Multiple Intelligence in the Efl Classroom: Enhancing Achievement in Learning Argumentative Writing Among Students at Jimma University, Ethiopia

Multiple Intelligence in the Efl Classroom: Enhancing Achievement in Learning Argumentative Writing Among Students at Jimma University, Ethiopia | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Multiple Intelligence in the Efl Classroom: Enhancing Achievement in Learning Argumentative Writing Among Students at Jimma University, Ethiopia Tilahun Gebretsadik Adare This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8527666/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The goal of this study was to scrutinize the influence of Multiple Intelligence-Oriented Instruction (MI-OI) on the argumentative writing ability of students enrolled under the college of business and economics at Jimma University. Ninety students from the department of accounting and finance were participated in the study throughout the academic years 2024–2025. The study utilized a quasi-experimental design with mixed-methods approach to data analysis. Participants from the intact group were placed into two groups randomly to the experimental group (n = 45) and the control group (n = 45). Writing achievement tests were used to collect quantitative data, while structured interviews were used to gather qualitative data. Atlas.ti v.28 was utilized for qualitative data and SPSS v.28 was used for statistics analyses. The groups’ argumentative essay writing achievement increased significantly, according to an independent-samples t-test statistics (t (88) = 12.287, p <.001). The experimental group’s mean scores meaningfully improved from the pre-test (M = 2.33, SD = 0.52) to the post-test (M = 3.58, SD = 0.54) at p = 0.01. These findings were supported by qualitative inquiry, which showed that MI-OI methods enhanced students’ ability to craft meaningful argumentative essays. Thus, the study commends the use of MI-OI approaches in comparable educational situations and finds that incorporating them into EFL writing courses can impressively augment students’ argumentative essay writing skills. Educational Philosophy and Theory Multiple Intelligences Argumentative Essay EFL Writing Achievement Ethiopia Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Introduction English language proficiency is essential for both academic writing success and survival in Ethiopia’s higher education system (Habtamu, 2018 ). Courses including Basic Writing Skills, Creative Writing Skills, Technical & Report Writing Skills, Intermediate Writing Skills, and Advanced Writing Skills are designed and offered to relevant groups of Ethiopian higher education students in order to achieve this (Habtamu, 2018 ). Additionally, because English serves as a medium of instruction across socioeconomic, political, and cultural domains, the need for competent English language instruction has increased in an increasingly globalized world (Abbas et al., 2023 ). Teachers are urged to use dynamic pedagogical strategies that take into account different learner intelligences in order to maximize language skill acquisition. Gaining proficiency in writing is essential for academic achievement in Ethiopia, since English is the main language of higher education. In order to meet this need, university curricula often include specialist writing classes (Alamirew, 2005 ). A framework for creating education that takes into account different learner profiles is provided by Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences (MIT), which was first presented in 1983 (Gardner, 1983 ). According to Gardner, people have unique combinations of intelligences that affect their learning preferences and results. These combinations include verbal-linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinaesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalistic, and existential (Gardner, 2011 ). EFL students’ involvement, cultural understanding, and attitudes toward language learning can all be improved by implementing MIT into the classroom (Christison, 1998 ). Additionally, research indicates that writing performance can be enhanced by customizing instruction to students’ intelligence profiles, especially in challenging assignments like argumentative writing (Ferretti & Fan, 2016 ). Despite these possible advantages, students usually struggle with academic writing because of a lack of resources and conventional, rule-based instructional techniques, and the Ethiopian EFL setting generally lacks systematic integration of MIT principles (Habtamu, 2018 ). Therefore, this study looks at how Multiple Intelligence (MI) affects accounting and finance students’ performance in argumentative writing at Jimma University in Ethiopia. Problem Statement Despite the fact that MIT has been extensively acknowledged by experts for its ability to improve language acquisition, including writing, its use in Ethiopian higher education institutions’ curricula is still fairly limited. Moreover, the current pedagogical strategy used by educators to teach language skills places a strong weight on traditional education while frequently overlooking the variety of intelligences that support higher-order cognitive abilities like reasoning and argumentation (Yohannes, 2015 ). According to Hyland’s research, EFL students struggle to become a proficient writer, which impairs their academic writing enactment (Hyland, 2004 ). Similarly, Ethiopian university students frequently lack both general English language proficiency and the necessary argumentative writing skills, despite the country’s emphasis on completing higher education and a number of English language courses with a high level of academic writing proficiency, which they are enrolled in for nearly all academic journeys to survival and/or achievement (Alamirew, 2005 ; Habtamu, 2018 ). This disparity adds to Ethiopian university students’ on-going challenges in producing logical and reliable written work for their academic advancement. Evidence-based implementation is hampered by a scarcity of empirical research on MIT’s effectiveness in the local environment, despite the Ethiopian Ministry of Education having started curriculum modifications to accommodate learner variety (Yohannes, 2015 ). As a result, student’ poor writing abilities hinder their general academic success. International studies support the benefits of MI-based writing instruction (Gündüz & Ünal, 2016 ; Zeraatpishe et al., 2020 ), but Ethiopian higher education has not supported these findings. Hence, this study seeks to fill this gap by gauging the effect of a MI-OI intervention on argumentative writing achievement at Jimma University in Ethiopian. Objective The main objective of this study was primarily to examine the sway of MI-OI on EFL students’ performance in writing argumentative essays in the study context. Besides, it sought to evaluate the extent to which MI-OI boosts students’ argumentative writing capabilities, like coherence, argument quality, and structure, and finally, to scrutinize how students’ achievement in argumentative writing and their dominant intelligence profiles relate to motivation within the MI framework under study. Research hypothesis The study utilizes the null hypothesis (h0) which states that after the MI intervention, there is no statistically significant change in the argumentative writing achievement of the control and experimental groups and the alternative hypothesis (ha), which states after the MI-OI intervention, the control and experimental groups’ achievement in argumentative writing statistically varies significantly. Significance By presenting experiential data on the effectiveness of MI-OI in an Ethiopian EFL environment, the study’s findings are foreseen to aid scholars, educators, curriculum designers, and policymakers to duly work on the MIT. Future studies on learner-centred instruction, curriculum design, and pedagogical approaches aligned to the theory of multiple intelligences may be influenced by the findings. Scope and Limitations This study was carried out with Banking and Finance students participating in the Basic Writing Skills (EnLa.201) course at Jimma University’s College of Business and Economics during the 2024–2025 academic years. Writing argumentative essays was the dependent variable in this study. Regardless of its promising findings, one of the study’s limitations is that it was narrowed to one college, which might have an impact on how generally the results can be practical across other colleges. Furthermore, even though the quasi-experimental design is suitable, it has inherent limitations with regard to its high cost to analyze. Finding a large body of local literature in Ethiopia was another challenge due to the novelty of MIT-focused argumentative writing studies. Literature Review Gardner’s ( 1983 ) the unified belief of intelligence is contested by MIT, which suggests that human cognitive competence, is made up of various modalities. The biopsychological capacity to digest information that can be triggered in cultural contexts to solve problems or produce valuable goods is known as intelligence (Gardner, 2011 ). Naturalistic and existential intelligences were eventually added to the original seven intelligences established by the theory (Gardner, 1999 ). In the field of education, MIT promotes inclusive and productive learning through customized instruction that capitalizes on students’ strengths (Armstrong, 2009 ). MIT in EFL Instruction MIT promotes instructional adaptability in EFL settings. The use of songs for musical intelligence or group projects for interpersonal intelligence is two examples of how instructional tactics can be adapted to match different intelligences (Christison, 1998 ). By relating class content to students’ natural cognitive preferences, this method