You cut the straws into diferent lengths. Not thicknesses. T: here was a fox. Prompts, on the other hand, include a variety of signals, other than alternative reformulations, that push learners to self-repair i.
T: Once upon a time, there…? T: You need a comparative adjective. Clariication requests. T: Sorry? Jones travel a lot last year. T: Mrs. Jones travel a lot last year? However, classifying feedback categorically as either explicit or implicit has proven problematic. Comparing the efects of diferent types of interactional feedback is of theo- retical interest because they arguably provide diferent types of linguistic evidence positive or negative and thus engage learners in diferent levels of cognitive processing e.
Explicit correc- tion clearly provides both negative and positive evidence; prompts provide only negative evidence whereas recasts provide positive evidence and maybe negative evidence. Drawing on L1 acquisition studies such as those by Farrar , , some second language researchers support the efectiveness of recasts for second language development, hypothesizing that recasts create ideal opportunities for learners to notice the diference between their interlanguage forms and target-like reformulations e.
For example, Long argued that conversational moves such as recasts beneit second language develop- ment because they provide learners with a primary source of negative evidence. Braidi and Leeman suggested that recasts serve as exemplars of positive evidence, which facilitates the encoding of new tar- get representations.
However, in many discourse contexts occurring during communica- tive and content-based instruction, prompts that incite learners to switch their attention momentarily away from meaning toward form may be better suited than recasts to provide negative evidence.
Designing practice activities that are both communicative in purpose and controlled in the sense of requiring the use of speciic target forms is challenging in any instructional context, and this is where prompts play a central role Lyster Given their aim to elicit modiied output, prompts serve to scafold op- portunities for controlled practice in the context of communicative interaction.
De Bot argued that second language learners beneit more from being pushed to retrieve target language forms than from merely hearing the forms in the input, because retrieval and subsequent production stimulate the development of connections in memory. Classroom quasi-experimental studies1 have generally shown more beneits for prompts and explicit correction than for recasts. He found that form-focused instruction was more efective when combined with prompts than with recasts.
Also with young learners, Ammar and Spada investigated the potential beneits of recasts and prompts on the acquisition of possessive determiners by French-speaking ESL learners. Both groups receiving feedback showed superior performance compared to the control group and, furthermore, while the group 1. Pre-tests are given to all students in both groups just prior to the instructional treatments and immediate post-tests at the end of the instructional treatment.
Ideally, delayed post-tests are then administered several weeks later to assess the extent to students they maintained over time what they had learned. With adult learners, Ellis, Loewen, and Erlam investigated the diferen- tial efects of recasts and metalinguistic feedback i.
Results showed that metalin- guistic feedback was overall more efective than recasts and that the efect was found mostly in the delayed posttest rather than the immediate posttest. Sheen compared the efects of recasts and metalinguistic, which included the cor- rect form followed by metalinguistic explanation e.
Loewen and Nabei compared the efects of recasts, clariication requests, and meta- linguistic feedback, provided during meaning-focused tasks, on English question formation in a Japanese EFL context. In their com- parison of the efects of prompts and recasts on the acquisition of regular and ir- regular past tense forms by Chinese learners of English as a foreign language, Yang and Lyster found signiicantly larger efects for prompts, but more so in the case of regular than irregular past tense forms see Section 5 below.
Recently, Lyster and Saito adopted a meta-analytic procedure to sta- tistically combine the results of 15 quasi-experimental classroom studies of oral feedback, which included seven of the aforementioned intervention studies i.
In addition to the negative evidence that prompts provide, their efectiveness can be explained through skill acquisition theory, which entails a gradual transi- tion from efortful use to more automatic use of target language forms, brought about through practice and feedback in meaningful contexts DeKeyser , Proponents of skill acquisition theory advocate instructional techniques that help second language learners develop automaticity in target language use, including a judicious use of various prompts that push second language learners to notice their interlanguage forms and to practice emergent target forms in contexts of interaction e.
