10
3.3 Error Free Clause Test
In response to the question asked as the writing test, the average time spent for reading the prompt was about 30 minutes, and as mentioned earlier, analysis of variance revealed no significant difference among the three groups. This shows that the participants spent about 30 minutes for reading and 30 minutes for writing.
Table 6 presents descriptive statistics for the number of error free clauses written in 100 words.
Table 6. Descriptive Statistics for the Error Free Clause Ratio Data
| Pretest | n | Posttest | n | Gain | |
| Group | M (SD) | M (SD) | |||
| JSG | 8.95 (3.56) | 34 | 12.19(2.67) | 32 | 3.24 |
| ESG | 8.05 (4.25) | 34 | 10.37(2.87) | 33 | 2.32 |
| Correction | 9.62 (3.26) | 36 | 11.30(1.87) | 36 | 1.67 |
JSG = Japanese summary group
ESG = English summary group
A one-way ANOVA showed no statistically significant differences among the groups, F(2,101) = 1.58, p = .21 on the number of error free clauses per 100 words on the pretest. A tests (pretest/posttest) by groups (three levels) repeated-measures ANOVA showed that there was a statistically significant difference within the participants (p = .00), but no statistically significant difference among the groups (p = .05) (Table 7). All groups improved to the same degree.
Table 7. A Repeated-Measures Two-Way Analysis of Variance on the EFC per 100 words Ratio Data
| df | SS | MS | F | p | |
| Between | 2 | 78.702 | 39.352 | 3.193 | .05 |
| Within | 1 | 291.829 | 291.829 | 38.334 | .00 |
| Interaction | 2 | 19.618 | 9.808 | 1.288 | .28 |
| Total | 5 | 390.149 |
10