increases rendezvous and may improve language acquisition results (Haley, 2004 ). MIT and Writing Instruction Writing is a sophisticated ability that calls for the fusion of social, linguistic, and cognitive skills. Grammar accuracy, coherence, argument building, and mechanics are frequently difficult for EFL learners in Ethiopian higher education institutions (Hyland, 2004 & 2023 ). To scaffold the writing process and meet a range of learner needs, MIT-oriented writing education incorporates a variety of activities (discussion for interpersonal intelligence and graphic organizing for spatial intelligence) (Armstrong, 2008 ). Research suggests that these methods can improve writing motivation, organization, and fluency (Gündüz & Ünal, 2016 ; Zeraatpishe et al., 2020 ). Argumentative Writing in EFL Classroom Students must formulate a thesis, provide evidence to back it up, weigh opposing viewpoints, and draw a logical conclusion when writing an argumentative essay. It is a mentally taxing genre that is necessary for academic achievement (Ferretti & Fan, 2016 ). Students at Ethiopian universities frequently find it difficult to meet its rhetorical and structural requirements. The scaffolding required to build these skills to be provided by explicit training incorporated into a MI framework (Kaur, 2015 ). Theoretical Framework Gardner’s MIT and social constructivist learning theory serve as the foundation for this investigation (Geerson, 2006 ). In line with MIT’s theory that intelligences are created via participation in relevant, contextualized activities, social constructivism highlights the importance of social interaction and culturally adapted instruments in learning. When combined, these frameworks facilitate an interactive, learner-centred method of teaching argumentative writing effective. Conceptual Framework By combining the conventional structure of argumentative essay writing with Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences (Gardner, 1983 ), this conceptual framework offers an innovative teaching strategy. Its main goal is to help teachers move beyond a purely linguistic and logical approach by suggesting that lessons be created to activate a range of cognitive strengths, including kinaesthetic, spatial, and interpersonal intelligences (Gardner, 2011 ). This will make writing more friendly, interesting, and successful for a wide variety of students (Christison, 1998 ). The framework is based on two interrelated pillars: the fundamental, linear structure of an essay (Introduction, Body, and Conclusion) and a collection of MI-oriented teaching elements that are specifically connected to each writing stage, such as creating a hook, formulating a thesis statement, and offering reasoning (Armstrong, 2008 ). The main innovation is found in the connections between these pillars, where multiple intelligence-rich strategies are used to scaffold each traditional essay element. For example, kinaesthetic role-play can be used to develop a thesis, spatial graphic organizers can be used to organize body paragraphs, and a musical summary can reinforce a conclusion (Haley, 2004 ). The framework, which is based on Gardner's theory (Gardner, 1983 ; 1999 ), works on the premise that mastering a linear writing activity necessitates a diverse instructional pathway, converting an abstract process into tangible, personally meaningful actions. It essentially tells a pedagogical narrative that moves the emphasis from simply teaching essay form to actively scaffolding it with a variety of cognitive tools, giving teachers a useful planning tool and acting as a model for researchers to test hypotheses about improved writing outcomes (Gündüz & Ünal, 2016 ; Zeraatpishe et al., 2020 ). By purposefully utilizing the many intellectual resources that each student brings to the classroom, the framework ultimately seeks to democratize writing abilities (Gardner & Hatch, 1989 ). The general conceptual framework described above is summed up in the following figure. Materials and Method Research Design A mixed-methods quasi-experimental design was utilized. The achievement in writing argumentative essays was the dependent variable, while the instructional strategy (MI-Oriented Instruction vs. Traditional strategy) was the independent variable hypothesized to bring the effect. Participants and Context Two intact groups of ninety banking and finance students from College of Business and Economics’ at Jimma University enrolled in Basic Writing Skills course experimental (n = 45) and controls (n = 45) were the participants of the study. Convenience sampling was used to choose the university, and two intact groups were assigned to control and experimental conditions using simple random sampling by the lottery method. Instruments Data collection tools included the writing achievement tests in which students were allowed to create an argumentative essay for the pre- and post-test sessions, scoring rubric, which was used to measure essays on thesis, support, counterargument, organization, and mechanics were calculated using an established analytical rubric that was adapted from Saint Paul College followed by structured interviews engaged with subsets of participants to get qualitative information. Procedure to data collection The study took half a year (one academic semester) from March-June 2025 for intervention of the MI-OI program. The pre-test on argumentative writing achievement was performed by both groups. An intervention on MI-OI lessons centring on different intelligences in argumentative essay writing classes were given to the experimental group and conventional instruction method was used with the control group. Consequently, the post-test was given with a similar argumentative writing test to both groups. Finally, an interviews protocol with purposely selected participants of the experimental group was applied to support the quantitative data. Data Analysis Quantitative data was analyzed by SPSS v.28 utilizing descriptive and inferential statistics, paired and independent samples t-tests. Cronbach’s Alpha was calculated to check the reliability analysis. Inter-Rater Reliability (IRR) was premeditated using the Interclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) analysis. Qualitative data gathered through structured interview was analyzed thematically by Atlas.ti v.28 to strengthen quantitative findings. Findings This section presents major findings in the study based on the research hypothesis. Table 1 Statistical Analysis of the Writing Achievement of groups: Pre-test Group Statistics Pre-test Groups of participants N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Control 45 2.58 0.49 .074 Experimental 45 2.59 0.49 .074 The results of the statistical analysis of the groups’ mean scores on their experiences in writing argumentative essays are shown in the results under Table 1 , where the mean scores for the control (M = 2.58, SD = 0.49) and experimental (M = 2.59, SD = 0.49) groups are shown. This may suggest that prior to the treatment of the independent variables (MI-OI), students from the college of business and economics at Jimma University, assigned to the control and experimental groups were homogenous in their argumentative essay writing abilities and performed comparable argumentative writing activities. Table 2 Statistical Analysis of the groups Writing Achievement: Pre-test and Post-test Paired Samples Test M SD Paired Differences T Df Sig. (2- tailed) M SD Std. Error Mean 95% CI Lower Upper Pair 1 Before 2.27 .589 .33 .42 .063 .096 .349 3.54 44 0.061 After 2.29 .588 0.02 Table 2 shows the results of the paired samples t-tests for the achievement Pre-test and post-test for producing argumentative essays in the control groups. The group’s performance on the accomplishment test for writing argumentative essays was assessed using a paired samples t-test, and t (44) = 3.54, p = .061 (Sig. (2-tailed) was found for the students’ essay grades before (M = 2.27, SD = 5.89) and after (M = 2.29, SD = 5.88). With 95% CI spanning from .096 to.349 and a mean test score change of − .33, at p. = 0.02), and it can be concluded that there was no discernible shift in the ability to compose an argumentative essay. This leads one to the conclusion that, when it comes to teaching writing in general and argumentative essays in particular and in the context of the current research, the traditional way of argumentative essay training did not fully develop the writing talents of the targeted students. Table 3 Statistical Analysis for the Experimental Group in Writing Achievement: Pre- test and Post-test Paired Samples Test N M SD Paired Differences T df Sig. M SD eta squared statistics 95% CI Lower Upper Pair 2 Before 45 2.33 .52 1.244 .67 η 2 = .72 1.04 1.44 12.28 44 .219 After 3.57 .54 .001 The paired samples t-test findings for the effect of MI-OI on the experimental groups’ achievement test scores in writing argumentative essays are displayed in Table 3 . The post-test findings demonstrated that the students’ essay scores had significantly improved from before (M = 2.3333, SD = .52) to after (M = 3.57, SD = .54), with a t (44) = 12.287, p = .001 Sig. (2-sided). The students’ argumentative essay writing achievement was better after participating in the MI-OI program, as evidenced by a mean test score increase of 1.24, with 95% confidence intervals between 1.44 and 1.04. Following the MI-OI program’s intervention, the eta-squared statistic showed a bigger effect size of (η2) = .72. The results and the intervention programs are highly supported by the interpretation of effect size of 0.72 for a bigger effect caused by the intervention (Cohen, 1988 ). Table 4 Levene’s Test for the groups’ Homogeneity of Variances in Writing Achievement (Post-test) Independent Samples Test Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances T-test for Equality of Means Achievement test Groups F Sig. T Df MD Std. Error Difference 95% CI Lower Upper Equal variances not assumed CG 4.72 .053 44 88 1.48 .1170 1.25 1.72 Equal variances assumed EG .001 44 88 1.48 .1179 1.25 1.72 Table 4 shows the outcomes of a post-test on argumentative essay writing that was given to ninety students into two groups: the experimental group (MI-OI) and the control group. To find out if there were statistically significant differences (p<.05) between the two groups’ argumentative essay quality, an independent-sample t-test was used. Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances was utilized for analysis with a 95% CI, and the results showed that there were statistically significant differences between students’ skills to produce argumentative essays t (88), p=.001, by the experimental group during post-test session. As a result, it was discovered that there were statistically significant change based on the MI-OI intervention program. This bar graph measures the impact of an intervention by showing pre-test and post-test results for two groups. Although both groups started off similarly, only the experimental group significantly improved following the intervention, as shown by the pictorial evidence. The chart is an effective tool for analyzing the experiment's results because the control group's static results demonstrate that the treatment is directly responsible for the measured gain. Qualitative Data The researcher collected interview data and grouped it into ten sub-themes, which focused on MI-OI effects and two central themes, which focused on skills development and methodical awareness. Atlas.ti.28, qualitative data analysis software, was utilized to triangulate learners writing achievements thematically. Thematic analysis of interview data yielded two central areas; improved skills advancement in which participants reflected amended ability to communicate claims, structure arguments, and integrate counterarguments and an increased methodological responsiveness. They also expressed their active participation and self-efficacy, attributing to their progress to the multiple intelligence-oriented methods. Perceptions from the participants confirm that they were struggling with claim/thesis development, organization of coherent essay, developing counter arguments, word choice, mechanics, and the application of rules when writing argumentative essays properly cited. This research sought to determine the features that added to students' achievement following the intervention and to address the realization of writing argumentative essays. The students reported that MI-OI offered rehearsal areas for debates, group discussions, and peer tasks through relating it to their existing bits of intelligences. Furthermore, they felt MI-OI approach at ease exploiting it when writing argumentative essays of the right length. Thus, the study concluded that MI-OI was the foundation for the development of participants’ argumentative essays at Jimma University in Ethiopia, which is consistent to the result of a study by Yohannes Tefera (Yohannes, 2015), which he did it on the implications of multiple intelligence theory and integrated skills language teaching for textbook development. Discussion First, an independent samples t-test confirmed no significant difference between the groups before the intervention Control (M = 2.58, SD = 0.50); Experimental (M = 2.59, SD = 0.50); p > .05) , creating baseline impartiality proven by the pre-test homogeneity. Next, a paired samples t-test showed no significant enhancement from pre-test (M = 2.27, SD = 0.59) to post-test (M = 2.29, SD = 0.59), t (44) = 3.546, p = .061 with no significant improvement to their argumentative essay writing skill demonstrated by control groups’ overall performance affected by the traditional methods. Third, a significant improvement was observed from pre-test (M = 2.33, SD = 0.52) to post-test (M = 3.58, SD = 0.54), t (44) = 12.287, p < .001 , with large effect size (η² = 0.725) demonstrated by the experimental group enactment. Fourth, an independent samples t-test revealed statistically significant variance in post-test scores (t (44) = 12.287, p < .001) , approving the experimental groups’ argumentative essay writing growth compared to post-test results of the control group. Lastly, the outcomes support the alternative hypothesis, signifying that MI-OI considerably improved students’ argumentative essay writing achievement in the study context. Further, the large effect size suggests substantially practical significance of the MI-OI. These findings align with previous international research (Razmjoo, S. A. (2008); Astutie, D. D. (2017) and extend their relevance to the Ethiopian EFL context. The qualitative data enrich this interpretation, emphasizing how MI-OI made the writing progression more accessible and attractive by linking it to students’ mental strengths. Conclusion and Suggestion In comparison to conventional approaches, this study explicitly shows that Multiple Intelligence-Oriented Instruction (MI-OI) crucially enriched the argumentative writing skills of Ethiopian higher institution education students at Jimma University. Qualitative feedback on student engagement and skill development impressively increased the quantitative results, which demonstrated a statistically and practically significant improvement in the experimental group’s writing achievement scores. The results emphasised the need to eliminate one-size-fits-all teaching methodologies. The inevitability of incorporating MI concepts into EFL curriculum and syllabi in order to provide distinguished, supported education that stimulates a variety of intelligences is one of the main implications. This change necessitates professional development and committed teacher training to give teachers the tools they need to create and carry out these kinds of teaching. To address a variety of learning profiles, it is advised that educational institutions and educators implement MI-OI concepts. In order to generalize results, researchers should do large-scale, longitudinal studies in a variety of settings. They should also look into how MI-OI affects other language skills and genres and how it interacts with elements like motivation and technology-enabled learning as a further research. Declarations Ethics Approval The study protocol was approved by the Ethical Review Board of the College of Social Sciences and Humanities, Jimma University (Ref. No. CSSH/5/23/2017, Date: 5 November 2024) in accordance with the institution’s ethical guidelines for research involving human participants. Informed Consent Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Conflict of Interest The authors declare no competing interests or conflicts of interest. Funding This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Data Availability The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Consent for Publication Informed consent was obtained from all participants for the publication of the study’s findings. The authors confirm that the manuscript is original, derived from a PhD dissertation, and approved for submission. Acknowledgement The authors of this article would like to extend their appreciations to the participants of the study for their willingness to participate. We also thank the college of business and economics for their overall coordination. We highly value editors and reviewers of this manuscript for their scholarly contributions. References Abbas, A., Zarei, A., & Mohseni, F. (2023). The relationship between multiple intelligences and grammatical and writing accuracy of Iranian learners of English. The Iranian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9 (2), 132–144. Alamirew, G. (2005). A study on the perception of writing, writing instruction and students' writing achievement [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Addis Ababa University. Armstrong, T. (2008). Multiple intelligences in the classroom (3rd ed.). ASCD. Armstrong, T. (2009). Multiple intelligences in the classroom (3rd ed.). ASCD. Astutie, D. D. (2017). Teaching English using multiple intelligences approach. English Education Journal, 8(2), 245–257. Christison, M. A. (1998). Applying multiple intelligences theory in preservice and inservice TEFL education programs. Forum, 36(2), 2–13. http://e.usia.gov/forum/ Cohen, J. (1988). Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin, 70(4), 213-220. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0026256 Ferretti, R. P., & Fan, Y. (2016). Argumentative writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 301–315). The Guilford Press. Fleetham, M., & Phillips, M. (2014). Pocket PAL: Multiple intelligences. Bloomsbury Education. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic Books. Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. Basic Books. Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences (3rd ed.). Basic Books. Gardner, H., & Hatch, T. (1989). Educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences. Educational Researcher, 18(8), 4–10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018008004 Geerson, E. B. (2006). An overview of Vygotsky's language and thought for EFL teachers. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 3, 41– 61. Gündüz, Z. E., & Ünal, I. D. (2016). Effects of multiple intelligences activities on writing skill development in an EFL context. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(7),1687–1697. