Does Language Aptitude Make a Difference? An Investigation of the Effect on Oral Accuracy through Corrective Feedback

Abstract

The aim of this study is to explore the effect of corrective feedback (prompts and recasts) on oral accuracy with the emphasis on language aptitude. The initial participants of this study were 120 male Iranian elementary learners (15–20 years old) studying English as a foreign language. Their language aptitude was measured by the Words in Sentence component of the Modern Language Aptitude Test-Elementary (MLAT-E) (2002). The Key English Test 2 (2003) was conducted as a placement test. 60 learners were selected using the results of placement and aptitude tests and randomly assigned into three groups (prompt, recast, control) each of them containing 20 members. The study followed placement test, MLAT-E, pre-test, treatment sessions, immediate post-test, and delayed post-test design. A mixed between-within subjects analysis of variance was conducted to assess the impact of prompts and recasts on participants’ oral accuracy across three time periods (pre-intervention, post-intervention, three weeks follow-up). The results showed that there was a statistically significant interaction between the use of corrective feedback and the time. The main effect comparing the two types of intervention was statistically significant suggesting a significant difference in the effectiveness of the two teaching approaches showing the superiority of prompts over recasts in post-tests. In the meantime, the results didn’t show any interaction between aptitude and feedback conditions in terms of target language accuracy.