my journal review.docx

7/24/2019 MY JOURNAL REVIEW.docx

1/17

JOURNAL REVIEW

1. Investigating Recast and Metalinguistic Feedback in Taskbased !"a##a"

Year 2011

Researcher (s) : Saeed Rezaei and Ali Derakhsan

Objective

This research investigated the effectiveness f recast vs! "etaling#istic

feedback b$ #sing task%based gra""ar instr#ctin!

&nte't : This st#d$ as cnd#cted at ran *ang#age nstit#te (*) in Tehran! Si't$

+artici+ants ere selected and divided int three gr#+s, recast-

"etaling#istic- and n%feedback gr#+! The +artici+ants ere selected b$

#sing a nn%+rbabilit$ sa"+ling techni.#e! The instr#"ents in this st#d$

#sed +rficienc$ test- +retest and +sttest- target gra""ar str#ct#res- and

tasks!

Research Design : /#asi%e'+eri"ental design

ain St#d$ : This st#d$ fc#s in investigating crrective feedback (recast vs

"etaling#istic feedback) in c"+arisn t n%feedback in task%based

gra""ar instr#ctin f cnditinals and ish state"ent as the target

gra""ar str#ct#res! Als- this st#d$ intended t see the +ssible

differential effect f different crrective feedback (&) in task%based

gra""ar instr#ctin!

indings : 1! The res#lts ere in line ith ther st#dies regarding the effectiveness f

& and the evidence shed that & can +tentiall$ a++r'i"ate i"+rve

the ranian learners #tterances fr" their errne#s str#ct#res t their

acc#rate lang#age +rd#ctins!2! The researcher stated that ignring errr #nnticed "ight lead t the

fssilizatin f errrs!3! etaling#istic feedback as "re effective than recast in task%based

gra""ar instr#ctin f cnditinals and ish state"ent!

Strength : This research e'+lains clearl$ regarding iss#es in crrective feedback

techni.#e and shs hich ne is better f t t$+es f crrective

feedback!

4eaknesses : This research nl$ shs the res#lt based n the test! 4e need t see

"re based n st#dents +erce+tin hich ne is better f the t t$+es f

crrective feedback! think giving .#estinnaire can sh the st#dents

+erce+tin ab#t it!


2/17

$. T%e I#&act '( )Metalinguistic* +'""ective Feedback 'n EFL Lea"ne"s* Levels '( Le,ical

Res'u"ce and !"a##atical Range and Accu"ac- in T%ei" O"al "'(icienc-

Year : 2013

Researcher (s) : ans#r ahi"- 5h!D and rteza ntazeri

Objective This research tried t investigate the +rbable i"+act f "etaling#isticfeedback n the "eas#re f learners level n le'ical res#rce and

gra""atical range and acc#rac$ in 6* learners s+eaking!

&nte't : Thirt$ "ale and fe"ale fr" 17 t 28 age as +artici+ants ere selected

fr" a"ng 100 st#dents at ler%inter"ediate level f +rficienc$ based

n 6*TS s+eaking test ith gaining scre 8!8! The instr#"ents #sed

+retest- +sttest and scring scale b$ #sing 6*TS s+eaking test and

6*TS s+eaking band descri+tr! The thirt$ +artici+ants ere divided int

t gr#+s, e'+eri"ental gr#+ h received "etaling#istic feedback fr

20 h#rs and cntrl gr#+ h received n crrective feedback fr 20

h#rs!


ain St#d$ : This st#d$ fc#s in e'+lring the i"+act f "etaling#istic crrective

feedback a"ng vari#s t$+es f crrective feedback n le'ical and

gra""atical range and acc#rac$ in 6* learners s+eaking!

indings : 1! 9$ c"+aring the "ean scre f ral achieve"ent at the levels f

fl#enc$ and gra""atical range and acc#rac$ n +retest and +sttest-

crrective feedback have better +erfr"ance in +st treat"ent stage!2! The finding reveals that crrective feedback is needed in class in rder

t i"+rve the ral achieve"ent fr 6* learners!

Strength : This research cncl#des that #sing nl$ ne t$+e f crrective feedback is

fake and +racticall$ i"+ssible! :ever- a certain t$+e f crrective

feedback c#ld be the d"inant hich 6* learners ere availed f! Als-

the researchers e'+lain clearl$ ab#t h t give crrective feedback in

the class! r e'a"+le- teacher can +rvide +eer crrective feedback and

let st#dents crrect each ther! Anther a$ is that learners sh#ld nt be

b"barded ith "#ch feedback beca#se the$ said that it ill de"tivate

st#dents t s+eak!

