زهرا قلی پور

  this thesis study elaborates on the importance of MI theory and the appropriate type of corrective feedback for learners with different MI profiles. Therefore the present study has employed a mixed-methods research design with the aim to compare the oral improvements of students with high mathematical and linguistic intelligences after being exposed to recast and meta-linguistic feedback. Furthermore. It aimed to analyze the learners’ preferences on the CF type provided in the EFL classroom according to their dominant type of intelligence. Another aim of this research study was to investigate the reasons why certain type of CF is more favored by EFL learners. To fulfill the aims of the study ۷۵ EFL learner completed the MI Inventory and OPT questionnaires. ۵۰ students were selected and assigned into two different recast and metalinguistic feedback classes. Each of these classes took a pre-test which included a PET speaking test. Then during ۱۲ sessions of treatment, the students were asked to perform similar speaking tasks based on their course books and the teacher provided each class with one type of above mentioned CF types. After the interventions the students took the same speaking test as the post-test. Finally, to gather the qualitative data of the study, a semi-structured interview was conducted to elicit the learners’ own CF preferences and the rationales behind their choices. ۱۴ students took part in the interview half of them were linguistically intelligent learners while the other half were mathematically intelligent ones. The results of the quantitative data analysis demonstrated that Among CF types metalinguistic feedback affected the oral performance of the learners in both mathematical and linguistic groups while recast positively while recast did not have any influence on the learners. Moreover learners with linguistic intelligence outperformed the learners with mathematical intelligence after being exposed to metalinguistic feedback. Hence, it can be concluded that metalinguistic feedback was more affective regardless of the learners’ intelligence types. However metalinguistic feedback was more beneficial for learners with linguistic intelligence. Furthermore, the results of the qualitative phase of the study indicated that in general most of the learners with mathematical and linguistic intelligence preferred metalinguistic feedback over recast since it helps them be aware of their mistakes directly and in a clear way.