Feedback delivery method made no statistically significant difference in grammar-and-style error counts measured by the Editor program¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2012 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Editor-derived scores for the three feedback groups showed no significant differences, indicating no interaction among groups. → Gulley 2012

Evidence¶

Gulley 2012¶

Gulley, B. (2012). Feedback on developmental writing students' first drafts. Journal of Developmental Education, 36(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1035676

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Second mixed design ANCOVA using Editor software error counts as the dependent variable, with COMPASS scores as covariate; the within-subjects test for Editor scores and treatment condition was "not statistically significant, F = 1.014, p < .368".

"Furthermore, when scores for the three feedback groups derived from the Editor program, designed to look at grammar and style, were compared, they were also not significant at the .05 level, indicating no interaction among groups."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Syntax — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Revised drafts contained more Editor-identified grammar and style errors than first drafts, despite significant pre-post change — related
• Feedback delivery method (oral, written, or combined) made no statistically significant difference in developmental writing students' rubric-scored revisions — related