4eaknesses : This research des nt +rvide the test scre in fl#enc$ hereas the

researchers state that the$ had c"+ared the "ean f gr#+s ra

achieve"ent at the level f fl#enc$! Als- this research des nt +rvide


3/17

an$ e"+irical data ab#t cntrl gr#+ h receive n feedback at all!

The researchers nl$ fc#s n "eas#ring acc#rac$ and le'ical res#rce!

/. +'#&a"ing t%e E((ects '( Recast vs. 0i"ect Feedback 'n EFL tudents* "'nunciati'n

Accu"ac-

Year : 2018

Researcher (s) : arzi$eh Abedi- *tfllah ;ari"i- and Ali


4/17

2. T%e I#&act '( Reducti'n Recasts 'n t%e I#&"'ve#ent '( EFL Lea"ne"s* &eaking Abilit-

Year : 2010

Researcher (s) : R'ana A"inzadeh and Saeideh

Objective This st#d$ tried t discver the i"+act f red#ctin recasts n the

i"+rve"ent f the s+eaking abilit$ and n the re+aired gra""atica

#+take rates f ranian nter"ediate level 6* learners!

&nte't : This st#d$ as cnd#cted at 6nglish lang#age schl in Tehran! The

+artici+ants ere inter"ediate level and rand"l$ divided int

e'+eri"ental and cntrl gr#+s! 2> st#dents ere selected int

e'+eri"ental gr#+s and 28 st#dents ere incl#ded int cntrl gr#+!

The instr#"ents in this st#d$ #sed lang#age +rficienc$ test- s+eaking

+retest- and s+eaking +sttest! The researchers did +ilting the lang#age

+rficienc$ test ith =1 st#dents at inter"ediate level!


ain St#d$ :This st#d$ fc#s in investigating the difference beteen red#ctin recastsand nn%red#ctin recast in i"+rving the s+eaking abilit$ f 6* class!

Als- this st#d$ intended t see the res#lts f re+aired gra""atical #+take

beteen red#ctin recast and nn%red#ctin recast!

indings : 1! The res#lts shed that e'+eri"ental gr#+ had a better i"+rve"ent

than cntrl gr#+ b$ #sing red#ctin recast and it gave significantl$

+sitive effect n 6* inter"ediate st#dents s+eaking abilit$!2! The c"+arisn f re+aired gra""atical #+take beteen the

e'+eri"ental and cntrl gr#+s indicated that e'+eri"ental gr#+ did

res#lt in a greater a"#nt than cntrl gr#+!

Strength : This research did detail in cllecting data! :ere- the$ did +ilting test

Then- the$ did intra%rater and inter%rater reliabilit$ in scring the test! ?e't

the$ tried t check the h"geneit$ bth e'+eri"ental and cntrl gr#+s

After that- the$ #sed t%test anal$sis fr s+eaking +sttest t see the "ean

scre bth t gr#+s! *astl$- the$ c"+ared the "ean scre bth t


5/17

gr#+s ab#t re+aired gra""atical #+take!

4eaknesses : This research nl$ shs the res#lt f st#dents res+nse (#+take) f

recast in scre! 4e need t read st#dents +erce+tin f recast itself! n

this case- the researcher "a$ give .#estinnaire t kn the st#dents

res+nse ab#t the effectiveness f recast!

3. A 0esc"i&tive tud- 'n +'""ective Feedback and Lea"ne"s* U&take du"ing Inte"acti'n in a

+'##unicative EFL +lass

Year : 2013

Researcher (s) : 5arvin Safari

Objective This st#d$ tried t discver- describe- and anal$ze the disc#rse +atternsf crrective feedback and #+take hich cc#rred in ranian 6* class

and als see the relatinshi+ t the learners #+take and self%re+air!

&nte't : This st#d$ as cnd#cted in ranians schl in ;#ait! The +artici+ants

ere teacher (3@%$ear%ld) h had ta#ght in the "inistr$ f 6d#catin f

ran and 17 st#dents f bth genders (13 t 17 $ears ld)! The instr#"ents

#sed a#di%ta+e- transcri+tin- and te'tbk!

