Listening comprehension does not improve after one year of EMI in either group, with slightly lower scores at post-test¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Both immersion and semi-immersion groups scored one point lower on the listening task at T2 than at T1, and neither difference was significant. → Ament 2015

Evidence¶

Ament 2015¶

Ament, J. R., & Pérez Vidal, C. (2015). Linguistic outcomes of English medium instruction programmes in higher education: A study on economics undergraduates at a Catalan university. Higher Learning Research Communications, 5(1), 47-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v5i1.239

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Descriptive analysis of the BBC-radio-interview listening task for the IM (N=7, 58.9 to 57.1) and SIM (N=9, 49.5 to 48.1) groups; "a lower value on T2 for both IM and SIM groups, by 1 point"; Wilcoxon p-values (.10 and .77) were non-significant.

"Descriptive statistical analysis of the listening task, as shown in Table 1, reveals a lower value on T2 for both IM and SIM groups, by 1 point."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Statistically significant linguistic gains after one year of EMI were detected in the semi-immersion group only, despite the immersion group's larger mean gains — a broader claim this one bears on
• Semi-immersion EMI students show a statistically significant gain in grammar over one academic year, while their cloze and listening gains are not significant — related
• Full-immersion EMI students show no statistically significant gains in any measured language domain over one year, despite descriptive improvement trends — related