حَدَثَ بَعْدَهُ أَيْضًا، لَا الِاكْتِفَاءَ بِوَصْفِ الْخُطْوَةِ الْأُولَى فِي تَصْمِيمِ الدِّرَاسَةِ.
رَنَا: وَعِبَارَةُ لَمْ يَظْهَرْ فَرْقٌ وَاضِحٌ لَا تَعْنِي إِثْبَاتَ انْعِدَامِ الْفَرْقِ. التَّقْدِيرُ الْمَذْكُورُ فِي الثَّانِي غَيْرُ دَقِيقٍ بِمَا يَكْفِي لِاسْتِبْعَادِ تَحَسُّنٍ صَغِيرٍ أَوْ تَرَاجُعٍ صَغِيرٍ.
يُوسُفُ: إِذَنْ لَا نَكْتُبُ أَنَّ الْأَدَاةَ عَدِيمَةُ الْفَائِدَةِ. نَكْتُبُ أَنَّ هَذِهِ الدِّرَاسَةَ لَمْ تُقَدِّمْ دَلِيلًا حَاسِمًا عَلَى تَحْسِينِ الْأَدَاءِ فِي الِاخْتِبَارِ الْمُؤَجَّلِ، ضِمْنَ الشُّرُوطِ الَّتِي دَرَسَتْهَا.
نَبِيلٌ: وَمَاذَا عَنْ جَمْعِ النَّتِيجَتَيْنِ فِي مُتَوَسِّطٍ وَاحِدٍ؟ قَدْ يُسَاعِدُ رَقْمٌ مُلَخَّصٌ الْقَارِئَ، لَكِنِّي أَخْشَى أَنْ نَخْفِيَ اخْتِلَافَ الْمَهَامِّ وَالْأَوْقَاتِ بِمُجَرَّدِ وَضْعِ الدَّرَجَاتِ عَلَى مِقْيَاسٍ وَاحِدٍ.
رَنَا: هَذَا الْقَلَقُ فِي مَحَلِّهِ. تَوْحِيدُ الْمِقْيَاسِ الْعَدَدِيِّ لَا يُوَحِّدُ مَعْنَى النَّتِيجَةِ. سَنَفْصِلُ بَيْنَ الْفَهْمِ الْفَوْرِيِّ، وَالثِّقَةِ الْمُعْلَنَةِ، وَنَقْلِ مَهَارَةِ الِاسْتِدْلَالِ إِلَى نُصُوصٍ جَدِيدَةٍ.
يُوسُفُ: أَقْتَرِحُ جَدْوَلًا يَشْمَلُ الْعَيِّنَةَ، وَمُدَّةَ الِاسْتِخْدَامِ، وَنَوْعَ الْمُقَارَنَةِ، وَأَدَاةَ الْقِيَاسِ، وَوَقْتَهُ. نُضِيفُ خَانَةً لِلْمَعْلُومَاتِ النَّاقِصَةِ حَتَّى لَا يَبْدُوَ الْفَرَاغُ كَأَنَّهُ تَطَابُقٌ بَيْنَ التَّقْرِيرَيْنِ.
نَبِيلٌ: وَسَأَفْصِلُ بَيْنَ النَّتِيجَةِ الَّتِي يَعْرِضُهَا الْجَدْوَلُ وَتَفْسِيرِ الْمُؤَلِّفِ لَهَا. عُنْوَانُ الْأَوَّلِ أَوْسَعُ مِنَ الْبَيَانَاتِ، فَلَا يَنْبَغِي أَنْ نَنْقُلَ هَذَا الِاتِّسَاعَ إِلَى خُلَاصَتِنَا دُونَ تَمْحِيصٍ.