Instructional settings Within the same classroom setting, Oliver and Mackey found that child ESL learners repeated recasts more frequently in explicit language-focused exchanges than in exchanges that were content-based, management-related, or communica- tive in nature. Yet, even within ostensibly similar programs i. In their comparison of French and Japanese immersion classrooms, with similar types of learners i.
In contrast, in French immersion classrooms where no such priming was observed, instances of learner uptake and repair were more likely to follow prompts than recasts. In meaning-oriented classrooms that do not usually provide opportuni- ties for controlled production practice with an emphasis on accuracy, learners may detect the overtly corrective function of prompts more easily than the covert sig- nals they need to infer from recasts, and they will beneit from processing the tar- get language through the production of modiied output in the form of self-repair.
Interactional feedback as instructional input 4. Age Around puberty e. Whereas it still remains contro- versial how and to what degree age of acquisition interacts with other factors e. In this section, we refer to a small body of research that has investigated age as a factor in feedback efectiveness. In both age groups, with similar proiciency levels, students engaged in comparable interactional tasks with their teacher. For example, teachers provided linguistic scafolds for child learners by providing less syntactically complex input and selecting appropriate topics for them to discuss.
With results showing that child learners beneited from interactional feedback and that the efects were more immediate than those observed with adult ESL learners cf. In their meta-analysis of classroom feedback studies, Lyster and Saito examined age as a continuous variable in a simple regression analysis that clas- siied participants into three age categories: a child learners with a mean age of 10—12 years, b young-adult learners with a mean age of 17—20 years, and c adult learners with a mean age above 23 years.
Interestingly, although they acknowledged the small sample sizes in the statistical analysis, the results of regression analyses also revealed two possible patterns with respect to the relationship between age and diferent types of feedback: a younger learners beneited more from prompts than from recasts whereas b older learn- ers beneited similarly from recasts and prompts. It may be the case, therefore, that younger learners are especially predisposed to the efects of interactional feed- back, as suggested by Oliver In contrast, older learners predisposed to taking more responsibility over their learning processes might be able to make the most of diferent types of feedback by utilizing their analytical abilities in ways that result in similar gains, irrespective of feedback type.
Few studies have actu- ally investigated the relationship between diferent types of feedback e. Recasts of grammatical errors are poten- tially ambiguous for classroom learners accustomed to focusing more on commu- nication, because such recasts might appear to be identical or alternative ways of saying the same thing in order to conirm message comprehensibility or veracity.
In contrast, recasts of pronunciation errors might be perceptually salient as well as unequivocal in terms of purpose, arguably because a student is unlikely to perceive such a recast as an alternative yet equally correct variant.
Furthermore, recasts might trigger processing mechanisms that are particularly conducive to pronun- ciation development. In a study of learners of Japanese as a foreign language receiving recasts as they participated in dyadic communicative tasks with native speakers of Japanese, Egi provided some evidence that learners processed recasts diferently according to whether the linguistic target was morphosyntatic or lexical.
Using stimulated-recall measures and tailor-made posttests to investigate which com- ponents of recasts i. In their meta-analysis of 25 interaction studies 7 lexis studies and 18 grammar studies , Mackey and Goo conirmed that the efects of interaction are signiicantly larger on lexical development than on grammatical development, especially at the immediate post- tests.
We consider the efects of diferent types of feedback on diferent types of linguistic targets to be an especially propitious topic for further investigation.
Pedagogical implications and conclusion We close this paper with pedagogical suggestions for practitioners. First, empiri- cal research has demonstrated the overall efectiveness of interactional feedback in classroom settings and some theoretical accounts suggest that it may even play a pivotal role in second language pedagogy driven by oral interaction.
We recommend that teachers may need to adopt a wide variety of feedback techniques i. With respect to the instructional setting and its overall communicative ori- entation, prompts might prove especially beneicial in communicatively-oriented and content-based classrooms where learners would otherwise be required to pro- cess the target language exclusively through content and meaning-based activities.
