The effects of input enhancement and metalinguistic/collaborative awareness on the acquisition of plural-s : an ESL classroom experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated the effects of input enhancement techniques and metalinguistic/collaborative awareness on the acquisition of the plural -s morpheme. Additionally, the durability of these interventions on the target linguistic feature was examined. The two treatment groups and the comparison group consisted of 101 grade 5 students enrolled in a French-language school board in the Montreal area. A pretest-posttest design was used to assess participants before and after the treatments. A series of 8 oral and written treatment activities focusing on plural -s were specifically created for the study, which lasted 4 weeks. The findings demonstrate that both groups showed durable, definite intervention effects for written production. The metalinguistic/collaborative group significantly outperformed the input enhancement group in oral production, indicating that input enhancement in conjunction with metalinguistic awareness is effective. Nonetheless, the learning effect for oral production was found to be robust for both groups, 5 months after the end of the treatment period, as well as for a small subsample selected from each group 10 months later.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".