رَنَا: انْتَبِهَا أَيْضًا إِلَى طَرِيقَةِ اسْتِخْدَامِ الْأَدَاةِ. فِي النَّادِي كَانَ الْمُيَسِّرُ يُنَاقِشُ التَّعْلِيقَاتِ مَعَ الْقُرَّاءِ، بَيْنَمَا اقْتَصَرَ الدَّعْمُ فِي الْمُقَرَّرِ عَلَى شَرْحٍ تِقْنِيٍّ قَصِيرٍ فِي الْبِدَايَةِ.
يُوسُفُ: إِذَنْ رُبَّمَا اخْتَلَفَتِ التَّجْرِبَةُ التَّعْلِيمِيَّةُ نَفْسُهَا، لَا الْأَدَاةُ فَقَطْ. يُمْكِنُنَا اقْتِرَاحُ دَوْرٍ لِلدَّعْمِ، لَكِنَّ هَذَيْنِ التَّقْرِيرَيْنِ لَا يَعْزِلَانِ أَثَرَهُ عَنْ بَقِيَّةِ الْفُرُوقِ.
نَبِيلٌ: هَلْ نَسْتَطِيعُ الْقَوْلَ إِنَّ الْأَدَاةَ تُفِيدُ الْمُتَطَوِّعِينَ أَكْثَرَ مِنَ الطُّلَّابِ الْمُلْزَمِينَ؟ يَبْدُو ذَلِكَ تَفْسِيرًا مَعْقُولًا، وَلَكِنَّهُ يَخْتَلِطُ بِاخْتِلَافِ الدَّعْمِ وَالِاخْتِبَارِ وَوَقْتِ الْقِيَاسِ.
رَنَا: نَعْرِضُهُ كَفَرْضِيَّةٍ تَحْتَاجُ إِلَى اخْتِبَارٍ، لَا كَنَتِيجَةٍ ثَابِتَةٍ. لِفَحْصِهَا نَحْتَاجُ إِلَى مُقَارَنَةٍ تَسْتَخْدِمُ مَهَامَّ مُتَشَابِهَةً وَدَعْمًا مُمَاثِلًا، مَعَ تَوْثِيقِ الدَّافِعِيَّةِ قَبْلَ اسْتِخْدَامِ الْأَدَاةِ.
يُوسُفُ: سَأَكْتُبُ: تُشِيرُ التَّقَارِيرُ إِلَى نَتَائِجَ تَخْتَلِفُ بِاخْتِلَافِ مَا قِيسَ وَكَيْفَ قِيسَ. وَلَا تَسْمَحُ الْمَعْلُومَاتُ الْمُتَاحَةُ بِحُكْمٍ وَاحِدٍ عَلَى فَاعِلِيَّةِ الْأَدَاةِ فِي جَمِيعِ أَوْضَاعِ الْقِرَاءَةِ.
نَبِيلٌ: الْجُمْلَةُ مُنْضَبِطَةٌ، لَكِنَّهَا تَحْتَاجُ إِلَى تَفْصِيلٍ يَنْفَعُ الْقَارِئَ. أُضِيفُ أَنَّ النَّتَائِجَ الْإِيجَابِيَّةَ الْفَوْرِيَّةَ لَا تُثْبِتُ وَحْدَهَا انْتِقَالَ الْمَهَارَةِ إِلَى نَصٍّ جَدِيدٍ بَعْدَ مُدَّةٍ.
رَنَا: وَنُضِيفُ أَنَّ النَّتِيجَةَ غَيْرَ الْحَاسِمَةِ لَا تُلْغِي كُلَّ فَائِدَةٍ مُحْتَمَلَةٍ. بِهَذَا نُحَافِظُ عَلَى الْفَرْقِ بَيْنَ مَا نَعْرِفُهُ، وَمَا نَشُكُّ فِيهِ، وَمَا لَمْ تُصَمَّمِ الدِّرَاسَتَانِ لِاخْتِبَارِهِ.
