The Effect of ECRIF Taxonomy in Foreign Language Teaching on Academic Achievement

The aim of this study is to determine the effect of ECRIF taxonomy in foreign language teaching on academic achievement. For this purpose, this study has been carried out with 56 students at 4th grade of primary education in 2018–2019 academic years. In the research, pretest posttest control group design of experiment method has been used. This study covered a period of 5 weeks and the unit of “Cartoon Characters” in English lesson. As data collection tool, achievement test for listening and speaking which was developed by the researcher was used. In the analysis of data, pretest and posttest scores were compared by using t-test for dependent groups. In addition, to explain power of relation, effect size (Cohens’ d) values were calculated. As a result of study, it was stated that ECRIF taxonomy provided significant differences in students’ academic success in favour of the experimental group.


INTRODUCTION
The Industrial Revolution, which brought economic and technical developments, and the increase of trade and transportation opportunities have been influential in considering foreign language as a mean of communication, as well as spreading foreign language teaching (Dinçer, 2013). Knowing a foreign language has an important role in communicating with other nations. Countries need people who speak foreign languages to take their international relations a step further in social, political, economic, educational and cultural fields. Therefore, multilingualism is encouraged in today's world. The aim of foreign language teaching in our country is not to enable Turkish citizens who have the same native language communicate with each other, but to communicate with the citizens of other countries. In this way, the aim of foreign language teaching is to facilitate increasing of our country's level in political, scientific, military, economic and social fields (Tok & Arıbaş, 2008, 206). For this reason, developed or developing countries are aware of the necessity of knowing foreign languages and they include foreign language courses in their curriculum (Er, 2006, 4). There are many studies in the literature on foreign language teaching (Abrejo, Sartaj & Memon, Phan, 2018;Thomas, 2019;Walker, 2019). Among these, there are only a few studies that examined new approaches in foreign language teaching.
Qualified foreign language teaching has always been a subject of Turkish education system. In the curriculum, it is seen that language consists of four skills (speaking, listening, writing and reading) which are based on comprehension and narration, and it is emphasized that these skills are acquired in a way that will bring the students to the center (Dinçer, 2013).
One of the new approaches thought to facilitate foreign language teaching is ECRIF Taxonomy. When the stages of ECRIF Taxonomy are considered, it is thought that it can be effective in foreign language teaching on students' academic achievement. Kurzweil and Scholl (2007, 86) developed ECRIF which can be an alternative in teaching foreign language. ECRIF as a framework includes stages of encounter, clarify, remember, internalize and fluently use. ECRIF which focuses on how students learn moves the classroom to student-centered learning rather than teacher-centered (Mezied, 2017). ECRIF has various definitions in the literature. Some of these definitions are as follows: ALLS 11(4):7-12 Lin (2016, 7-9) described ECRIF as an approach for moving classroom from teacher centered lesson to student centered collaboration. According to him, ECRIF may not be a methodology learning or instructional approaches. In a similar definition, Mezied (2017) considered ECRIF as an "approach that focuses on how learners learn". In addition, Tosuncuoğlu (2017, 131-132), used the word "framework system" to describe ECRIF, and he concluded that the ECRIF framework is not a right or the best way for any specific technique, style or methodology as a result of his study.
Studies which claim that ECRIF is not a methodology or a direct method of teaching languages have brought a different perspective to ECRIF. ECRIF which can be widely used in second language teaching, has formed a sequence of stages with its own teaching steps. It is seen to be ranked from simple to complex, from easy to difficult, from concrete to abstract. From this point of view, it is seen that ECRIF differs from the approaches and methods used in foreign language teaching and it shows a taxonomic structure. The classification of the ECRIF stages as a taxonomy is shown in Figure 1.
Encounter Stage: This stage is the first step of the learning process and students encounter new information for the first time. At this stage, the teacher collects a suitable input from the surrounding knowledge that is directly related to this topic, and then he intends to create situations to provide a background for students about the target topic (Mezied, 2017). Generally, The Encounter stage begins by activating the learner's background knowledge, or noticing what they have already known. This stage includes some items like noticing that there should be something to be learned and then to be understood what it that is being learned. The student tries to realize what kind of the grammar, vocabulary, or skill it is and what it demands (Tosuncuoğlu, 2017, 132). During the encounter stage, the student is not expected to produce anything new.
