Claims

Low-proficiency L2 learners benefited significantly more from prompts than from recasts

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2006 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? For low-proficiency learners, prompts produced significantly greater gains than recasts on the target structure. → Ahlem Ammar and Nina Spada 2006

Evidence

Ahlem Ammar and Nina Spada 2006

Ahlem Ammar and Nina Spada. (2006). ONE SIZE FITS ALL?: Recasts, Prompts, and L2 Learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, Volume 28, Issue 4. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060268

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Quasi-experimental comparison of recast and prompt conditions with grade 6 Francophone ESL learners, contrasting outcomes by proficiency level. The article reports low-proficiency learners "benefited significantly more from prompts than recasts." No effect size is printed in the available text.

"In particular, high-proficiency learners benefited equally from both prompts and recasts, whereas low-proficiency learners benefited significantly more from prompts than recasts."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id low-proficiency-learners-benefit-more-from-prompts
title Low-proficiency L2 learners benefited significantly more from prompts than from recasts
description Low-proficiency L2 learners benefited significantly more from prompts than from recasts
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2006
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-15
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — ahlem-ammar-and-nina-spada-2006

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.