Explicit language learning strategy instruction did not have a statistically significant effect on language progress as measured by the OPT in mixed-ability higher-education groups¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2010 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Students in the treatment group did not improve their OPT scores more than students in the contrast group over the course. → Jurkovič 2010

Evidence¶

Jurkovič 2010¶

Jurkovič, V. (2010). Effect of Explicit Language Learning Strategy Instruction on Language-test and Self-assessment Scores. English Language Teaching, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v3n1p16

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Linear regression (ENTER method) on 77 first-year students with membership in the treatment group and initial OPT score as predictors of "test difference". The article reports membership in the treatment group "did not have any statistically significant effect" (beta weight 0.03, Table 2).

"The results of regression analysis presented in Table 2 show that membership in the treatment group did not have any statistically significant effect on language progress as measured by the OPT"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Explicit strategy instruction did not significantly enhance self-assessed language progress in mixed-ability groups — related
• Initial language competence negatively predicted language progress on both the OPT and the self-assessment scale — related
• No statistically significant treatment–contrast differences emerged when students were compared within similar initial CEFR ability sub-groups — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• An early aptitude-by-treatment interaction favoring lower-scoring treatment students was no longer statistically significant after updated analyses — related
• Both groups were highly heterogeneous in language competence, spanning A1 to C1, which the author identifies as the primary reason for the scarce efficiency of training — related