In form-oriented classrooms, however, where learners have been primed to view language as an object of study and thus to perceive the corrective force of feedback, all types of feedback might be equally efective but recasts might be especially efective for averting an overemphasis on form at the expense of meaning. Older learners might not react very difer- ently to diferent types of feedback, being able to make the most of interactional feedback in ways that result in similar gains regardless of feedback type.
Based on empirical evidence, we have argued in this paper that interactional feedback has a key role to play in instructional input. However, this does not mean that the primary efects of feedback are necessarily input driven.
References Ammar, A. One size its all? Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition vol. Berns, M. Lee Eds. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Bialystok, E. Second Language Research vol. Birdsong, D. Age and second language acquisition and processing: A selective overview. Language Learning vol. Block, D. Braidi, S. Carpenter, H.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. Chaudron, C. Second language classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press. Clark, S. DeKeyser, R. Interactional feedback as instructional input DeKeyser, R.
Implicit and explicit learning. Doughty Eds. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology. Processing strategies and the generation efect: Impli- cations for making a better reader.
De Pietro, J. Fugier Eds. DOI: Gass , Kim McDonough Published Theoretical claims about the benefits of conversational interaction have been made by Gass , Long , Pica , and others. The Interaction Hypothesis suggests that negotiated interaction can facilitate SLA and that one reason for this could be that, during interaction, learners may receive feedback on their utterances.
An interesting issue, which has challenged interactional research, concerns how learners perceive feedback and whether their perceptions affect their subsequent L2… Expand. View via Publisher.
Save to Library Save. Create Alert Alert. Share This Paper. Background Citations. Methods Citations. Results Citations. Figures and Tables from this paper. Paper Mentions. Blog Post. New research produces surprising results. Citation Type. Has PDF. Publication Type. More Filters. L2 Learner Perceptions of Interactional Feedback.
The production of comprehensible output is an integral component of learning a second language Swain, To facilitate the development of communicative competence, teachers often provide oral … Expand. Highly Influenced. This III. Elicitation techniques include asking questions, asking questions combined with using pictures, with games and activities, with texts and dialogues, and finally, with non-verbal language Doff, In order for improved learner participation, instructors should maximize the use of a variety of elicitation techniques in their classrooms.
The instructor does not explicitly provide the target form Ferreria et al. Ferreria et al. PAS includes the interactional feedback strategies that encourage students construct the correct form themselves. In contrast, in GAS, the instructor indicates the location of error or provides the target form.
PAS includes metalinguistic cues, clarification request, and elicitation, and GAS includes repetition, recasts, explicit correction, and giving answer. This categorization is important with regard to the role of the instructor in the language learning process and the effectiveness of the strategies used in the classroom.
The analysis revealed that the progress which groups that received prompts made was significantly better compared to the groups that received recasts. The study will also reveal data regarding the interactional feedback strategy deemed the most effective interactional feedback strategy, the interactional feedback strategy perceived as the most frequently used feedback strategy in Main Course classes at a state university, the actual feedback use in the related III.
Research Questions The following research questions were examined in the present study: 1. Do the learners prefer to be corrected during classroom interaction in English classes? Who do the learners prefer to be corrected by? Which interactional feedback strategy is deemed the most effective interactional feedback type?
Which interactional feedback strategy is perceived as the most frequently used interactional feedback strategy in Main Course classes? Is there a difference between the perceived and actual interactional feedback strategy use during classroom interaction in Main Course classes?
Does the preferred interactional feedback strategy used during classroom interaction in different courses vary? Data collection was done concurrently through a survey. Quantitative data came from Likert-scale rating questions, and qualitative data came from open-ended questions. The medium of instruction at the university was English. Twenty-nine preparatory year students, all of whom were A2 level non-native speakers of English, participated in the study voluntarily.
