From my understanding (or misunderstanding), interaction theory and comprehensible output theory claim some amount of language acquisition happens when students work out meaning together through dialogue like synchronous classroom communication.

I'm referring to students trying to work out the meaning of a sentence aloud with each other.

Example

A. What did you do yesterday?

B. I movies with my mom.

A. No, you should say, "I went to the movies with my mom.

B. Yes, thank you. I went to the movies.

I would say this type of output is more necessary with lower level student. But even at most with my lower level students, this type of direct feedback in class constituted 5 to 10 percent of dialogue in face to face communication and less than 1-3% of communication in asynchronous CMC.

I always found that most students would shut down after I gave feedback in mid-conversation. Instead, I usually echo back their ideas in correct form.

I ask this because I'm not seeing any knowledge-gaps or meaning-negotiation in student discussion board interactions (Facebook or LMS).

Is language learning through CMC properly explained by interaction or output theory? Is there a better alternative to explain how language learning can occur ther CMC interactions, besides the comprehensible output or interaction theories?