Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
  • Print publication year: 2021
  • Online publication date: February 2021

22 - Corrective Feedback in Second versus Foreign Language Contexts

from Part VI - Contexts of Corrective Feedback and Their Effects

Summary

This chapter summarizes the main findings regarding the effect of the variable instructional context on oral corrective feedback (CF) provision and learner uptake in second language (SL) and foreign language (FL) settings. Although there are other intervening variables in CF provision, such as learners’ individual variables, CF type, and task-related factors, instructional context seems to play an important role in the way teachers provide CF to oral errors, as well as in learners’ reaction to those errors. Lesson orientation appears to be a key factor and, thus, in those contexts that teachers, learners, and activities focus on language forms, such as FL settings, CF seems to be more effective, especially recasts. In classrooms that are more meaning- or content-oriented, such as SL, immersion or secondary school content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms, the rates of uptake are lower and more explicit CF types (such as metalinguistic information or elicitation) are needed. This review of the impact of context on CF provision and uptake leads to some pedagogical implications.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO
Alcón Soler, E. & García Mayo, M. P. (2008). Incidental focus on form and learning outcomes with young foreign language classroom learners. In Philp, J., Oliver &, R. Mackey, A. (eds.), Second language acquisition and the younger learner: Child’s play? (pp. 173192). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Amrhein, H. R. & Nassaji, H. (2010). Written corrective feedback: What do learners and teachers prefer and why? Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(2), 95127.
Choi, S. & Li, S. (2012). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in a child ESOL classroom. RELC Journal, 43(3), 331351.
Dabaghi, A. & Basturkmen, H. (2009). The effectiveness of implicit and explicit error correction on learners’ performance. System, 37(1), 8298.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content and language integrated learning: From practice to principles. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182204.
Dalton-Puffer, C. & Nikula, T. (2014). Content and language integrated learning (guest editorial). The Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 117122.
De Graaff, R., Koopman, G. J., Anikina, Y. & Westhoff, G. (2007). An observation tool for effective L2 pedagogy in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 603624.
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H. & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51(2), 281318.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S. & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339368.
Enever, J. (2018). Policy and politics in global primary English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fujii, A., Ziegler, N. & Mackey, A. (2016). Peer interaction and metacognitive instruction in the EFL classroom. In Sato, M. & Ballinger, S. (eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda (pp. 6389). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
García Mayo, M. P. (2017). Learning foreign languages in primary school: Research insights. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Goo, J. (2012). Corrective feedback and working memory capacity in interaction-driven SL learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(3), 445474.
Goo, J. & Mackey, A. (2013). The case against the case against recasts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(1), 127165.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. & Révész, A. (2012). Tasks, teacher feedback, and learner modified output in naturally occurring classroom interaction. Language Learning, 62(3), 851879.
Havranek, G. & Cesnik, H. (2001). Factors affecting the success of corrective feedback. In Foster-Cohen, S. & Nizegorodzew, A. (Eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook Volume 1 (pp.99122). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jafarigohara, M. & Gharbavib, A. (2014). Recast or prompt: Which one does the trick? Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 695703.
Kartchava, E. & Ammar, A. (2014). The noticeability and effectiveness of corrective feedback in relation to target type. Language Teaching Research, 18(4), 428452.
Lasagabaster, D. & Sierra, J. M. (2010). Immersion and CLIL in English: More differences than similarities. ELT Journal, 64(4), 376395.
Lee, E. (2013). Corrective feedback preferences and learner repair among advanced ESL learners. System, 41(2), 217230.
Li, S. (2017). Student and teacher beliefs and attitudes about oral corrective feedback. In Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning (pp. 143157). New York; London: Routledge.
Llinares, A. & Lyster, R. (2014). The influence of context on patterns of corrective feedback and learner uptake: A comparison of CLIL and immersion classrooms. The Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 181194.
Lochtman, K. (2002). Oral corrective feedback in the foreign language classroom: How it affects interaction in analytic foreign language teaching. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3), 271283.
Lochtman, K. (2007). Die mündliche Fehlerkorrektur in CLIL und im traditionellen Fremdsprachenunterricht: Ein Vergleich. In Dalton-Puffer, C. & Smit, U. (eds.), Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroom discourse (pp. 119138). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Lorenzo, F., Casal, S. & Moore, P. (2010). The effects of content and language integrated learning in European education: Key findings from the Andalusian bilingual sections evaluation project. Applied Linguistics, 31(3), 418442.
Lyster, R. (1998). Recasts, repetition and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(1), 5180.
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(3), 399432.
Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lyster, R. & Mori, H. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 269300.
