CLIL and non-CLIL groups were homogeneous in language and content knowledge at pretest¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i0negligible
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i0 An independent t-test showed no significant difference between CLIL (M = 64.85, SD = 9.315) and non-CLIL (M = 63.85, SD = 9.366) groups on the pretest (t(29) = .339, p = .737, r = .055). → Karimi 2019
Evidence¶
Karimi 2019¶
Karimi, P., Lotfi, A. R., & Biria, R. (2019). Enhancing Pilot’s Aviation English Learning, Attitude and Motivation through the Application of Content and Language Integrated Learning. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 751-766. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1201326
q3 · i0 · causal · r2
Independent-samples t-test comparing pretest means of CLIL (M = 64.85, SD = 9.315) and non-CLIL (M = 63.85, SD = 9.366) groups (n = 40). The article reports "r = .055 representing a weak effect size".
"The results of the independent t -test (t (29) = .339, 95 % CI [ -4.97, 6.97], p = .737, r = .055 representing a weak effect size) (Table 6) indicated that the groups were homogenous in terms of their language and content knowledge as measured through the pretest."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Experimental and control groups were homogeneous in idiom knowledge before treatment — related
- Before the FCI treatment, the experimental and control groups showed no statistically significant difference in writing ability — related
- CLIL applications helped an initially disadvantaged experimental group become statistically similar to the control group in English test scores — reports the opposite
- The experimental and control groups did not differ significantly in programming knowledge at pretest — related
- Before implementation, treatment students performed significantly below control students on the standardized reading test — reports the opposite
- CLIL instruction significantly improved aviation English posttest performance compared to traditional instruction — related
- CLIL instruction produced significantly more positive attitudes toward language learning than traditional instruction — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.