حمید مرعشی

The current study adopted a qualitative-quantitative design to compare the effects of output-based production (OBP) and input enhancement (IE) as two teaching techniques on a group of EFL learners’ writing and also to seek those learners’ perceptions on the two instruction procedures. Accordingly, 65 intermediate learners were selected through convenience nonrandom sampling from among 94 students in intact classes based on their performance on a sample proficiency test (the test had already been piloted among 30 learners). These 65 learners were subsequently divided into two groups consisting of 33 learners in the OBP group and 32 in the IE group. The researchers also made sure that the learners in both groups were homogeneous in terms of their writing prior to the treatment. Next, the treatment in both groups commenced. Once the treatment was over, the researchers gave both groups the same writing posttest. The results of the statistical analysis indicated that the IE group outperformed the OBP group significantly in their writing. The participants further sat for a semi-structured interview comprising five questions about their perception regarding both instructions which demonstrated that the IE group was generally more satisfied with the course than the OBP group. The findings of this study suggest more attention to the incorporation of IE in both English language schools and pre- and in-service teacher training programs.

This research tried to probe the effects of incorporating learners’ preferred learning styles in instructions on their narrative writing development and their mental patterns and imagination. 74 homogeneous secondary EFL learners were divided into three groups based on their sensory styles of visual, auditory and tactile. The learners in the three groups were provided with instructions anchored to their learning styles. In the meantime, they were required to produce narrative writings on a number of topics in accordance with their course book. Prior to narrating, they had to think loudly and record their voices to reveal the approach and pattern they utilize for performing the required activities. Their voices were transcribed and later analyzed by the researchers for further investigations. The obtained results displayed a significant improvement in their writings as well as an ongoing progress of their thinking patterns. Furthermore, the data revealed the dominant mental approaches of top-down, considering the whole plot of the topic in advance, and bottom-up, considering the details prior to the entire story, used by the students. The study also displayed the positive impact of instruction on the improvement of learners’ narrative writing revealing their self-imaging of the plot with which they could narrate the given topics in accordance with their own life experiences and understanding.

This research tried to probe the effects of incorporating learners’ preferred learning styles in instructions on their narrative writing development and their mental patterns and imagination. 74 homogeneous secondary EFL learners were divided into three groups based on their sensory styles of visual, auditory and tactile. The learners in the three groups were provided with instructions anchored to their learning styles. In the meantime, they were required to produce narrative writings on a number of topics in accordance with their course book. Prior to narrating, they had to think loudly and record their voices to reveal the approach and pattern they utilize for performing the required activities. Their voices were transcribed and later analyzed by the researchers for further investigations. The obtained results displayed a significant improvement in their writings as well as an ongoing progress of their thinking patterns. Furthermore, the data revealed the dominant mental approaches of top-down, considering the whole plot of the topic in advance, and bottom-up, considering the details prior to the entire story, used by the students. The study also displayed the positive impact of instruction on the improvement of learners’ narrative writing revealing their self-imaging of the plot with which they could narrate the given topics in accordance with their own life experiences and understanding.

The present study sought to compare the effect of two modes of corrective feedback, that is, recast and elicitation, on the speaking accuracy of impulsive and reflective EFL learners. In doing so, 95 intermediate EFL learners who were studying at Tehran's Kish Language School were selected through nonrandom convenience sampling and sat for the Impulsivity Sub-Scale of Eysenck's Impulsive Questionnaire (EIQ). A total of 15 learners who were within the middle range were excluded, thus leaving 80 impulsive and reflective learners. Subsequently, a sample PET speaking test was administered as the pretest to assess the participants' speaking accuracy at the outset. Next, the participants were divided into four subgroups: 20 impulsive and 22 reflective learners undergoing a recast treatment, and 18 impulsive and 20 reflective participants experiencing elicitation. Once the 16-session treatment ended, another sample PET speaking test was administered as the posttest, and all four hypotheses were tested through a two-way analysis of covariance. The findings demonstrated that both recast and elicitation were significantly effective in improving the participants' speaking accuracy, while the elicitation impulsive group benefited the most compared to others. The pedagogical implications of this research and suggestions for further study are elaborated in the paper.

Ever since its introduction, the flipped learning approach has demonstrated promising results in English language teaching. To this end, the goal of the present study was to compare the effectiveness of flipped learning on speaking in two different cooperative and competitive EFL learning settings. To conduct the study, the researchers selected 60 learners through nonrandom convenience sampling and subsequently randomly assigned them into two experimental groups of 30 learners, namely the flipped learning cooperative and the flipped learning competitive groups. Both groups underwent the same flipped learning treatment; the point of departure, however, was the fact that in one group the learners exercised cooperative learning while the other group experienced competitive learning. Prior to the treatment, all 60 learners took a speaking pretest (a sample Preliminary English Test or PET) and after the treatment, a posttest (another sample PET) was administered to them. An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was run on the two groups’ scores on the pre- and posttest. The result of the study indicated that the learners sitting in the flipped cooperative group outperformed those in the flipped competitive group. The implications of the findings of this study are elaborated in the paper.