Output-based FFI was more effective than input-based FFI for complex clausal grammatical features, a difference the article characterizes as a large effect¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · 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.
q2 i? At the clausal level, output-based instruction was more effective than input-based instruction, with a difference in mean effect size of 1.12 that the article characterizes as a large effect. → Schenck 2024
Evidence¶
Schenck 2024¶
Schenck, A. (2024). Learning How to Use Input-Based and Output-Based Form-Focused Instruction: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Persian EFL Learners. Journal of Second Language Acquisition and Teaching, 30. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1457419
q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r1
Meta-analytic collation by grammatical complexity; Table 2 reports clausal output mean 4.1901 (n=4) vs input 3.0655 (n=5). The 1.12 is a difference between mean effect sizes, not a standardized effect size for the contrast, so no i value is coded; the article states it "is sizable, representing a large effect".
"Output-based instruction was more effective when more complex, clausal features were emphasized (Table 2). At the more complex clausal level, the difference in effect was 1.12."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Grammatical complexity and L2 proficiency interact: complex features benefit more from input at low proficiency, while simple features benefit more from output at high proficiency — related
- Input-based FFI is more effective than output-based FFI for inter-phrasal grammatical features, with a medium-sized difference — related
- Input-based FFI was more effective than output-based FFI at both beginner and intermediate proficiency levels, and both types showed larger effects for intermediate learners — reports the opposite
- Input-based FFI is only slightly more effective than output-based FFI for intra-phrasal grammatical features in Persian EFL learners — related
- L1 transfer may moderate FFI effectiveness: features similar to Persian benefit more from input, while disparate features benefit more from output — related
- Proficiency level and input delivery method (FFI vs. no-FFI) interact significantly in their effect on grammatical knowledge — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.