scholarly journals Using meta-analysis of technique and timing to optimize corrective feedback for specific grammatical features

Author(s):  
Andrew Schenck
SAGE Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 215824402110475
Author(s):  
Andrew Schenck

Past experimental studies of corrective feedback (CF) have isolated factors like grammatical complexity, learner proficiency, and L1 one by one, carefully designing experiments that eliminate the influence of “extraneous” factors. Because each factor is actually codependent, more holistic study is needed. Eleven studies, all of which had English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners with a Persian L1 and productive measures of speech or writing, were selected for meta-analytic examination. Results suggest that type of grammatical feature, as well as associated learner variables such as L1 similarity or proficiency, collectively influence the efficacy of different CF types. As variables jointly add to the difficulty of a grammatical feature, CF providing a kind of scaffold, in the form of a written or oral reformulation from the teacher, appears to be the most effective. As grammatical difficulty decreases, learners appear to benefit from CF in which the learner is compelled to self-repair.


2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 97
Author(s):  
Albatool Abalkheel ◽  
Tara Brandenburg

Many language teachers spend countless hours correcting student writing in hopes of improvement in accuracy, but as of yet, there has been little consensus regarding the efficacy of written corrective feedback (CF) or the type of CF that is most efficient. Although many studies have been conducted on the topic, conflicting results have arisen. In this meta-analysis, ten quasi-experimental studies of written corrective feedback are examined to analysis the overall effect of CF and compare the variations of CF. It is shown that written corrective feedback in general is inconclusive as a predictor of student improvement in writing over time and the efficacy of the feedback depends on its focus. It is also shown that focused written feedback has any overall positive effect on student’s writing, whereas comprehensive written feedback has the potential to have a harmful effect on student’s writing over time.


2014 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 267-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke Plonsky ◽  
Dan Brown

Applied linguists have turned increasingly in recent years to meta-analysis as the preferred means of synthesizing quantitative research. The first step in the meta-analytic process involves defining a domain of interest. Despite its apparent simplicity, this step involves a great deal of subjectivity on the part of the meta-analyst. This article problematizes the importance of clearly defining and operationalizing meta-analytic domains. Toward that end, we present a critical review of one particular domain, corrective feedback, which has been subject to 18 unique meta-analyses. Specifically, we examine the unique approach each study has taken in defining their domain of interest. In order to demonstrate the critical role of this stage in the meta-analytic process, we also examine variability in summary effects as a function of the unique subdomains in the sample. Because different techniques used to identify candidate studies carry assumptions about the type of research that falls within the domain of interest (e.g. published vs. unpublished), we also include a brief review of search techniques employed in a set of 81 meta-analyses of second language research. Building on the work of In’nami and Koizumi (2010) and Oswald and Plonsky (2010), the results for this phase of the analysis show that L2 meta-analysts generally rely on a stable but very limited set of search strategies, none of which is likely to yield unpublished studies. Based on our findings related both to domain definition and search techniques employed by L2 researchers, we make specific recommendations for future meta-analytic practice in the field.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Garyfalia Charitaki ◽  
Sotiria Tzivinikou ◽  
Garyfallia Stefanou ◽  
Spyridon - Georgios Soulis

Early numeracy is related to preschoolers’ acquisition of skills such as understanding and operating with quantities. Consequently, early numeracy has substantial impact on first Graders’ attainments in typical mathematics. Meta-analysis was conducted to address the extent in which early numeracy interventions are effective. Twenty studies were analyzed, including 3.080 young low-performing children (Ncontrol=1.815, Ntreatment=1.265). The overall best estimate for programs based on Early Numeracy Interventions odds ratio was moderately effective g=0.61 (95% CI=[0.44, 0.78]). Heterogeneity was large. Results of the final meta-regression model predicted larger treatment effects for short-term interventions including 1 to 9 sessions. On average, the interventions included instructional strategies such as Explicit Instruction (g=0.57), Corrective Feedback (g = 0.55), CRA (g =0.64), Concrete Manipulatives (g=0.60) Visual Representations (g=0.57) and one-to-one instructional arrangement g=0.79 are moderately effective for children aged 5-8. Results of the study are discussed with respect to implications for designing early numeracy interventions.


2019 ◽  
Vol 170 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-308
Author(s):  
Marziyeh Yousefi ◽  
Hossein Nassaji

Abstract This paper reports the results of a meta-analysis of 39 published studies conducted during the last decade (from 2006 to 2016) on the effects of instruction and corrective feedback on learning second language (L2) pragmatics. The study meta-analyzed the effects of instruction in terms of several moderator variables including mode of instruction, type of instruction, outcome measures, length of instruction, language proficiency, and durability of the instructional effects. It was found that (a) computer-assisted instruction generated larger effects than face-to-face instruction, (b) instruction was generally more effective for L2 pragmatic comprehension than production, (c) instruction produced larger effects when tested by selected response outcome measures although different patterns were observed across explicit-implicit categories, (d) longer treatments generated a larger effect size than shorter treatments, (e) studies conducted with intermediate level learners produced larger effect sizes than beginner or advanced level learners, and (f) the observed effects of instruction were maintained.


2010 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 461-479 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M. Norris ◽  
Lourdes Ortega

When in the late 1990s we set out to review the accumulated research on second language (L2) instructional effectiveness, it was with a sense – though no certainty – that a journey into the uncharted territory of systematic research synthesis would eventually prove worth the effort. In order to find a fitting methodology, and in the absence of any guidance within applied linguistics, we willingly delved into challenging techniques and debates from other disciplines. A few years later, we had to search long and hard to find enough synthesists working on language learning and teaching issues to warrant a book, but we did, and we saw that new effort as an important, if initial, step towards the adoption and adaptation of research synthesis, and particularly the subset of methods known as meta-analysis, to the problems of applied linguistics. Now, some ten years after our first publication on the topic, applications of meta-analysis have increased dramatically in the field, as this Timeline clearly shows. For some topics (e.g. interaction, corrective feedback), we have even seen several studies replicating and building on each other. We are pleased with these developments and welcome the efforts of the field to engage in rigorous and meaningful reviews of L2 research, with an eye towards cumulative explanation of key phenomena. At the same time, we also hope that researchers will avail themselves of the full potential of systematic research synthesis, which considerably transcends the narrower domain of meta-analysis and includes other quantitative as well as qualitative methods that more fully enable the task of synthesizing accumulated knowledge in the increasingly diverse research landscape of applied linguistics.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document