Clarify Stage: At this stage, students try to understand the meaning and form of the new language or structure. They see what the new language means; how can it pronounce and spell, its structure, and how to make it in a sentence (Tirira, 2013). It is the process that students realize in the inner part of them while the student tries to define the form and meaning of target language (Tosuncuoğlu, 2017, 133). This stage gives the student a central role to clarify the target language or skill. Therefore, the students are active in the process of receiving and processing the information and construct their own knowledge. The students who take an active role try to distinguish the new knowledge they have learned, how to use this knowledge or the pronunciation.
Remember Stage: The remember stage is seen as the process of conveying the target information from short-term memory to long-term memory. When a student grasps information, it is conveyed to long-term memory (Tosuncuoğlu, 2017, 133). At this stage, students can repeat, drill, and refer back to support materials (Mezied, 2017). For example; practices such as repetition of information, repeating a list, or repeating a text help to convey information more appropriately for long-term memory (Çelikkaya, 2010, 72). In other words, this stage includes strategies used to enable students to convey information from short-term memory to long-term memory.
Internalize Stage: Internalization, is to interpret and accept the results by examining an idea, a knowledge and a belief through learning and socialization. In terms of foreign language teaching and learning, Vygotsky who emphasizes that thought and language are closely related, thinks that internalization of complex ideas is necessary for language development (Yurdakul, 2005, 45). Considering the meaning and effectiveness of internalization for language development, the internalization stage which is the fourth step of the ECRIF taxonomy, relies on freer and less controlled practices and without any outside support, students determine the suitable decisions and select from the choices depending on their own information (Mezied, 2017). At this stage, students try to engage the new knowledge and skills to their prior experience and internalize and remember the target language through student-centered activities. As well as teachers give opportunities for the students to use the target language and skills in semi-controlled context in an interactive way, they provide slight, indirect hints that give the students the chance to self-correct inaccuracies at this stage of the learning process (Tirira, 2013).
Fluently Use Stage: The final stage of ECRIF taxonomy is fluently use. At this stage, students produce the language spontaneously and use it in real life situation. So, it can be considered that it is the stage of production which is the result of students' own understanding and internalization (Mezied, 2017). In order to demonstrate ability, students use the target language on their own through some kind of communicative task (Brawn, 2009, 59). For this purpose, teachers create opportunities for students and students choose what language to use or not to use (Tirira, 2013). In addition, completion of a task allows the teacher to determine whether students can use the target language or not (Brawn, 2009, 60). This stage is interconnected with aforementioned activities (Tosuncuoğlu, 2017, 132).
The correct selection and practice of methods and approaches to increase academic achievement in foreign language teaching affect the students' success levels. When the methods which can be used in foreign language teaching are examined, it is thought that ECRIF taxonomy will be effective in foreign language teaching. Therefore, it is important to investigate the effect of ECRIF taxonomy on academic achievement. The purpose of this study is to examine the influence of ECRIF taxonomy on 4 th year students' academic achievement in foreign language learning in primary school. For this aim, answers for hypotheses are sought: 1. There is a significant difference between the pretest and posttest academic achievement (listening) scores of the experimental group. 2. There is a significant difference between pretest and posttest academic achievement (listening) scores of the control group. 3. There is a significant difference between the academic achievement (listening) scores of the students in the experimental group in the posttest and those of the students in the control group. 4. There is a significant difference between the pretest and posttest academic achievement (speaking) scores of the experimental group. 5. There is a significant difference between the pretest and posttest academic achievement (speaking) scores of the control group. 6. There is a significant difference between the posttest academic achievement (speaking) scores of the students in the experimental group and those of the students in the control group.