Lyster, R. & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 3766.
Lyster, R. & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA. A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 265302.
Mackey, A. & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In Mackey, A. (ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 407472). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mackey, A., Gass, S. & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive interactional feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(4), 471497.
Mackey, A. & Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 338356.
Mifka-Profozic, N. (2014). Effectiveness of implicit negative feedback in a foreign language classroom. EUROSLA Yearbook, 14, 111142.
Milla, R. (2017). Corrective feedback episodes in CLIL and EFL classrooms: Teachers’ and learners’ beliefs and classroom behaviour. Unpublished doctoral thesis. University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Vitoria, Spain.
Milla, R. & García Mayo, M. P. (2014). Corrective feedback episodes in oral interaction: A comparison of a CLIL and an EFL classroom. International Journal of English Studies, 14(1), 120.
Mori, R. (2002). Teachers’ beliefs and corrective feedback. JALT Journal, 24(1), 4869.
Mori, R. (2011). Teacher cognition in corrective feedback in Japan. System, 39(4), 451467.
Muñoz, C. (2007). CLIL: Some thoughts on its psycholinguistic principles. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada (Models and practice in CLIL) Vol. Extra 1, 1726.
Nabei, T. & Swain, M. (2002). Learner awareness of recasts in classroom interaction: A case study of an adult EFL learner’s second language learning. Language Awareness. 11(1), 4363.
Nassaji, H. (2007). Elicitation and reformulation and their relationship with learner repair in dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 57(4), 511548.
Nassaji, H. (2011). Correcting students’ written grammatical errors: The effect of negotiated versus nonnegotiated feedback. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 1(3), 315334.
Nassaji, H. (2013). Participation structure and incidental focus on form in adult ESL classrooms. Language Learning, 63(4), 835869.
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.
Nassaji, H. (2019). The effects of recasts versus prompts on learning a complex target structure. In DeKeyser, R. & Botana, G. P. (eds.), (Doing) SLA research with implications for the classroom (reconciling methodological demands and pedagogical applicability) (pp. 107–126). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Nassaji, H. & Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching grammar in second language classrooms: Integrating form-focused instruction in communicative context. London: Routledge.
Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (eds.). (2017). Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning. Research, theory, applications, implications. New York; London: Routledge.
Oliver, R. & Grote, E. (2010). The provision and uptake of different types of recasts in child and adult ESL learners: What is the role of age and context? Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 33(3), 26.1–26.22.
Panova, I. & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36(4), 573595.
Philp, J. (2003). Constraints on noticing the gap: Nonnative speakers’ noticing of recasts in NS-NNS interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(1), 99126.
Pinter, A. (2011). Children learning second languages. Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Rassaei, S. (2014). Scaffolded feedback, recasts and L2 development: A sociocultural perspective. Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 417431.
Saito, K. & Lyster, R. (2012). Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of / ɹ / by Japanese learners of English. Language Learning, 62(2), 595633.
Samar, G. R. & Shayestefar, P. (2009). Corrective feedback in EFL classrooms: Learner negotiation strategies and uptake. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 212, 107134.
Sato, M. (2017). Oral peer corrective feedback. Multiple theoretical perspectives. In Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning. Research, theory, applications, implications (pp. 1934). New York; London: Routledge.
Sato, M. & Ballinger, S. (2012). Raising learner awareness in peer interaction. A cross-context, cross-method examination. Language Awareness, 21(12), 157179.
Sato, M. & Loewen, S. (2019). Towards evidence-based second language pedagogy: Research proposals and pedagogical recommendations. In Sato, M. & Loewen, S. (eds.), Evidence-based second language pedagogy: A collection of instructed second language acquisition studies (pp. 124). New York: Routledge.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in L2 learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129158.
Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8(3), 263300.
Sheen, Y. (2006). Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner uptake. Language Teaching Research, 10(4), 361392.
Sheen, Y. (2008). Recasts, language anxiety, modified output, and L2 learning. Language Learning, 58(4), 835874.
Spada, N. & Fröhlich, M. (1995). COLT. Communicative orientation of language teaching observation scheme: Coding conventions and applications. Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.
Tedick, D. J. & Cammarata, L. (2012). Content and language integration in K-12 contexts: Learner outcomes, teacher practices and stakeholder perspectives. Foreign Language Annals, 45(1), 2853.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Yang, Y. & Lyster, R. (2010). Effects of form-focused practice and feedback on Chinese EFL learners’ acquisition of regular and irregular past tense forms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 235263.
Yilmaz, Y. (2012). The relative effects of explicit correction and recasts on two target structures via two communication modes. Language Learning, 62(4), 11341169.
Yoshida, R. (2008). Teachers’ choice and learners’ preference of corrective-feedback types. Language Awareness, 17(1), 7893.