effects of exemplar-based, rule-based, and analogy-based written corrective feedback on iranian intermediate efl learners’ writing

Rested in analogical theories of learning and syntactic configuration in discourse, this study attempted to explore the efficiency of rule-based, exemplar-based, and analogy-based corrective feedback in the writings of iranian efl learners regarding the third- person singular’ s. to this aim, three intact classes, each containing 25 students, were assigned to analogy-based, rule-based and exemplar-based groups at random in which the teacher accentuated the learners’ errors by different feedback types. post-tests (immediate and delayed) were used to test the learners’ acquisition of the target grammar under question and the efficacy of corrective feedback varying in mode. the results of the study indicated significant delayed gains for analogy-based corrective feedback. no evident gain was found for exemplar-based or rule-based types. descriptive statistics demonstrate diverse patterns over progressive testing times, where, unlike the other two corrective feedback types, the analogy-based group displayed the worst performance on the immediate post-test but nonetheless exhibited advances and progress on the delayed post-test.