Proactive intensive FFI benefits intermediate EFL learners' grammatical knowledge more than advanced learners'¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 After adjusting for pretest scores, proficiency level significantly affected grammar posttest scores, with intermediate FFI learners gaining more (3.71) than advanced FFI learners (2.11). → Rooholamin et al. 2016

Evidence¶

Rooholamin et al. 2016¶

Amir Rooholamin, Reza Biria & Hamid Reza Haghverdi. (2016). Effectiveness of Proactive Intensive FFI in Cultivating Grammatical Knowledge of Iranian EFL Learners at Different Proficiency Levels. English Language Teaching, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n3p197

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

One-way ANCOVA comparing IEG (n = 29) and AEG (n = 28) grammar posttest scores with pretest as covariate. Proficiency level was significant, p = .035, partial η² = .081; the article reports average gain scores of 3.71 (IEG) versus 2.11 (AEG).

"the p value corresponding to PL was smaller than the specified alpha level (.035 < .05), which means that proficiency level did aff ect the grammar posttest scores of the IEG and AEG . Under Partial Eta Squared, the relevant value was .081"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• EFL learners receiving proactive intensive FFI significantly outperform no-FFI control learners on grammatical knowledge — related
• Proactive intensive FFI significantly improves the grammatical knowledge of both intermediate and advanced Iranian EFL learners — related
• Proficiency level and input delivery method (FFI vs. no-FFI) interact significantly in their effect on grammatical knowledge — a broader claim this one bears on