Oral corrective feedback

This entry provides an overview of the theory, research, and pedagogy of corrective feedback (CF) in second language speech production. CF refers to responses to learners’ erroneous utterances, and the justification for its usefulness in facilitating second language (L2) development can be found in a number of L2 theories, such as the Interaction Hypothesis, the Skill Acquisition Theory, and the Sociocultural Theory. Descriptive studies have found that recasts are the most frequent feedback type in most L2 classes but they are less likely to invite learner responses, compared with prompts which encourage self-correction. Experimental studies have demonstrated that the effects of CF are constrained by a multitude of learner-internal and learner-external factors. For example, prompts are better at consolidating previous L2 knowledge while recasts are more suitable for structures learners have no previous knowledge about. On the basis of the research findings, a number of recommendations are made regarding how to effectively use CF in classroom teaching, such as making the corrective intension transparent, using a hybrid corrective package consisting of a prompt followed by a recast, using focused feedback, combining explicit instruction with CF when necessary, and providing both online and offline CF.

ELT Journal, 2014

Corrective feedback (CF) refers to teacher and peer responses to learners' erroneous second language (L2) production. The recent burgeoning of research into oral CF is attributable to its pedagogical and theoretical significance. Practitioners are interested in whether, when, and how to incorporate CF in classroom instruction; theorists (for example Krashen 1981; Gass 1997) are divided over whether the negative evidence afforded by oral CF about what is 'wrong' or unacceptable in the target language is necessary for L2 development, or whether exposure to positive evidence about what is correct is sufficient by itself. Experimental studies to date have demonstrated that oral CF can facilitate L2 development but that its effects may be constrained by contextual factors and individual learner differences (Li 2010; Lyster and Saito 2010).

The Journal of AsiaTEFL, 2020

Kwansei Gakuin University Humanities Review, 2015

Corrective feedback is regarded as a crucial element in the process of developing second language acquisition (SLA); it is argued, to supply comprehensible samples of target language necessary for SLA (Long, 1988). This paper will focus on corrective feedback in language classrooms relating to oral production. Corrective feedback as an instructional device is when a teacher corrects the utterance of a learner’s error; it has both explicit and implicit modes. Recasts as a form of implicit corrective feedback is both an efficient and effective corrective tool in the language classroom that is arguably misunderstood in the English as a foreign language (EFL) context as lazy teaching.

English Teaching Journal : A Journal of English Literature, Language and Education, 2014

This study aims to review the teacher’s expressions which constitute teacher’s corrective feedbacks (CFs) in oral production and examine the ways the teachers' expression revealing teacher’s CFs. The data are in the forms of teachers' utterances obtained from four research articles. The result shows that teacher' expressions which constitute CFs cover explicit correction, recast, clarification request, metalinguistic, elicitation, and repetition. While the ways which reveal teacher’s CFs are found to be reduction, negation, and expansion. The area to be corrected commonly involves phonological, grammatical, and lexical errors. So, it can be concluded that in a second language classroom instruction, teacher’s CFs expressions lead learners' erroneous utterances to be resolved because by saying "Sorry?" (clarification request), a teacher implicitly asks a language learner to reformulate what he has just been said which is usually called repair. Thus, it impl...

2014

This doctoral thesis aims to contribute to the growing body of research which shows that oral corrective feedback or error correction is beneficial for second language acquisition. It also seeks to address the pedagogical question of how oral feedback can be implemented in communicative language classrooms. With these aims in mind, a series of three empirical studies was designed based on a review of the existing literature on oral corrective feedback. First of all, a quasi-experimental classroom study was carried out to compare the effects of two types of feedback on the accurate oral production and acquisition of the English regular and irregular past simple tense. Two intact classes of intermediate learners at a Spanish university carried out communicative storytelling tasks during which they received either elicitation or metalinguistic feedback on their past tense errors. Both types of feedback were found to impact the acquisition of the target structure positively, but there w...