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2016.040719 Habtamu, M. (2018). A study on students' beliefs about writing, their writing strategy use and writing achievement [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Addis Ababa University. Haley, M. H. (2004). Learner-centered instruction and the theory of multiple intelligences with second language learners. Teachers College Record, 106(1), 163-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2004.00327.x Hyland, K. (2004). Patterns of engagement: Dialogic features and L2 student writing. In L. J. Ravelli & R. A. Ellis (Eds.), Analyzing academic writing: Contextualized frameworks (pp.5–23).Continuum. Hyland, K. (2023). Teaching and Researching Writing (4th ed.). Routledge. Kaur, K. (2015). The emergent nature of strategic mediation in ESL teacher education. Language Teaching Research, 19 (3), 374–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814541723 Razmjoo, S. A. (2008). On the relationship between multiple intelligences and language proficiency. The Reading Matrix, 8(2), 155–174. Yohannes, T. (2015). Implications of multiple intelligence theory and integrated skills language teaching for textbook development [Doctoral dissertation, University of South Africa]. UNISA Institutional Repository. http://hdl.handle.net/10500/20104 Zeraatpishe, M., Seifoori, Z., & Hadidi Tamjid, N. (2020). The impact of multiple intelligence-oriented writing tasks on the accuracy, fluency, and organization of ELT students' writing. Journal of English Language Pedagogy and Practice, 12(25), 1– 31. https://doi.org/10.30495/JAL.2020.678069 Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8527666","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":570007116,"identity":"e6c15ded-4e76-4b3d-a3d1-4c6527ddc52b","order_by":0,"name":"Tilahun Gebretsadik Adare","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3690-8307","institution":"Jimma University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tilahun","middleName":"Gebretsadik","lastName":"Adare","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-01-06 07:05:09","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":true,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"humanSubjectConsent":true,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8527666/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8527666/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":99858981,"identity":"4685f4d3-9fa2-4057-baaa-d8d347a75ed9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-09 06:37:00","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":134755,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Article1toGIST.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8527666/v1/b6f9c01f2e55313aaf549901.docx"},{"id":99858973,"identity":"0743af74-4ca7-46e1-a2d3-501ec861ea64","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-09 06:37:00","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":342,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"rs8527666.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8527666/v1/a0c066422aec0a7e51b7d67e.json"},{"id":99858978,"identity":"c1ea82c2-766f-4922-9cc3-85bbc7454c10","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-09 06:37:00","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":74200,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"rs85276660enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8527666/v1/86de602162366573bb9a64b1.xml"},{"id":100357408,"identity":"5d5375b9-9661-45c8-b0bf-8bffbee3b24d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 07:19:51","extension":"emf","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":346696,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.emf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8527666/v1/4a9f50780619b4a48945d3ce.emf"},{"id":100357273,"identity":"31470991-085c-4272-be60-12a4eaa31940","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 07:19:33","extension":"jpeg","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":244607,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8527666/v1/6adab5deefbd2ba8929f62e2.jpeg"},{"id":99858980,"identity":"0fbc19e0-3231-4902-b220-f0b0e8d24114","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-09 06:37:00","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":9083,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8527666/v1/9c4488c2ba34df960f5794ca.png"},{"id":99858974,"identity":"3a7770b0-53b7-4ec0-829c-aae3724f3f63","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-09 06:37:00","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":44632,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8527666/v1/33db62078f288cee1bb0880a.png"},{"id":100358255,"identity":"460617fc-bf22-4382-9aaa-d1114210363c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 07:20:48","extension":"xml","order_by":7,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":71254,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"rs85276660structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8527666/v1/2e90f16d90dae5d107c91558.xml"},{"id":100357841,"identity":"fff6c5cf-3bed-4f51-a1c6-240b6e4e4d00","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 07:20:24","extension":"html","order_by":8,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":82195,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8527666/v1/d15e36a508d981da9554f865.html"},{"id":99858971,"identity":"a68dbac2-2c0d-4a10-bd02-62b86cb986e0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-09 06:37:00","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":160537,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConceptual framework: self-inventory, 2025\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8527666/v1/b67a818529dd49c6c1074ff2.png"},{"id":99858972,"identity":"955244b8-3f92-4aca-a1b4-d4a357eca040","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-09 06:37:00","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":48787,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBar Chart summarizing of students’ Argumentative Essay Writing Success\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8527666/v1/71be1dd72c5b53ca5f591459.png"},{"id":100377121,"identity":"b1ca4c9f-04b7-47c4-9dab-01992c259b57","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-16 08:47:08","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":972517,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8527666/v1/3d4b75bf-bd05-4626-9c44-58b6b43255e6.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003eMultiple Intelligence in the Efl Classroom: Enhancing Achievement in Learning Argumentative Writing Among Students at Jimma University, Ethiopia\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eEnglish language proficiency is essential for both academic writing success and survival in Ethiopia\u0026rsquo;s higher education system (Habtamu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Courses including Basic Writing Skills, Creative Writing Skills, Technical \u0026amp; Report Writing Skills, Intermediate Writing Skills, and Advanced Writing Skills are designed and offered to relevant groups of Ethiopian higher education students in order to achieve this (Habtamu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, because English serves as a medium of instruction across socioeconomic, political, and cultural domains, the need for competent English language instruction has increased in an increasingly globalized world (Abbas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTeachers are urged to use dynamic pedagogical strategies that take into account different learner intelligences in order to maximize language skill acquisition. Gaining proficiency in writing is essential for academic achievement in Ethiopia, since English is the main language of higher education. In order to meet this need, university curricula often include specialist writing classes (Alamirew, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e). A framework for creating education that takes into account different learner profiles is provided by Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences (MIT), which was first presented in 1983 (Gardner, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1983\u003c/span\u003e). According to Gardner, people have unique combinations of intelligences that affect their learning preferences and results. These combinations include verbal-linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinaesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalistic, and existential (Gardner, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). EFL students\u0026rsquo; involvement, cultural understanding, and attitudes toward language learning can all be improved by implementing MIT into the classroom (Christison, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, research indicates that writing performance can be enhanced by customizing instruction to students\u0026rsquo; intelligence profiles, especially in challenging assignments like argumentative writing (Ferretti \u0026amp; Fan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Despite these possible advantages, students usually struggle with academic writing because of a lack of resources and conventional, rule-based instructional techniques, and the Ethiopian EFL setting generally lacks systematic integration of MIT principles (Habtamu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, this study looks at how Multiple Intelligence (MI) affects accounting and finance students\u0026rsquo; performance in argumentative writing at Jimma University in Ethiopia.