The learners were the students of the instructor-researcher. They were enrolled at basic science and engineering departments, namely architecture, chemistry, city and regional planning, food engineering, and mathematics. The learners were placed into the current level based on their proficiency exam scores. As A2 level learners, they were required to attend 28 class hours per week. Main course, Reading and Writing, and Listening and Speaking courses were offered as a part of the preparatory school curriculum.
The syllabus for the Main Course included the formal teaching of language structures through all language skills. Reading and Writing and Listening and Speaking courses, on the other hand, were integrated skills courses. The sample interactional feedback strategies involved in the questionnaire were retrieved from the literature Ellis, ; Nassaji, The Likert-scale items were about the interactional feedback type deemed the most effective in a language classroom, how often the instructor-researcher used interactional feedback strategies in class, and how often they should be used in different courses, namely, Main Course, Reading and Writing, and Listening and Speaking.
The Cronbach alpha value was calculated as. Data Collection Procedures The survey was administered by the instructor-researcher after obtaining consent forms from the participants. Prior to the survey, a mini training session on the interactional feedback strategies was held, and detailed explanations about the interactional feedback strategies were provided. In the following week, participants were asked to write a chain story entitled Adventure in the Rainforest with a focus on the use of past tenses, in triads.
Following the chain story writing process, immediate instructor feedback was provided on the stories written by the learners, specifically on the erroneous statements. The class was audiotaped. The recording was 45 minutes in total.
Qualitative data were analyzed through thematic analysis of the audiotaped class, which was transcribed verbatim. The feedback strategies used by the researcher were classified based on Table 2. Findings and Discussion First, the findings of the qualitative data will be presented. Next, the analysis of the quantitative data will be provided. The findings will be presented for each research question successively. Table 3. I do not make them again. I have to be aware of the mistakes that I make.
If my mistakes are not corrected immediately, I cannot learn. Total 3 Therefore, it is more memorable. Total 5 With the guidance provided, they could notice and correct their mistakes, which contributed to their self- awareness of the mistakes they make. In brief, classroom learning and noticing played a critical role in their learning, for they had a limited time to learn the language.
Also, as they were learning English for academic purposes, they aimed to learn the language forms accurately. Therefore, they expected instructors to assist them to realize their mistakes and learn the correct forms so that the inaccurate uses did not become fossilized. Learners stated that they could immediately learn the accurate language forms and avoid fossilized forms when immediate correction was available.
They could pursue their academic studies in their department if they could pass the final exam and successfully complete the preparatory year education. That is why their grades were important to pass the final exam. In a nutshell, they expected the instructors to correct their mistakes to be able to get higher grades.
Learners asserted that immediate correction and feedback were vital to be able attain permanent learning as well. In this way, they were able to recall the target forms more easily and for longer periods of time. The majority of the participants stated that learning English was important in terms of their future goals. As the medium of instruction in their departments was English, learning English properly was of great importance for their future studies and academic success.
Instructor 15 Also, I can remember it easily. The teacher should correct our pronunciation mistakes. I would prefer to have one-to-one conferences with the teacher rather than being corrected in the classroom.
I would feel myself bad when my peers correct my mistakes. I cannot completely rely on my friends as we have the same proficiency levels.
Both can correct; without giving offense, by giving examples. When the teacher does not have enough time, peers can Both 9 Both are OK, but I would prefer to be corrected mostly by the instructor.
Nobody is proficient enough in English, so I do not think Any of the 5 What is important is to be corrected. Total 29 All learners were non-native speakers of English. As a result of this, it could be observed that None of the learners, on the other hand, preferred to be corrected only by their peers.
In research question 4, the interactional feedback strategy deemed the most effective strategy was examined See Table 5. Table 5. The perceived most effective interactional feedback strategy Interactional Feedback Strategy Mean Std. Recasts 2. Explicit correction, on the other hand, was the strategy which was perceived as the least effective interactional feedback strategy. Research question 5 aimed to show the interactional feedback strategy that was perceived as the most frequently used interactional feedback strategy in Main Course classes.
Information regarding the perceived interactional strategy use in Main Course classes has been provided in Table 6.
0コメント