Teaching English as a Second Language Quarterly (Formerly Journal of Teaching Language Skills)

Elicitation, Recast, and Meta-Linguistic Feedback in Form-Focused Exchanges: Effects of Feedback Modality on Multimedia Grammar Instruction

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate Professor, TEFL Shiraz University

2 Ph.D. Student, TEFL Shiraz University

Abstract

This research explores the effects of three computer-mediated feedback modalities, that is, elicitation, recast, and meta-linguistics, on the learning of English participial, gerund, and infinitival phrases among Iranian intermediate-level EFL learners. The overriding focus of the present study was to investigate whether different types of feedback given through form-focused computer-human exchanges would produce varying immediate and long-term effects on the participants’ incorporation of linguistic forms. To this end, 160 participants were randomly assigned to three equivalent experimental groups. One group then received treatment on the three types of phrases through a tutorial system and multimedia grammar exercises where they received elicitation on the errors they made. The second and the third groups likewise received treatment on the same types of phrases through the same tutorial system, but received either recast or meta-linguistic feedback on their errors. The groups then sat for an immediate and a delayed post-test of grammar two weeks after the experiment. The experiment revealed that meta-linguistic feedback yielded the strongest immediate and sustained effects as compared with those of elicitation and recast. Likewise, while recast produced stronger immediate effects on learning as compared to those of elicitation, its sustained effects were much smaller than those of elicitation and meta-linguistic feedback.

Keywords

References
Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 543-574.
Babaie, H. (2008). On the effects of help options in MCALL programs on the listening comprehension of EFL learners. Journal of TELL, Tarbiat Modares University, 2(6), 27-47.
Babaie, H., & Khalili, M. (2010). Pictorial, textual, and picto-textual glosses in e-reading: A comparative study. Canadian Journal of English Language Teaching (ELT), 3(4), 1-11.
Beatty, K. (2003). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning. London: Longman.
Beaudoin, M. (2004). Educational use of databases in CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 77(5), 497-516.
Brandl, K. K. (1995). Strong and weak students’ preferences for error feedback options and responses. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 194-211.
Carroll, S. (2001). Input and evidence: The raw material of second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition: Foundations for teaching, testing and research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chapelle, C. A. (2003). English language learning and technology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Chapelle, C. A. (2005). Interactionist SLA theory in CALL research. In J. Egbert & G. M. Petrie (Eds.). CALL research perspectives (pp. 53-64). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Collentine, J. (2000). Insights into the construction of grammatical knowledge provided by user-behavior tracking technologies. Language Learning & Technology, 5(2), 44-57.
Cowan, R., Choi, H. E., & Kim, D. H. (2003). Four questions for error diagnosis and correction in CALL. CALICO Journal, 20, 451-463.
DiGiovanni, E. & Nagaswami, G. (2001). Online peer review: an alternative to face-to-face? ELT Journal, 55 (3), 263-272.
DeKeyser, R. M. (2005). What makes learning second language grammar difficult? A review of issues. Language Learning, 55(1), 1-25.
Ellis, N. (2005). At the interface: dynamic interactions and explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(1), 305-352.
Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1, 3-18.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of 12 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339-368.
Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gass, S. M., & Torres, M. J. (2005). Attention when? An investigation of the ordering effect of input and interaction. SSLA, 27, 1-31.
Glendinning, E., & Howard, R. (2003). Lotus ScreenCam as an aid to investigating student writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16, 31-46.
Greenfield, R. (2003). Collaborative e-mail exchange for teaching secondary ESL: A case study in Hong Kong. Language Learning and Technology, 7 (1), 46-70.
Heift, T. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in CALL. ReCALL, 16(2), 416–431.
Long, M. H. (1996) The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.). Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Loewen, S. (2007). The prior and subsequent use of forms targeted in incidental focus on form. In H. Nassaji, & S. Fotos (Eds.). Form Focused Instruction and Teacher Education: Studies in Honour of Rod Ellis (pp. 101-116). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Corrective feedback in the chatroom: An experimental study. Computer Assisted Language Learning 19(1), 1-14.
Loewen, S., & Nabei, T. (2007). Measuring the effects of oral corrective feedback on L2 knowledge. In A. Mackey (Ed.). Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 361-377). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Long, M. H. (2007). Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research and practice. In C. Doughty, & J. Williams (Eds.). Focus on form in second language acquisition (pp. 15-41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399-426.
McDonough, K. (2005). Identifying the impact of negative feedback and learners’ responses to ESL question development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 79-103.
Noonan, F. J. (2004). Teaching ESL students to "notice" grammar. The Internet TESL Journal, 10(7), 1-10.
Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36(4), 573-595.
Petersen, K. A. (2010). Implicit corrective feedback in computer-guided interaction: Does mode matter? (Doctoral dissertain). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Database. (AAT 3450858).
Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes and outcomes? Language Learning, 44, 493-527.
Sachs, R., & Suh, B., (2007). Textually enhanced recasts, learner awareness, and L2 outcomes in synchronous computer-mediated interaction. In A. Mackey (Ed.). Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 197-227). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sauro, S. (2009). Computer-mediated corrective feedback and the development of L2 grammar. Language Learning & Technology, 13(1), 96-120. Retrieved October 18, 2011, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol13num1/sauro.pdf
Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165-179.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129-158.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.). Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Torlakovic, E., & Deugo, D. (2004). Application of a CALL system in the acquisition of adverbs in English. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 17(2), 203-235.
Van den Branden, K. (1997). Effects of negotiation on language learners’ output. Language Learning, 47, 589-636.
Warschauer, M. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13(2), 7-26.
Zamel, V. (1981). Cybernetics: A model for feedback in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 15, 139-150.
Teaching English as a Second Language Quarterly (Formerly Journal of Teaching Language Skills)
Volume 31, Issue 4 - Serial Number 4
March 2013
Pages 25-51
Files
History
  • Receive Date: 02 July 2012
  • Revise Date: 29 December 2012
  • Accept Date: 05 March 2013
Share
How to cite
Statistics