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eProblem Statement\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDespite the fact that MIT has been extensively acknowledged by experts for its ability to improve language acquisition, including writing, its use in Ethiopian higher education institutions\u0026rsquo; curricula is still fairly limited. Moreover, the current pedagogical strategy used by educators to teach language skills places a strong weight on traditional education while frequently overlooking the variety of intelligences that support higher-order cognitive abilities like reasoning and argumentation (Yohannes, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). According to Hyland\u0026rsquo;s research, EFL students struggle to become a proficient writer, which impairs their academic writing enactment (Hyland, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). Similarly, Ethiopian university students frequently lack both general English language proficiency and the necessary argumentative writing skills, despite the country\u0026rsquo;s emphasis on completing higher education and a number of English language courses with a high level of academic writing proficiency, which they are enrolled in for nearly all academic journeys to survival and/or achievement (Alamirew, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; Habtamu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). This disparity adds to Ethiopian university students\u0026rsquo; on-going challenges in producing logical and reliable written work for their academic advancement. Evidence-based implementation is hampered by a scarcity of empirical research on MIT\u0026rsquo;s effectiveness in the local environment, despite the Ethiopian Ministry of Education having started curriculum modifications to accommodate learner variety (Yohannes, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). As a result, student\u0026rsquo; poor writing abilities hinder their general academic success. International studies support the benefits of MI-based writing instruction (G\u0026uuml;nd\u0026uuml;z \u0026amp; \u0026Uuml;nal, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Zeraatpishe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), but Ethiopian higher education has not supported these findings. Hence, this study seeks to fill this gap by gauging the effect of a MI-OI intervention on argumentative writing achievement at Jimma University in Ethiopian.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eObjective\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe main objective of this study was primarily to examine the sway of MI-OI on EFL students\u0026rsquo; performance in writing argumentative essays in the study context. Besides, it sought to evaluate the extent to which MI-OI boosts students\u0026rsquo; argumentative writing capabilities, like coherence, argument quality, and structure, and finally, to scrutinize how students\u0026rsquo; achievement in argumentative writing and their dominant intelligence profiles relate to motivation within the MI framework under study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eResearch hypothesis\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study utilizes the null hypothesis (h0) which states that after the MI intervention, there is no statistically significant change in the argumentative writing achievement of the control and experimental groups and the alternative hypothesis (ha), which states after the MI-OI intervention, the control and experimental groups\u0026rsquo; achievement in argumentative writing statistically varies significantly.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eSignificance\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBy presenting experiential data on the effectiveness of MI-OI in an Ethiopian EFL environment, the study\u0026rsquo;s findings are foreseen to aid scholars, educators, curriculum designers, and policymakers to duly work on the MIT. Future studies on learner-centred instruction, curriculum design, and pedagogical approaches aligned to the theory of multiple intelligences may be influenced by the findings.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eScope and Limitations\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was carried out with Banking and Finance students participating in the Basic Writing Skills (EnLa.201) course at Jimma University\u0026rsquo;s College of Business and Economics during the 2024\u0026ndash;2025 academic years. Writing argumentative essays was the dependent variable in this study. Regardless of its promising findings, one of the study\u0026rsquo;s limitations is that it was narrowed to one college, which might have an impact on how generally the results can be practical across other colleges. Furthermore, even though the quasi-experimental design is suitable, it has inherent limitations with regard to its high cost to analyze. Finding a large body of local literature in Ethiopia was another challenge due to the novelty of MIT-focused argumentative writing studies.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Literature Review","content":"\u003cp\u003eGardner\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1983\u003c/span\u003e) the unified belief of intelligence is contested by MIT, which suggests that human cognitive competence, is made up of various modalities. The biopsychological capacity to digest information that can be triggered in cultural contexts to solve problems or produce valuable goods is known as intelligence (Gardner, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Naturalistic and existential intelligences were eventually added to the original seven intelligences established by the theory (Gardner, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e). In the field of education, MIT promotes inclusive and productive learning through customized instruction that capitalizes on students\u0026rsquo; strengths (Armstrong, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eMIT in EFL Instruction\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMIT promotes instructional adaptability in EFL settings. The use of songs for musical intelligence or group projects for interpersonal intelligence is two examples of how instructional tactics can be adapted to match different intelligences (Christison, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e). By relating class content to students\u0026rsquo; natural cognitive preferences, this method increases rendezvous and may improve language acquisition results (Haley, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eMIT and Writing Instruction\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWriting is a sophisticated ability that calls for the fusion of social, linguistic, and cognitive skills. Grammar accuracy, coherence, argument building, and mechanics are frequently difficult for EFL learners in Ethiopian higher education institutions (Hyland, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e \u0026amp; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). To scaffold the writing process and meet a range of learner needs, MIT-oriented writing education incorporates a variety of activities (discussion for interpersonal intelligence and graphic organizing for spatial intelligence) (Armstrong, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). Research suggests that these methods can improve writing motivation, organization, and fluency (G\u0026uuml;nd\u0026uuml;z \u0026amp; \u0026Uuml;nal, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Zeraatpishe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eArgumentative Writing in EFL Classroom\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudents must formulate a thesis, provide evidence to back it up, weigh opposing viewpoints, and draw a logical conclusion when writing an argumentative essay. It is a mentally taxing genre that is necessary for academic achievement (Ferretti \u0026amp; Fan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Students at Ethiopian universities frequently find it difficult to meet its rhetorical and structural requirements. The scaffolding required to build these skills to be provided by explicit training incorporated into a MI framework (Kaur, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eTheoretical Framework\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGardner\u0026rsquo;s MIT and social constructivist learning theory serve as the foundation for this investigation (Geerson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). In line with MIT\u0026rsquo;s theory that intelligences are created via participation in relevant, contextualized activities, social constructivism highlights the importance of social interaction and culturally adapted instruments in learning. When combined, these frameworks facilitate an interactive, learner-centred method of teaching argumentative writing effective.