Research Design : Descri+tive design

ain St#d$ : This st#d$ fc#s in identif$ing the +atterns f crrective feedback and their

effects n learners #+take! Als- the researcher tried t reveal the

fre.#enc$ and distrib#tin f the & t$+es in relatin t learner #+take!

indings : 1! The res#lts revealed that recast is the "st +referred techni.#e in

giving crrective feedback b$ the teacher alth#gh the techni.#e has a

little efficient t get st#dents re+air t the high rates!2! This st#d$ revealed that clarificatin re.#est- elicitatin- re+etitin- and

e'+licit crrectin hich have s#ccessf#ll$ gt st#dents re+air are rarel$

a++lied!3! The finding stated that "etaling#istic feedback as ineffective at

eliciting learners #+take in adlescent c""#nicative 6* cnte't!

Strength : The researcher +rvides s#ggestin ab#t h t give crrectin in

teaching c""#nicative 6* cnte't!


6/17

4eaknesses : This st#d$ desnt incl#de an intervie st#d$ r an$ .#estinnaire t kn

hether st#dents +refer t the crrectin r nt! This st#d$ j#st fc#s in its

interactins as in the title "entined! 9eca#se- res+nses fr" the

st#dents are i"+rtant t kn hich sh#ld be best crrectin a++lied b$

the teacher fr l%inter"ediate level!

4. T%e E((ect '( Metalinguistic +'""ective Feedback 'n tudents* W"iting e"('"#ance

Year : 2018

Researcher (s) :Ali ;hdi and Sahar Abbasi Sardari

Objective This st#d$ tried t investigate the effect f giving crrective feedback n

st#dents +erfr"ance in 6* riting classes!

&nte't : This st#d$ as cnd#cted at riting classes in ranian niversit$! The

+artici+ants ere inter"ediate level and rand"l$ divided int

e'+eri"ental and cntrl gr#+s! 83 st#dents ere +artici+ated in this

st#d$ bth fe"ale and "ale- in hich the$ are "ajring 6nglish literat#re

The instr#"ents in this st#d$ #sed &a"bridge 6nglish 5rficienc$ test

(&65- +re%test and +st%tests! The indicatr fr final +erfr"ance- it as#sed riting +erfr"ance! There ere three gr#+s #sed in this st#d$!

The$ ere t e'+eri"ental gr#+s that ne received f#c#sed

etaling#istic crrective feedback and ther received #nfc#sed

etaling#istic crrective feedback! The cntrl gr#+ received the

traditinal instr#"ents! The length f instr#ctin fr all gr#+s as 12

sessins!


ain St#d$ : This st#d$ investigated the effect bth #nfc#sed and fc#sed f"etaling#istic crrective feedback and c"+are ith traditinal teaching!

indings : 1! This st#d$ s#ggest that giving fc#sed & is better than giving

#nfc#sed &!2! The e'+eri"ental gr#+s shed a better +erfr"ance than the cntrl

gr#+ after receiving crrective feedback in riting instr#ctin! Als- it

increases bth aareness and attentin f learners!


7/17

Strength : This st#d$ elabrated their finding ith the +revi#s st#d$ and +rvides

s#ggestin hich best techni.#e fr teaching riting is!

4eaknesses : The riting test is nt clearl$ described! t is nl$ stated that the$ #se +re%

test and +st%test! .#estin is it hether r nt the test is taken fr" &65

test! 9eca#se- the$ j#st "entin the &65 is nl$ #sed fr checking at the

h"geneit$ f the sa"+le!


8/17

5. E,&licit Recast6 I#&licit Recast6 and t%e Ac7uisiti'n '( Englis% N'un lu"al8 A +'#&a"ative

tud-

Year : 2010

Researcher (s) : &hen Bh#

Objective This st#d$ e'a"ined the effect f e'+licit and i"+licit recast n the

ac.#isitin f 6nglish n#n +l#ral b$ &hinese 6* learners!

&nte't : This st#d$ as cnd#cted at


9/17

9. Investigating t%e E((ects '( T%"ee T-&es '( +'""ective Feedback 'n t%e Ac7uisiti'n '(

Englis% W%7uesti'n F'"#s b- I"anian EFL Lea"ne"s

Year : 2011

Researcher (s) : 6hsan Rassaei Ah"ad inzadeh

Objective This st#d$ as ai"ed t e'a"ine the i""ediate and dela$ed effects f

three t$+es f crrective feedback s#ch as recast- "etaling#istic feedback

and clarificatin re.#ests that fc#sed n the ac.#isitin f 6nglish 4h%

.#estin fr"s!

