Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-8bbf57454-khjsh Total loading time: 1.226 Render date: 2022-01-24T06:20:09.518Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

4 - Corrective Feedback from a Sociocultural Perspective

from Part I - Theoretical Perspectives on Corrective Feedback

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2021

Hossein Nassaji
Affiliation:
University of Victoria, British Columbia
Eva Kartchava
Affiliation:
Carleton University, Ottawa
Get access

Summary

This chapter examines the role of corrective feedback from a sociocultural perspective. Much of the theoretical argument for feedback and the role of negotiation has been within a cognitive or cognitive-interactionist approach. However, another theoretical framework for understanding the role of feedback comes from the Vygotskian sociocultural theory. This chapter begins with a discussion of this theoretical view, its underlying concepts, and their contributions to our understanding of the role of language, interaction, and the field of error correction. It then reviews corrective feedback research conducted within this framework. The studies reviewed include those that have examined various premises of the sociocultural theory as they relate to corrective feedback and also those that have compared feedback when conceptualized within a cognitive-interactionist perspective and feedback when conceptualized within a sociocultural perspective. The chapter concludes with implications of the issues discussed for effective corrective feedback practices in language classrooms.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aljaafreh, A. & Lantolf, J. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. Modern Language Journal, 78(4), 465483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appel, G. & Lantolf, J. (1994). Vygotskian approaches to second language research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Bliss, J., Askew, M. & Macrae, S. (1996). Effective teaching and learning: Scaffolding revisited. Oxford Review of Education, 22(1) 3761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. London: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davin, K. & Donato, R. (2013). Student collaboration and teacher-directed classroom dynamic assessment: A complementary pairing. Foreign Language Annals, 46(1), 522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In Lantolf, J. & Appel, G. (eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 3359). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197261). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1, 218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engin, M. (2012). Trainer talk: Levels of intervention. ELT journal, 67(1), 1119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erlam, R., Ellis, R. & Batstone, R. (2013). Oral corrective feedback on L2 writing: Two approaches compared. System, 41(2), 257268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lantolf, J. (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. (2006). Sociocultural theory and L2: State of the art. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(1), 67109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lantolf, J. & Poehner, M. (2007). Dynamic assessment of L2 development: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 1(1), 4972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lantolf, J., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J., & Thorne, S. L. (2007). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. In. van Patten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 201224). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. & Bhatia, T. (eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413468). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Marchenkova, L. (2005). Language, culture, and self: The Bakhtin – Vygotsky encounter. In Hall, J. K., Vitanova, G. & Marchenkova, L. (eds.), Dialogue with Bakhtin on second and foreign language learning (pp. 171188). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R. & Myles, F. (1998). Second language learning theories (2nd ed.). London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2007). Reactive focus on form through negotiation on learners’ written errors. In Fotos, S. & Nassaji, H. (eds.), Form focused instruction and teacher education: Studies in honour of Rod Ellis (pp. 117129). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2011). Correcting students’ written grammatical errors: The effects of negotiated versus nonnegotiated feedback. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 1(3), 315334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2013). Interactional feedback: Insights from theory and research. In Benati, A., Laval, C. & Arche, M. (eds.), The grammar dimension in instructed second language learning: Theory, research and practice (pp. 103123). London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2015). Interactional feedback dimension in instructed second language learning. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2016). Anniversary article: Interactional feedback in second language teaching and learning: A synthesis and analysis of current research. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 535562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2017). Negotiated oral feedback in response to written errors. In Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications (pp. 114128). New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nassaji, H. & Cumming, A. (2000). What’s in a ZPD? A case study of a young ESL student and teacher interacting through dialogue journals. Language Teaching Research, 4(2), 95121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nassaji, H. & Swain, M. (2000). Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2: The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness, 9(1), 3451.Google Scholar
Ohta, A. (2000). Rethinking interaction in SLA: Developmentally appropriate assistance in the zone of proximal development and the acquisition and L2 grammar. In Lantolf, J. (ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 5178). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ohta, A. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language learning, 44(3), 493527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second language development: Processability theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M. (2005). Discussing processability theory. In Pienemann, M. (ed.), Crosslinguistic aspects of processability theory (pp. 61–83). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poehner, M. (2008). Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2 development. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poehner, M. (2009). Group dynamic assessment: Mediation for the L2 classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 43(3), 471491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahimi, M., Kushki, A. & Nassaji, H. (2015). Diagnostic and developmental potentials of dynamic assessment for L2 writing. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 2(2), 185208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rassaei, E. (2014). Scaffolded feedback, recasts, and L2 development: A sociocultural perspective. Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 417431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Van den Branden, K. (1997). Effects of negotiation on language learners’ output. Language Learning, 47(4), 589636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verity, D. P. (2005). Vygotskian concepts for teacher education. In Lifelong learning: Proceedings of the 4th annual JALT Pan-SIG conference. May 14–15, 2005. Tokyo: Tokyo Keizai University.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). The genesis of higher mental functions. In Wertsch, J. V. (ed.), The concept of activity in soviet psychology (pp. 144188). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1988). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Vol. I: Problems of general psychology. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Wells, G. (2007). Semiotic mediation, dialogue and the construction of knowledge. Human Development, 50(5), 244274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Send book to Kindle

To send this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Send book to Dropbox

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Send book to Google Drive

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×