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eConceptual Framework\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBy combining the conventional structure of argumentative essay writing with Howard Gardner\u0026rsquo;s Theory of Multiple Intelligences (Gardner, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1983\u003c/span\u003e), this conceptual framework offers an innovative teaching strategy. Its main goal is to help teachers move beyond a purely linguistic and logical approach by suggesting that lessons be created to activate a range of cognitive strengths, including kinaesthetic, spatial, and interpersonal intelligences (Gardner, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). This will make writing more friendly, interesting, and successful for a wide variety of students (Christison, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e). The framework is based on two interrelated pillars: the fundamental, linear structure of an essay (Introduction, Body, and Conclusion) and a collection of MI-oriented teaching elements that are specifically connected to each writing stage, such as creating a hook, formulating a thesis statement, and offering reasoning (Armstrong, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). The main innovation is found in the connections between these pillars, where multiple intelligence-rich strategies are used to scaffold each traditional essay element. For example, kinaesthetic role-play can be used to develop a thesis, spatial graphic organizers can be used to organize body paragraphs, and a musical summary can reinforce a conclusion (Haley, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). The framework, which is based on Gardner's theory (Gardner, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1983\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e), works on the premise that mastering a linear writing activity necessitates a diverse instructional pathway, converting an abstract process into tangible, personally meaningful actions. It essentially tells a pedagogical narrative that moves the emphasis from simply teaching essay form to actively scaffolding it with a variety of cognitive tools, giving teachers a useful planning tool and acting as a model for researchers to test hypotheses about improved writing outcomes (G\u0026uuml;nd\u0026uuml;z \u0026amp; \u0026Uuml;nal, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Zeraatpishe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). By purposefully utilizing the many intellectual resources that each student brings to the classroom, the framework ultimately seeks to democratize writing abilities (Gardner \u0026amp; Hatch, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1989\u003c/span\u003e). The general conceptual framework described above is summed up in the following figure.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and Method","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eResearch Design\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA mixed-methods quasi-experimental design was utilized. The achievement in writing argumentative essays was the dependent variable, while the instructional strategy (MI-Oriented Instruction vs. Traditional strategy) was the independent variable hypothesized to bring the effect.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eParticipants and Context\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e Two intact groups of ninety banking and finance students from College of Business and Economics\u0026rsquo; at Jimma University enrolled in Basic Writing Skills course experimental (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;45) and controls (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;45) were the participants of the study. Convenience sampling was used to choose the university, and two intact groups were assigned to control and experimental conditions using simple random sampling by the lottery method.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eInstruments\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eData collection tools included the writing achievement tests in which students were allowed to create an argumentative essay for the pre- and post-test sessions, scoring rubric, which was used to measure essays on thesis, support, counterargument, organization, and mechanics were calculated using an established analytical rubric that was adapted from Saint Paul College followed by structured interviews engaged with subsets of participants to get qualitative information.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eProcedure to data collection\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study took half a year (one academic semester) from March-June 2025 for intervention of the MI-OI program. The pre-test on argumentative writing achievement was performed by both groups. An intervention on MI-OI lessons centring on different intelligences in argumentative essay writing classes were given to the experimental group and conventional instruction method was used with the control group. Consequently, the post-test was given with a similar argumentative writing test to both groups. Finally, an interviews protocol with purposely selected participants of the experimental group was applied to support the quantitative data.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eData Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eQuantitative data was analyzed by SPSS v.28 utilizing descriptive and inferential statistics, paired and independent samples t-tests. Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s Alpha was calculated to check the reliability analysis. Inter-Rater Reliability (IRR) was premeditated using the Interclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) analysis. Qualitative data gathered through structured interview was analyzed thematically by Atlas.ti v.28 to strengthen quantitative findings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eFindings\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis section presents major findings in the study based on the research hypothesis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStatistical Analysis of the Writing Achievement of groups: Pre-test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"6\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGroup Statistics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePre-test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGroups of participants\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStd. Deviation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStd. Error Mean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.074\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExperimental\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.074\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results of the statistical analysis of the groups\u0026rsquo; mean scores on their experiences in writing argumentative essays are shown in the results under Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, where the mean scores for the control (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.58, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.49) and experimental (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.59, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.49) groups are shown. This may suggest that prior to the treatment of the independent variables (MI-OI), students from the college of business and economics at Jimma University, assigned to the control and experimental groups were homogenous in their argumentative essay writing abilities and performed comparable argumentative writing activities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStatistical Analysis of the groups Writing Achievement: Pre-test and Post-test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"12\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c12\" colnum=\"12\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"12\" nameend=\"c12\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePaired Samples Test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" morerows=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePaired Differences\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDf\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSig. (2-\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003etailed)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStd. Error Mean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95% CI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLower\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUpper\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePair 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBefore\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.589\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.063\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.096\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.349\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.061\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.588\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.02\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e shows the results of the paired samples t-tests for the achievement Pre-test and post-test for producing argumentative essays in the control groups. The group\u0026rsquo;s performance on the accomplishment test for writing argumentative essays was assessed using a paired samples t-test, and t (44)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.54, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.061 (Sig. (2-tailed) was found for the students\u0026rsquo; essay grades before (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.27, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.89) and after (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.29, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.88). With 95% CI spanning from .096 to.349 and a mean test score change of \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.33, at p. = 0.02), and it can be concluded that there was no discernible shift in the ability to compose an argumentative essay. This leads one to the conclusion that, when it comes to teaching writing in general and argumentative essays in particular and in the context of the current research, the traditional way of argumentative essay training did not fully develop the writing talents of the targeted students.