Research Design
The study was conducted in a true experimental design. It was carried out in line with pretest-posttest control group model. Two groups were formed by randomly assigning the subjects into experimental and control groups. In both groups, measurements and evaluations were made prior to and after the experiment. Pretests which were applied before the implementation help us to determine the level of similarity of the experimental and control groups before the experiment and posttests help us to interpret the results obtained (Karasar, 2006, 97).

Study Group
The study group consisted of a total of 56 4 th grade students who attended two different classrooms of a primary school in a medium-sized city in the West Black Sea Region of Turkey in 2018-2019 academic year. Data obtained concerning academic achievement (listening and speaking) levels of students both in the pretest and the posttest were used to assign the subjects into experimental and control groups equally. There were 28 students in the experimental group and 28 students in the control group.
The experimental group scores of pretest of academic achievement (listening) is 4.39 (x̄ = 4.39), and standard deviation is 0.139 (SS= .139). The control group scores of pretest of academic achievement (listening) is 4.50 (x̄ =4.50), and standard deviation is 0.123 (SS=.123) ( Table 1). It was found out by using the t-test technique if there was a significant difference between the pretest mean scores of the students in the experimental and control groups and it was discovered that the difference was not statistically significant. The experimental group students and control group students have similar success levels in terms of academic achievement (listening) before beginning the implementation.
The experimental group scores of pretest of academic achievement (speaking) is 3.71 (x̄ = 3.71), and standard deviation is 0.144 (SS= .144). The control group scores of pretest of academic achievement (speaking) is 3.78 (x̄ =3.78), and standard deviation is 0.142 (SS=.142). There was not statistically a significant difference between the pretest scores in the experimental and control groups (t(54)=-0.19; p<0.05) ( Table 2). The experimental group and control group have similar success levels in terms of academic achievement (speaking) before beginning the practices.

Academic achievement (listening) test
An academic achievement (listening) test was prepared by the researcher for academic achievement and the level of retention. In the development of test, 4 th grade curriculum outcomes used by Ministry of Education in Turkey. Besides, course books were used. Ten questions were prepared by researcher. While the questions of the academic achievement test were being prepared, the views of two English teachers, an assistant professor in the department of English Language and Literature, an assistant professor and two associate professors in department of Curriculum and Instruction were consulted. The achievement test has been given final shape after necessary corrections are done.
To determine the reliability of the test, achievement test was applied to a total of 150 5 th grade students who are similar group. The reliability data was analyzed with Test Analysis Program (TAP). Test items were evaluated for item difficulty and item discrimination and it was found that there were not any questions to be removed. Index of item difficulty and item discrimination for academic achievement (listening) test has been given in Table 3.
The item difficulty index (pj) is between 0.47 and 0.69; item discrimination index (rjx) is between 0.41 and 0.68. In addition, the mean item difficulty index (pj) of the test is 0.585. According to this, it can be said that the test is medium difficulty and its discrimination is high. In order to calculate the reliability of the test, Cronbach Alpha internal consistency coefficient was examined and the internal consistency coefficient was found to be 0.88. According to these results, it can be said that test items accurately measure whether students are successful or not.

Data Analysis
In this study, t-test was used for the dependent groups while comparing the mean scores of the pretest and posttest scores. In addition, for each relationship, to explain power of relation effect size (Cohens' d) values were calculated. According to this, it was interpreted the effect sizes as small (d = 0.2), medium (d = 0.5), and large (d ≥ 0.8) (Green, Salkind and Akey, 2000, 145). The level which is .05 and trust interval which is 95% are used for commenting data.