يُوسُفُ: سَأُرْسِلُ الْجَدْوَلَ مَعَ خُلَاصَةٍ تَفْصِلُ هَذِهِ الْمُسْتَوَيَاتِ. وَإِذَا وَصَلَتْ مَعْلُومَاتٌ عَنِ صُعُوبَةِ الِاخْتِبَارِ وَالْغَائِبِينَ، فَسَنُرَاجِعُ تَقْيِيمَنَا، دُونَ أَنْ نَتَظَاهَرَ بِأَنَّ تِلْكَ الْمَسَائِلَ كَانَتْ مَحْسُومَةً.
نَبِيلٌ: اتَّضَحَ أَنَّ مُهِمَّتَنَا لَيْسَتِ اخْتِيَارَ تَقْرِيرٍ فَائِزٍ، بَلْ تَحْدِيدَ السُّؤَالِ الَّذِي يُجِيبُ عَنْهُ كُلٌّ مِنْهُمَا. هَذَا يَجْعَلُ الْخُلَاصَةَ أَدَقَّ وَأَكْثَرَ فَائِدَةً لِمَنْ يُخَطِّطُ لِبَحْثٍ جَدِيدٍ.
Show English translationHide English translation
Nabil — researcher: We have two fictional reports prepared for this seminar. The first says a digital annotation tool improves comprehension, while the second says it produced no clear improvement. How should we present this conflict?
Rana — lecturer: Let us start with what comprehension means in each report. The titles may use the same word while one measures recall and the other measures the ability to infer an unstated meaning.
Yusuf — researcher: The first involves twenty-four volunteers from a reading club. They answered short questions immediately after using the tool, and most said they had become more confident in their understanding of texts.
Nabil — researcher: The second includes one hundred and twenty students on a compulsory course. It tested their ability to interpret new texts two weeks later, without access to the tool during the test. The tasks are therefore different.
Rana — lecturer: Confidence in comprehension is not performance itself. We should not dismiss participants’ views, but we should distinguish feeling an improvement from being able to interpret a previously unread text.
Yusuf — researcher: There is another difference: the first compared the group’s results with its earlier results and included no comparison group. The second randomly allocated students within the course to use the tool or read as usual.
Nabil — researcher: Then should we favour the second because its sample is larger and its allocation stronger? I worry our presentation will seem indecisive if we only list differences without explaining what can be relied on.
Rana — lecturer: We favour evidence for a particular question, not for everything. The second is better suited to the question of delayed inference in this course; the first describes volunteers who already have an interest in reading.
Yusuf — researcher: Even the first report’s before-and-after comparison needs examination. The appendix says the final test text is shorter and does not clarify whether equivalent difficulty was established for the two texts.
Nabil — researcher: A shorter text is not necessarily easier. We can say that equivalent difficulty is not documented, but we cannot decide that the whole improvement resulted from an easier test.
Rana — lecturer: Exactly; we should not replace one hasty conclusion with another. We record an unresolved possibility and request more information about the questions and marking method before judging the comparison.
Yusuf — researcher: In the second, fewer students completed the delayed test. The report gives the total but does not describe the absent students in each group. The effect of absence therefore remains unclear.
Nabil — researcher: I had treated random allocation as a sufficient guarantee. I now see that we also need to follow what happened afterwards, rather than stopping at the first step in the study design.
Rana — lecturer: “No clear difference emerged” does not prove there is no difference. The estimate in the second report is not precise enough to rule out either a small improvement or a small decline.
Yusuf — researcher: Then we should not write that the tool is useless. We should write that this study did not provide decisive evidence of improved performance on the delayed test under the conditions it examined.
Nabil — researcher: What about combining the two results into one average? A summary figure might help readers, but I worry that simply putting scores on one scale would hide differences in tasks and timing.
Rana — lecturer: That concern is well founded. A common numerical scale does not give results a common meaning. We will separate immediate comprehension, reported confidence, and transfer of inference skills to new texts.
Yusuf — researcher: I suggest a table covering the sample, duration of use, comparison type, measurement instrument, and timing. We should add a column for missing information so a blank does not look like agreement between reports.