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStatistical Analysis for the Experimental Group in Writing Achievement: Pre- test and Post-test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"13\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c12\" colnum=\"12\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c13\" colnum=\"13\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"13\" nameend=\"c13\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePaired Samples Test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" morerows=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c10\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePaired Differences\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eM\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eeta squared statistics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c10\" namest=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95% CI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLower\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUpper\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePair 2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBefore\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.244\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eη\u003c/b\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cb\u003e2\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u003cb\u003e=\u003c/b\u003e\u0026thinsp;.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.219\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe paired samples t-test findings for the effect of MI-OI on the experimental groups\u0026rsquo; achievement test scores in writing argumentative essays are displayed in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e. The post-test findings demonstrated that the students\u0026rsquo; essay scores had significantly improved from before (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.3333, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.52) to after (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.57, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.54), with a t (44)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;12.287, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.001 Sig. (2-sided). The students\u0026rsquo; argumentative essay writing achievement was better after participating in the MI-OI program, as evidenced by a mean test score increase of 1.24, with 95% confidence intervals between 1.44 and 1.04. Following the MI-OI program\u0026rsquo;s intervention, the eta-squared statistic showed a bigger effect size of (η2)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.72. The results and the intervention programs are highly supported by the interpretation of effect size of 0.72 for a bigger effect caused by the intervention (Cohen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1988\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLevene\u0026rsquo;s Test for the groups\u0026rsquo; Homogeneity of Variances in Writing Achievement (Post-test)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"11\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"11\" nameend=\"c11\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndependent Samples Test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLevene\u0026rsquo;s Test\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003efor Equality of Variances\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"6\" nameend=\"c11\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eT-test for Equality of Means\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAchievement test\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eGroups\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDf\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStd. Error Difference\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c11\" namest=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95% CI\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLower\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUpper\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEqual variances not assumed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.053\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.1170\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEqual variances assumed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.1179\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTable 4 shows the outcomes of a post-test on argumentative essay writing that was given to ninety students into two groups: the experimental group (MI-OI) and the control group. To find out if there were statistically significant differences (p\u0026lt;.05) between the two groups’ argumentative essay quality, an independent-sample t-test was used. Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances was utilized for analysis with a 95% CI, and the results showed that there were statistically significant differences between students’ skills to produce argumentative essays \u003cstrong\u003et (88), p=.001,\u003c/strong\u003e by the experimental group during post-test session. As a result, it was discovered that there were statistically significant change based on the MI-OI intervention program.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis bar graph measures the impact of an intervention by showing pre-test and post-test results for two groups. Although both groups started off similarly, only the experimental group significantly improved following the intervention, as shown by the pictorial evidence. The chart is an effective tool for analyzing the experiment's results because the control group's static results demonstrate that the treatment is directly responsible for the measured gain.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eQualitative Data\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe researcher collected interview data and grouped it into ten sub-themes, which focused on MI-OI effects and two central themes, which focused on skills development and methodical awareness. Atlas.ti.28, qualitative data analysis software, was utilized to triangulate learners writing achievements thematically. Thematic analysis of interview data yielded two central areas; improved skills advancement in which participants reflected amended ability to communicate claims, structure arguments, and integrate counterarguments and an increased methodological responsiveness. They also expressed their active participation and self-efficacy, attributing to their progress to the multiple intelligence-oriented methods. Perceptions from the participants confirm that they were struggling with claim/thesis development, organization of coherent essay, developing counter arguments, word choice, mechanics, and the application of rules when writing argumentative essays properly cited. This research sought to determine the features that added to students' achievement following the intervention and to address the realization of writing argumentative essays. The students reported that MI-OI offered rehearsal areas for debates, group discussions, and peer tasks through relating it to their existing bits of intelligences. Furthermore, they felt MI-OI approach at ease exploiting it when writing argumentative essays of the right length. Thus, the study concluded that MI-OI was the foundation for the development of participants’ argumentative essays at Jimma University in Ethiopia, which is consistent to the result of a study by Yohannes Tefera (Yohannes, 2015), \u0026nbsp;which he did it on the implications of multiple intelligence theory and integrated skills language teaching for textbook development.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eFirst, an independent samples t-test confirmed no significant difference between the groups before the intervention Control \u003cb\u003e(M = 2.58, SD = 0.50);\u003c/b\u003e Experimental \u003cb\u003e(M = 2.59, SD = 0.50); p \u0026gt; .05)\u003c/b\u003e, creating baseline impartiality proven by the pre-test homogeneity. Next, a paired samples t-test showed no significant enhancement from pre-test (M = 2.27, SD = 0.59) to post-test \u003cb\u003e(M = 2.29, SD = 0.59), t (44) = 3.546, p = .061\u003c/b\u003e with no significant improvement to their argumentative essay writing skill demonstrated by control groups’ overall performance affected by the traditional methods. Third, a significant improvement was observed from pre-test \u003cb\u003e(M = 2.33, SD = 0.52)\u003c/b\u003e to post-test \u003cb\u003e(M = 3.58, SD = 0.54), t (44) = 12.287, p \u0026lt; .001\u003c/b\u003e, with large effect size (η² = 0.725) demonstrated by the experimental group enactment. Fourth, an independent samples t-test revealed statistically significant variance in post-test scores \u003cb\u003e(t (44) = 12.287, p \u0026lt; .001)\u003c/b\u003e, approving the experimental groups’ argumentative essay writing growth compared to post-test results of the control group. Lastly, the outcomes support the alternative hypothesis, signifying that MI-OI considerably improved students’ argumentative essay writing achievement in the study context. Further, the large effect size suggests substantially practical significance of the MI-OI. These findings align with previous international research (Razmjoo, S. A. (2008); Astutie, D. D. (2017) and extend their relevance to the Ethiopian EFL context. The qualitative data enrich this interpretation, emphasizing how MI-OI made the writing progression more accessible and attractive by linking it to students’ mental strengths.\u003c/p\u003e "},{"header":"Conclusion and Suggestion","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn comparison to conventional approaches, this study explicitly shows that Multiple Intelligence-Oriented Instruction (MI-OI) crucially enriched the argumentative writing skills of Ethiopian higher institution education students at Jimma University. Qualitative feedback on student engagement and skill development impressively increased the quantitative results, which demonstrated a statistically and practically significant improvement in the experimental group’s writing achievement scores. The results emphasised the need to eliminate one-size-fits-all teaching methodologies. The inevitability of incorporating MI concepts into EFL curriculum and syllabi in order to provide distinguished, supported education that stimulates a variety of intelligences is one of the main implications. This change necessitates professional development and committed teacher training to give teachers the tools they need to create and carry out these kinds of teaching. To address a variety of learning profiles, it is advised that educational institutions and educators implement MI-OI concepts. In order to generalize results, researchers should do large-scale, longitudinal studies in a variety of settings. They should also look into how MI-OI affects other language skills and genres and how it interacts with elements like motivation and technology-enabled learning as a further research.