FINDINGS
In this section, pretest and posttest findings are given about experimental and control group.
The experimental group scores of pretest is (x̄=4.39) and standard deviation is 0.139 (SS=.139), mean score of posttest is 9.07 (x̄=9.07) and standard deviation is (SS=.101) ( Table 4). The difference between pretest and posttest is in favor of the posttest. Whether the difference between the scores of pretest and posttest is meaningful or not, was interpreted with 't test', and also a meaningful difference was found at the resulting (t(27)= -16,88; p<0.05). The effect size of the difference between pretest and posttest scores of the experimental group was calculated as (d:2,06). It is seen that the experimental process has a major effect on students' academic achievements of experimental group students.
The control group students' mean score of pretest is 4.50 (x̄=4.50) and standard deviation is 0.123 (SS=.123), mean score of posttest is 6.07 (x̄=6.07) and its standard deviation is 0.151 (SS=.151). The difference between pretest and posttest is in favor of the posttest. There is a significant difference between the control group scores of pretest and posttest academic achievement (listening) test (t(27)= -5.21; p<0.05). The effect size of the difference between pretest and posttest scores of the control group was calculated as 0.78 (d: 0.78) ( Table 5). The courses processed as indicated in the program, have reasonable effects on the control group students' academic achievement.
The experimental group scores of posttest is 9.07(x̄=9.07) and standard deviation is 0.101 (SS=.101) The control group scores of posttest is 6.07 (x̄=6.07) and standard deviation is  There is a significant difference between the posttest scores the academic achievement (listening) of the experimental and the control group (t(54)= 8.71; p<0.05). The effect size of the difference between the experimental and the control group posttest scores was calculated as 1.12 (d: 1.12) ( Table 6). The courses supported by ECRIF taxonomy are more effective than the traditional methods on students' academic achievement. The experimental group score of pretest is 3.71 (x̄=3.71) and standard deviation is 0.144 (SS=.144), mean score of posttest is 9.18 (x̄=9.18) and standard deviation is 0.077 (SS=.077). The difference between pretest and posttest is in favor of the posttest.
There is a significant difference between the experimental group scores of pretest and posttest academic achievement (speaking) (t(27)= -16,91; p<0.05). The effect level has been calculated and the result has been found as 2.32 (d: 2.32) ( Table 7). The experimental process has a major effect on students' academic achievements of experimental group students.
The control group scores of pretest is 3.78 (x̄=3.78) and standard deviation is 0.142 (SS=.142), mean score of posttest is 6.71 (x̄=6.71) and standard deviation is 0.141 (SS=.141). The difference between pretest and posttest is in favor of the posttest. There is a significant difference between the control group scores of pretest and posttest academic achievement (speaking) (t(27)= -8.59; p<0.05). The effect level has been calculated and the result has been found as 1.02 (d: 1.02) ( Table 8). The courses processed as indicated in the program, have major effects on the control group students' academic achievement.
Experimental group scores of posttest is 9.18 (x̄=9.18) and standard deviation is 0.077 (SS=.077), control group students' mean score of posttest is 6.71 (x̄=6.71) and standard deviation is 0.141 (SS=.141). The difference is in favor of the experimental group. There is a significant difference between the posttest academic achievement (speaking) scores of the experimental and the control group (t(54)= 8.11; p<0.05). The effect level has been calculated and the result has been found as 0.96 (d: 0.96) ( Table 9). ECRIF taxonomy has a major effects on the experimental students' academic achievement.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
It is concluded that the teaching by using ECRIF taxonomy is effective in increasing academic achievement when the findings obtained from the experimental group's difference between the pretest and posttest scores (listening) are examined. With the ECRIF taxonomy, it can be considered to have an increase in academic achievement as teachers provide students with the opportunities they need to increase their language skills. The result of this research is also supported by some of the studies. In a study searched by AlSaleem (2018), it was aimed to investigate the effect of ECRIF strategy on EFL seventh grades' vocabulary learning and retention. At the end of the research, it is concluded that ECRIF strategy is necessary for students to learn English vocabulary and retention. In a similar study, Mezied (2017) aimed to determine the effect of the ECRIF strategy on fifth graders' vocabulary learning and retention. As a result of the study, he stated that ECRIF strategy has effective results in vocabulary teaching. It is also concluded that teaching English by using ECRIF taxonomy is more effective than teaching which is based on the traditional curriculum in increasing the students' academic achievement when the findings obtained from the difference between the posttest scores (listening) of the experimental group and the control group students are examined.
Lin (2016, 7-9) described ECRIF as an approach for moving classroom from teacher-centered lesson to student-centered collaboration. In contrast to traditional teaching methods, the most important issue to consider is the necessity of taking the students as a center for education and activities in terms of student achievement in education. In the student-centered approach, student and own effort is at the center of everything. The student-centered teaching approach is known as an approach that targets different learning styles and the effective and permanent information that it will bring. Teachers pay attention to the needs of students when they are preparing the lesson plan, materials or texts they will use in class (Calvo, 2007, 195). In this context, in the experimental group which the teaching was conducted according to the ECRIF taxonomy, the active participation of the students in teaching was provided and the teachers were aimed to participate in  the teaching as a guide. As a result of the research, it can be said that this feature of ECRIF is also effective in acquires desired behaviors on students' achievement. As a result of study, it is concluded that the teaching by using ECRIF taxonomy is effective in increasing academic achievement when the findings obtained from the experimental group's difference between the pretest and posttest scores (speaking) are examined. It can be said that ECRIF taxonomy develops students' academic achievement as it addresses their needs, facilitates learning and makes the lesson fun. According to the ECRIF taxonomy, one of the tasks of the teacher is indicated that teacher must enable the students to study by writing or asking questions before the fluently use stage. Then, at the fluently use stage, teacher must enable the students to speak target language without materials. It may also have influenced students' motivation levels in English and along with this, it contributed to their academic success. In a study, Fergusson (2003) found that motivation is very important for academic achievement.
Following recommendations can be given based on the findings of the study. 1. In the study, it is concluded that the ECRIF taxonomy is effective in teaching the unit of "Cartoon Characters". This taxonomy can also be used in teaching other units of English lesson. 2. To increase the students' academic achievement, ECRIF taxonomy can be used in teaching other foreign languages and teaching English in primary school. 3. ECRIF taxonomy can be used in the development of listening skill which is one of the target skills determined for the primary school level. 4. ECRIF taxonomy can be used in the development of the speaking skill which is the other target skill determined for the primary school level.