Cooperative learning and conventional instruction produced no statistically significant difference in pronunciation improvement among Spanish-speaking ELLs in a six-week quasi-experiment¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The improvement of the CL (experimental) group was not statistically significantly different from that of the CV (control) group (t(44) = 0.2404, p = .8101). → Hsuan-Yu Chen (Jack) & Jaya S. Goswami 2011

Evidence¶

Hsuan-Yu Chen (Jack) & Jaya S. Goswami 2011¶

Hsuan-Yu Chen (Jack) & Jaya S. Goswami. (2011). Structuring Cooperative Learning in Teaching English Pronunciation. English Language Teaching, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n3p26

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Quasi-experiment with pre-post two-treatment design: 19 ELLs taught pronunciation in a CL setting and 25 in a conventional setting. The independent t-test on improvement scores showed no significant difference; equivalence was not tested. Means were "M = 1.38, SD = 2.00" versus "M = 1.35, SD = 2.07".

"An independent t-test showedt(44) = 0.2404, p = .8101. That is, as shown in Table 4, the overall performance score of the CL (experimental) group (M = 1.38, SD = 2.00) was not statistically significantly different from that of the CV (control) group (M = 1.35, SD = 2.07)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Phonetic and phonological instruction delivered in a cooperative learning setting significantly improved ELLs' pronunciation of target English sounds over six weeks — related
• Phonetic and phonological instruction delivered in a conventional setting also significantly improved ELLs' pronunciation of target English sounds — related
• AI-GFCA students show better pronunciation, fluency and IELTS speaking predictor scores than AI-C students, but intonation does not differ — related
• The experimental group shows significant within-group gains from pre-test to post-test in speaking skill. — related