Nabil — researcher: I will separate the tabulated result from the author’s interpretation. The first report’s title goes beyond its data, and we should not carry that overreach into our own summary without scrutiny.
Rana — lecturer: Also consider how the tool was used. In the club, a facilitator discussed annotations with readers, whereas support on the course was limited to a brief technical explanation at the start.
Yusuf — researcher: Then perhaps the learning experience itself differed, rather than just the tool. We can suggest that support may matter, but these reports do not isolate its effect from the other differences.
Nabil — researcher: Can we say the tool benefits volunteers more than students required to participate? That seems plausible, but it is mixed together with differences in support, tests, and measurement timing.
Rana — lecturer: We present it as a hypothesis needing testing, not an established finding. Examining it requires a comparison with similar tasks and support, and documentation of motivation before use of the tool.
Yusuf — researcher: I will write: the reports indicate outcomes that differ according to what was measured and how. The available information does not permit a single judgement on the tool’s effectiveness in every reading context.
Nabil — researcher: The sentence is careful, but it needs a detail readers can use. I would add that positive immediate results alone do not establish transfer of the skill to a new text after a delay.
Rana — lecturer: And we add that an inconclusive result does not eliminate every possible benefit. This preserves the distinction between what we know, what remains uncertain, and what the studies were not designed to test.
Yusuf — researcher: I will send the table with a summary that separates those levels. If information arrives about test difficulty and absent students, we will revise our assessment without pretending those issues were already settled.
Nabil — researcher: It is now clear that our task is to identify the question each report answers, rather than choose a winning report. That makes the synthesis more accurate and more useful for someone planning new research.
02Useful words and expressions
| Arabic in the conversation | Meaning here |
|---|---|
| تَقْرِيرَانِ افْتِرَاضِيَّانِ | two fictional reports |
| التَّعْلِيقِ الرَّقْمِيِّ | digital annotation |
| مَعْنًى غَيْرِ مُصَرَّحٍ بِهِ | an unstated meaning |
| مُقَرَّرٍ إِلْزَامِيٍّ | a compulsory course |
| مَجْمُوعَةَ مُقَارَنَةٍ | a comparison group |
| تَكَافُؤِ صُعُوبَةِ النَّصَّيْنِ | equivalent difficulty of the two texts |
| الِاخْتِبَارَ الْمُؤَجَّلَ | the delayed test |
| دَلِيلًا حَاسِمًا | decisive evidence |
| تَوْحِيدُ الْمِقْيَاسِ الْعَدَدِيِّ | standardising the numerical scale |
| دُونَ تَمْحِيصٍ | without scrutiny |
| كَفَرْضِيَّةٍ | as a hypothesis |
| خُلَاصَةٍ | a synthesis or summary |
03Check your understanding
Choose one answer for each question. Look back at the Arabic conversation for evidence. Open the English question support or a hint when you need help.
What to remember
- Compare what was measured, with whom, and when before treating findings as contradictory.
- Keep hypotheses, observed results, missing information, and the scope of a conclusion distinct.
Explore the Arabic in this conversation
Related grammar and vocabularyOpen Araqick guides connected to this conversation.
Lakinna and Lakin in Arabic: Two Patterns for But
لَكِنَّهَا تَحْتَاجُ إِلَى تَفْصِيلٍ يَنْفَعُ الْقَارِئَ
Use lakinna with a pronoun to qualify an otherwise acceptable summary.
Fa in Arabic Conditional Sentences: When the Result Needs Fa
إِذَا وَصَلَتْ مَعْلُومَاتٌ عَنِ صُعُوبَةِ الِاخْتِبَارِ وَالْغَائِبِينَ، فَسَنُرَاجِعُ تَقْيِيمَنَا
Link an idha condition to a future response introduced by fa and sa-.
Arabic Relative Pronouns: Joining Ideas with Alladhi and Allati
السُّؤَالِ الَّذِي يُجِيبُ عَنْهُ كُلٌّ مِنْهُمَا
Use alladhi to specify the particular question answered by each report.