&nte't : This st#d$ as cnd#cted in ran that invlved 13= ranian 6* learners

(>8 fe"ales and 8E "ales) h ere #niversit$ st#dents ith a "ean age

f 20!2 $ears and the$ ere divided int = classes! There ere threeclasses as the e'+eri"ental gr#+s that received feedback and ne class

as the cntrl gr#+ that received n feedback! The instr#"ents f this

research ere +re%test- +st%test and dela$ed +st%test! The test as

"ade #+ f 30 ite"s targeting h%.#estin fr"s fr the e'+eri"ental

gr#+s and 18 distracters (targeted at negatin- +ast tense Fed

c"+arative Fer- +l#ral Fs)! The +re%test as cnd#cted ne da$ befre

the treat"ent! The +st%test and dela$ed +st%test ere cnd#cted ne

da$ after the treat"ent finished and 10 da$s later res+ectivel$!

Research Design : A .#asi%e'+eri"ental design

ain St#d$ : This st#d$ investigated the effectiveness f three t$+es f crrective

feedback na"el$ recast- "etaling#istic and clarificatin re.#est that

fc#sed n the ac.#isitin f 4h%.#estin fr"s thr#gh three ti"e

intervals (+re%test- +st%test and dela$ed +st%test)

indings : 1! This st#d$ f#nd that "etaling#istic feedback as "re effective than

recast in the i""ediate +st%test hile in the dela$ed +st%test!2! Recast feedback shed "re stable and end#ring effect tard

learners +erfr"ance!3! &larificatin re.#est had n significant effect n learners +erfr"ance!

Strength : st f st#dies investigate the effectiveness f recast and "etaling#istic

feedback- b#t b$ invlving clarificatin re.#est t$+e can cntrib#te t the

6nglish lang#age teaching!


10/17

4eaknesses : This st#d$ des nt disc#ss dee+l$ the res#lt and elabrate the" ith the

ther$ r +revi#s st#dies! Als- this st#d$ desnt "entin the st#dents

level that invlved in this st#d$ hether the$ are inter"ediate level r nt!

:. T%e investigati'n '( 0i((e"ential E((ects '( Recast and Metalinguistic Feedback 'nAccu"ac-6 Fluenc-6 and +'#&le,it- '( &eaking e"('"#ance '( Male and Fe#ale EFL

Lea"ne"s

Year : 2013

Researcher (s) : R$a


11/17

s+eaking test fr +re%test and +st%test! 4e need t kn h "an$

raters it is #sed! Als- the inter%rater reliabilit$ is i"+rtant t be calc#lated

in rder t see the cnsistenc$ f the raters in their rating!

1;.T%e +'#&a"ative E((ect '( ee" Metalinguistic +'""ective Feedback 'n Ele#enta"- and

Inte"#ediate EFL Lea"ne"s* &eaking Abilit-

Year : 2013

Researcher (s) : 9ehdkht all%A"iri Aghdas :esa"i

Objective This st#d$ ai"ed t c"+are the effect f +eer "etaling#istic crrective

feedback n ele"entar$ and inter"ediate 6* learners s+eaking abilit$!

&nte't : This st#d$ as cnd#cted in Al%zahra :igh Schl in ;er"anshah- ran!

The s#bjects f this research ere 7> +artici+ants (38 ele"entar$ and 32

inter"ediate) fr" selecting rand"l$ 11> fe"ale 6* learners at grade 3-

Alzahra :igh Schl in ;er"anshah- ran! The$ ere selected as the

e'+eri"ental gr#+ based n the btained scre in a 56T (5reli"inar$

6nglish Test) test! The interval scre =8%7E ere selected as the

ele"entar$ gr#+ and >0%@E ere incl#ded in the inter"ediate gr#+! The

instr#"ents f this research ere 56T- Te't bks- treat"ent and +st%

test (anther 56T test)! Rating scale f the 56T s+eaking test (0%3) as#sed t rate the +artici+ants +re%test and +st%test +erf"ances incl#ding

five criteria s#ch as gra""ar and vcab#lar$- disc#rse "anage"ent-

+rn#nciatin- interactive c""#nicatin and glbal achieve"ent!

Research Design : A c"+arative st#d$ design

ain St#d$ This st#d$ tried t find #t hich level f learners are benefited fr" the

t$+e f crrective feedback n s+eaking abilit$!!

indings The res#lt shed that inter"ediate learners ere "re significantl$benefited fr" the t$+e f crrective feedback than the ele"entar$ gr#+!