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics Approval\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study protocol was approved by the Ethical Review Board of the College of Social Sciences and Humanities, Jimma University (Ref. No. CSSH/5/23/2017, Date: 5 November 2024) in accordance with the institution’s ethical guidelines for research involving human participants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInformed Consent\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInformed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflict of Interest\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no competing interests or conflicts of interest.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Availability\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for Publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInformed consent was obtained from all participants for the publication of the study’s findings. The authors confirm that the manuscript is original, derived from a PhD dissertation, and approved for submission.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe authors of this article would like to extend their appreciations to the participants of the study for their willingness to participate. We also thank the college of business and economics for their overall coordination. We highly value editors and reviewers of this manuscript for their scholarly contributions.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbbas, A., Zarei, A., \u0026amp; Mohseni, F. (2023). The relationship between multiple intelligences and grammatical and writing accuracy of Iranian learners of English. The Iranian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9 (2), 132\u0026ndash;144.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlamirew, G. (2005). A study on the perception of writing, writing instruction and students\u0026apos; writing achievement [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Addis Ababa University.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArmstrong, T. (2008). Multiple intelligences in the classroom (3rd ed.). ASCD.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArmstrong, T. (2009). Multiple intelligences in the classroom (3rd ed.). ASCD.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAstutie, D. D. (2017). Teaching English using multiple intelligences approach. English Education Journal, 8(2), 245\u0026ndash;257.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChristison, M. A. (1998). Applying multiple intelligences theory in preservice and inservice TEFL education programs. Forum, 36(2), 2\u0026ndash;13. http://e.usia.gov/forum/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCohen, J. (1988). Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin, 70(4), 213-220. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0026256\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFerretti, R. P., \u0026amp; Fan, Y. (2016). Argumentative writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, \u0026amp; J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 301\u0026ndash;315). The Guilford Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFleetham, M., \u0026amp; Phillips, M. (2014). Pocket PAL: Multiple intelligences. Bloomsbury Education.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic Books.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. Basic Books.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences (3rd ed.). Basic Books.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGardner, H., \u0026amp; Hatch, T. (1989). Educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences. Educational Researcher, 18(8), 4\u0026ndash;10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018008004\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGeerson, E. B. (2006). An overview of Vygotsky\u0026apos;s language and thought for EFL teachers. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 3, 41\u0026ndash; 61.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eG\u0026uuml;nd\u0026uuml;z, Z. E., \u0026amp; \u0026Uuml;nal, I. D. (2016). Effects of multiple intelligences activities on writing skill development in an EFL context. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(7),1687\u0026ndash;1697. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2016.040719\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHabtamu, M. (2018). A study on students\u0026apos; beliefs about writing, their writing strategy use and writing achievement [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Addis Ababa University.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHaley, M. H. (2004). Learner-centered instruction and the theory of multiple intelligences with second language learners. Teachers College Record, 106(1), 163-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2004.00327.x\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHyland, K. (2004). Patterns of engagement: Dialogic features and L2 student writing. In L. J. Ravelli \u0026amp; R. A. Ellis (Eds.), Analyzing academic writing: Contextualized frameworks (pp.5\u0026ndash;23).Continuum.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHyland, K. (2023). Teaching and Researching Writing (4th ed.). Routledge.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKaur, K. (2015). The emergent nature of strategic mediation in ESL teacher education. Language Teaching Research, 19 (3), 374\u0026ndash;388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814541723\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRazmjoo, S. A. (2008). On the relationship between multiple intelligences and language proficiency. The Reading Matrix, 8(2), 155\u0026ndash;174.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYohannes, T. (2015). Implications of multiple intelligence theory and integrated skills language teaching for textbook development [Doctoral dissertation, University of South Africa]. UNISA Institutional Repository. http://hdl.handle.net/10500/20104\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZeraatpishe, M., Seifoori, Z., \u0026amp; Hadidi Tamjid, N. (2020). The impact of multiple intelligence-oriented writing tasks on the accuracy, fluency, and organization of ELT students\u0026apos; writing. Journal of English Language Pedagogy and Practice, 12(25), 1\u0026ndash; 31. https://doi.org/10.30495/JAL.2020.678069\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"Jimma University","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Multiple Intelligences, Argumentative Essay, EFL Writing, Achievement, Ethiopia","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8527666/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8527666/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe goal of this study was to scrutinize the influence of Multiple Intelligence-Oriented Instruction (MI-OI) on the argumentative writing ability of students enrolled under the college of business and economics at Jimma University. Ninety students from the department of accounting and finance were participated in the study throughout the academic years 2024–2025. The study utilized a quasi-experimental design with mixed-methods approach to data analysis. Participants from the intact group were placed into two groups randomly to the experimental group (n = 45) and the control group (n = 45). Writing achievement tests were used to collect quantitative data, while structured interviews were used to gather qualitative data. Atlas.ti v.28 was utilized for qualitative data and SPSS v.28 was used for statistics analyses. The groups’ argumentative essay writing achievement increased significantly, according to an independent-samples t-test statistics (t (88) = 12.287, \u003cstrong\u003ep \u0026lt;.001). \u003c/strong\u003eThe experimental group’s mean scores meaningfully improved from the pre-test (M = 2.33, SD = 0.52) to the post-test (M = 3.58, SD = 0.54) at \u003cstrong\u003ep = 0.01.\u003c/strong\u003e These findings were supported by qualitative inquiry, which showed that MI-OI methods enhanced students’ ability to craft meaningful argumentative essays. Thus, the study commends the use of MI-OI approaches in comparable educational situations and finds that incorporating them into EFL writing courses can impressively augment students’ argumentative essay writing skills.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Multiple Intelligence in the Efl Classroom: Enhancing Achievement in Learning Argumentative Writing Among Students at Jimma University, Ethiopia","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-01-09 06:36:51","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8527666/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"5debfad7-f21a-4da3-b7c2-0ccbe4d92529","owner":[],"postedDate":"January 9th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":60736967,"name":"Educational Philosophy and Theory"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-01-09T06:36:51+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-01-09 06:36:51","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8527666","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8527666","identity":"rs-8527666","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}