Humanities science current issues

Like all other kinds of human learning, language learning involves committing errors. Errors and misunderstandings occur on a daily basis in our life. In the past years, language teachers considered errors committed by learners as something undesirable which they sought to prevent from occurring. As a result, many people have a phobia that is associated with learning a foreign language. That is why it is important to convey to students that errors are a natural part of the learning process. Scientists with different views and approaches of a foreign language teaching have different points of view regarding the correction of errors. But most researchers agree that oral corrective feedback is the most common language teaching strategy, and the means of correcting mistakes are significant factors that affect the motivation of students and the success of a foreign language learning. This is mainly because it fixes various elements of language lessons, such as pronunciation and spelling. Oral corrective feedback is a broad field that helps teachers and students identify errors and eliminate them. The focus is on highlighting common errors and correcting them, allowing students to avoid them in the future. Error analysis is one of the most influential theories of second language acquisition. It deals with the analysis of mistakes made by students learning a foreign language by comparing the norms acquired by students with the norms of the target language and explaining the identified errors. Corrective feedback is an approach widely used by language teachers to assess and reflect on students' errors regarding speech and pronunciation. This strategy is also used to reduce language errors, as well as to understand how students can eliminate such errors. Corrective feedback is usually described as a verbal response used by the teacher to correct the speaker's mispronunciation or utterance. It seeks to correct phonological, syntactic, semantic, or functional inaccuracies that may be present in the speaker's speech. Moreover, many researchers believe that corrective feedback leads to the development of healthy teacher-student interaction, which is very important at language classes. Corrections in the teaching process are also considered to play a contributing and constructive role. Taking into account the purpose of teaching and keeping a number of individual factors in mind, language teachers can use appropriate error correction techniques to create a favorable learning environment for their students.

2015

Abstract: The rise in popularity of the communicative approach in language teaching since the late 1970s primarily focusing on language for meaningful interaction and for accomplishing tasks rather than on learning rules has intensified debate among teachers and researchers on corrective feedback or error correction in second language learning. The concept of corrective feedback has been under analysis for long especially since Hendrickson’s study in 1978 in which he questioned if errors should be corrected and if so which ones, when and how the errors should be corrected. Subsequent studies have investigated the types of corrective feedback as well as the use and effectiveness of those types in various contexts and even the impact of those types of error treatment on uptake. Despite these studies, corrective feedback remains one of the most contentious issues in second language teaching and there is no consensus about its application. While some view it as a natural part of the sec...

International Journal of English Language Studies

This paper synthesizes findings from qualitative and quantitative research on corrective feedback in an English as a Second Language (ESL) classroom. This paper revisited the characteristics and purposes of corrective feedback. Searches were conducted using the following research and journal databases: Google Scholar, Academia.edu, Research Gate, and Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The results provide analyses of the four corrective feedbacks, namely, recast, clarification request, metalinguistic feedback, and elicitation. The researchers also provide examples appropriate to each key stage of K-12 schooling in the Philippines. It is emphasized in this paper that learners learn best if they are aware that they are corrected and if the manner of correcting them is not obtrusive.

International Journal of English Studies, 2014

This paper addresses the issue of corrective feedback (CF), a topic widely investigated in the last few decades , and instructional context. We observed and recorded the oral interaction of an intact class of thirty Spanish intermediate-level high-school learners and two teachers in two settings: a traditional formoriented English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classroom and a meaning-oriented Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) classroom (Dalton-Puffer, 2011). Corrective feedback episodes (CFE; were used as the unit of analysis. The findings of the study indicate that there are differences in the type, quantity and manner of CFE between the two learning contexts. Although no significant difference in the proportion of learners' uptake was found between the EFL and CLIL contexts, a qualitative analysis of the data indicated that the teachers' attitude toward CF influenced subsequent learner uptake. Implications for further research on CF, learner uptake and instructional context are suggested.