Strength : The res#lt f this research s#++rt the clai"s that teacher sh#ld +rvide

different st#dents ith different kinds f feedback cnsidering their needs-

+rficienc$ level- age and classr" bjectives (Tedick de


12/17

4eaknesses : 9eca#se this st#d$ #sed s+eaking sectin f 56T- there as n

e'+lanatin ab#t the reliabilit$ f the t raters in rder the$ have the

sa"e agree"ent in giving scre! nter%rater and intra%rater reliabilit$ is

i"+rtant t be "eas#red!

11. T%e E((ect '( i, 0i((e"ent +'""ective Feedback t"ategies 'n I"anian Englis% Language

Lea"ne"s* IELT W"iting Task $

Year : 201=

Researcher (s) : Reza Hahdani Sanavi ajid ?e"ati

Objective This st#d$ ai"ed t find #t h nternatinal 6nglish *ang#age Testing

S$ste" (6*TS) candidates c#ld be hel+ed t +erfr" better in the

riting c"+nent f the test ith the feedback given!

&nte't : The +artici+ants f this research ere 1@7 9AI9S and AIS st#dents at

different #niversities accrss the c#ntr$! The$ ere jining 6*TS t enter

#niversities abrad here the "edi#" f instr#ctin is 6nglish! The

+artici+ants ere selected fr" the three different instit#tes here the$

ere in the range f 21%38 $ears f age! The instr#"ent f this research

as 6*TS 4riting Task 2!

Research Design : A .#asi%e'+eri"ental design

ain St#d$ : This st#d$ investigated hether r nt crrective feedback strategies

(clarificatin re.#est- e'+licit feeback- recasts- "etaling#istic feedback

elicitatin and re+etitin) affects the riting abilit$ f the ranian 6*TS

candidates riting +erfr"ance in Task 2!

indings The res#lt f this research revealed that there as an i"+rve"ent f

riting abilit$ f ranian 6* learners in the light f the i"+le"entatin fcrrective feedback strategies! :ever- the "st effective strateg$ as

refr"#latin strateg$!

Strength : This research filled the ga+ fr" the +revi#s st#dies f crrective

feedback n s+eaking skill! This research fc#sed n investigating the

i"+rve"ent f the learners riting abilit$ thr#gh si' different t$+es f


13/17

crrective feedback!t benefits fr the teacher t kn h t tackle the

learners inacc#rate +rd#ctins as far as cncerning the different riting

scre band descri+trrs!

4eaknesses : The researcher sh#ld cnd#ct dela$ed +st%test t check hether r nt

there as +rbable effect f ti"e!

1$. E((ects '( Teac%e"*s +'""ective Feedback 'n Accu"ac- in t%e O"al Englis%Ma


14/17

effectiveness fr different level f learner is different! edi#" and l

gr#+ sh a better effectiveness beca#se there is en#gh s+ace fr the

learners t be i"+rved!=! r high gr#+ learners- their ral acc#rac$ is better b#t the$ sh#ld

i"+rve their ral fl#enc$ and c"+le'it$!

Strength : st f st#dies n crrective feedback nl$ e"+l$ed +re%test and +st%

test- b#t this research als e"+l$ed intervie and classr"bservatin!

4eaknesses : There as n clear e'+lanatin ab#t the criteria f ral achieve"ent that

#ld be "eas#red! Als- the researcher des nt elabrate dee+l$ the

findings f the research ith the +revi#s st#dies!

1/.An investigati'n '( #etalinguistic c'""ective (eedback in ="iting &e"('"#anceYear : 2013

Researcher (s) : sar


15/17

Strength : The researcher anal$zes the data ell! t e"+l$s ?elsn +rficienc$ test

t deter"ine the sa"+le and t see the h"gene#s f the st#dents-

anal$ze the inter%rater reliabilit$- and c"+aring +retest and +sttest

scres b$ #sing t%test!

4eaknesses : This st#d$ desnt e"+l$ the dela$ed +sttest! t is i"+rtant t check

hether there is the +rbable effect f ti"e r nt! Als- there as n clear

e'+lanatin ab#t s"e +revi#s st#dies that ere related t this

research!

