Young EFL learners receiving input-providing corrective feedback improve significantly in grammar from pretest to immediate and delayed posttests, with gains retained¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? For the input-providing group, repeated-measures ANOVA showed significant differences across the three test occasions (F(1.33, 22.67) = 152.72, p < 0.0001), with significant pretest-to-posttest gains but no significant immediate-to-delayed change. → Mousavi 2018

Evidence¶

Mousavi 2018¶

Mousavi, K., Alavinia, P., & Gholami, J. (2018). Input Providing vs. Output-Prompting Negotiation Strategies in Learning Grammar among Young EFL Learners. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 497-512. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11234a

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Repeated-measures ANOVA on the input-providing group's pretest, immediate posttest and delayed posttest scores (N=18, means 6.88, 15.55, 15.66). Sphericity was violated, so the Greenhouse-Geisser row was used. Bonferroni comparisons showed significant pretest-to-posttest gains but no significant immediate-to-delayed difference; no standardized effect size is printed in the quoted finding.

"for ANOVA with repeated measures with a Greenhouse -Geisser correction, the mean scores for grammar learning concentration were statistically significantly different ( F (1.33, 22.67) = 152.72, p < 0.0001)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Output-prompting feedback outperforms input-providing and no-feedback conditions on both immediate and delayed grammar posttests in young EFL learners — related
• Learners in all three corrective-feedback groups improve irregular past tense performance on both GJT and EIT from pretest to posttests, a within-group gain that does not separate the feedback types — related
• Corrective feedback on second-language errors has a significant effect on L2 development that is maintained on delayed tests — a broader claim this one bears on
• Both groups improved greatly from pretest to posttest and maintained performance from posttest to delayed posttest — related