Control-group students showed no improvement in using ILP features while interpreting without instruction¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Members of the control group, who received no ILP instruction, did not show any improvement in their ability to use ILP features while interpreting (post-test mean 19.60 versus pre-test mean 19.53). → Ravesh and Tabrizi 2017

Evidence¶

Ravesh and Tabrizi 2017¶

Mahnaz Mahmoudi Ravesh, Hossein Heidari Tabrizi. (2017). The Effect of Teaching Interlanguage Pragmatics on Interpretation Ability of Iranian Translation Students. Advances in Language and Literary Studies 8(3). https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.8n.3p.44

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Discussion-section interpretation of the quasi-experiment's post-test results for the control group taught through the traditional method of teaching interpretation; Table 3 prints a post-test mean of 19.60 versus a pre-test mean of 19.53. Descriptive means only; no effect size or test is printed for this contrast.

"Moreover, members of the control group for whom no ILP feature was incorporated did not show any improvement in their ability to use ILP features while interpreting."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Iranian translation students are not successful in comprehending interlanguage pragmatic features prior to instruction — related
• Purely meaning-focused activity without form-focused treatment did not lead learners to improve oral accuracy — related
• Control-group students who received no intervention showed no improvements in reading fluency — related
• Experimental-group achievement rose significantly from pre- to post-test while the control group's gain was not significant — related
• Teaching interlanguage pragmatic features improves Iranian translation students' interpretation ability — related