12.An Investigati'n int' >'= EFL Lea"ne"s E#'ti'nall- Res&'nd t' Teac%e"s* O"al +'""ective

Feedback

Year : 2013

Researcher (s) : M#an de Dis artinez Ag#d

Objective This st#d$ ai"ed t anal$ze h 6* learners e"tinall$ res+nd t the

ral feedback +rcess in *2 classr"s and t hat e'tent find teachers

ral feedback "a$ infl#ence their "tivatin and attit#des tards l2

learning!

&nte't : This st#d$ as cnd#cted at Secndar$ schl in 4estern S+ain! The

+artici+ants ere rand"l$ selected fr" t classes in each schl! 21>

st#dents fr" secndar$ schl ere +artici+ated in this investigatin!

After giving 21> .#estins- E .#estinnaires are invalid hich it is failed t

fll the instr#ctin f .#estinnaire! The level f the st#dents as #++er

inter"ediate based n the s#rve$ that the$ had st#died 6nglish fr an

average f 1= $ears! The instr#"ent #sed shrt 10Nite" .#estinnaire!&ntent anal$sis and +ilt test as cnd#cted t ens#re the reliabilit$ and

validit$ f the .#estinnaire!

Research Design : Descri+tive design

:

ain St#d$ : This st#d$ investigated the a$ f teacher in +rviding ral crrective


16/17

feedback and h 6* learners +erceive r res+nd t the ral feedback

+rcess!

:

indings : 1! st res+ndents ad"itted the need and the benefit fr" ra

feedback! t is s#ggested that ral feedback is i"+rtant t devel+

interlang#age c"+etence!

: 2! An'iet$ gave a negative effect t the learners!

: 3! There as a different a$ fr" the learners e"tinall$ res+nd t

teachers ral crrective feedback!

:

Strength : The .#estinnaire has been +ilted t see the reliabilit$ and validit$! This

st#d$ als gives s#ggestin t the f#t#re research!

4eaknesses : This st#d$ sh#ld +rvide the intervie st#d$ t kn dee+l$ ab#t

st#dents res+nd!

13.T%e e((ect '( O"al Inte"active Feedback 'n t%e Accu"ac- and +'#&le,it- '( EFL lea"ne"s*

="iting &e"('"#ance8 U&take and Retenti'n

Year : 201=

Researcher (s) : R$a Akbarzadeh- ahnaz Saeidi- and ahtaj &hehrer

Objective

This st#d$ investigated the effect f Oral interactive feedback (O) n the

acc#rac$ and c"+le'it$ f ranian inter"ediate 6* learners riting!

&nte't : This st#d$ as cnd#cted at sla"ic Azad niversit$ in Tabriz 9ranch! The

+artici+ants ere 80 st#dents and rand"l$ divided int t gr#+s

na"el$ O gr#+ and e'+licit feedback (6) gr#+! O gr#+ received

elicitatin and "etaling#istic cl#es and 6 gr#+ receive ral e'+licit

crrectin! The st#dents level as inter"ediate level and the$ are

s+h"re st#dents! The instr#"ent #sed a standard +rficienc$ testna"el$ 5reli"inar$ 6nglish Test (56T)- +re%test and +st%test- and riting

task!


ain St#d$ : This st#d$ investigate the significant difference beteen O gr#+ and


17/17

6 gr#+ n ranian 6* learners ritten acc#rac$ and c"+le'it$ in

i""ediate re+air f errrs n revised c"+sitins- indicating #+take- and

n the +st%test- indicating retentin- #sing elicitatin and "etalng#istic

cl#es!

:

indings : 1! This st#d$ revealed that the st#dents ritten acc#rac$ in revised

c"+sitins as significantl$ affected b$ O!2! The res#lt f this st#d$ revealed that O has a significant effect n the

ritten acc#rac$ f the +artici+ants n the +st%test in the O gr#+ in

c"+arisn ith the 6 gr#+!3! The findings- regarding the c"+le'it$ f riting- revealed that there

as a significant difference beteen O and 6 gr#+s n revised

c"+sitins and the +st test!

Strength : This st#d$ crrelates their findings ith the +revi#s st#d$! Als- the

+rced#re f cllecting and anal$zing the data are ell%str#ct#red s#ch as

ding +rficienc$ test- finding the h"geneit$ f bth gr#+s

ad"inistering +retest and +st%test and ding treat"ent fr 8 sessins!

4eaknesses : This st#d$ didnt cnd#ct a +ilt st#d$ t test the instr#"ents!

my journal review.docx

Documents