Keywords
error correction
recast
corrective feedback
grammaticality
How to Cite
Number of views: 875
Number of downloads: 773
Abstract
Most of the laboratory studies on recasts have examined the role of intensive recasts provided repeatedly on the same target structure. This is different from the original definition of recasts as the reformulation of learner errors as they occur naturally and spontaneously in the course of communicative interaction. Using a within-group research design and a new testing methodology (video-based stimulated correction posttest), this laboratory study examined whether extensive and spontaneous recasts provided during small-group work were beneficial to adult L2 learners. Participants were 26 ESL learners, who were divided into seven small groups (3-5 students per group), and each group participated in an oral activity with a teacher. During the activity, the students received incidental and extensive recasts to half of their errors; the other half of their errors received no feedback. Students’ ability to detect and correct their errors in the three types of episodes was assessed using two types of tests: a stimulated correction test (a video-based computer test) and a written test. Students’ reaction time on the error detection portion of the stimulated correction task was also measured. The results showed that students were able to detect more errors in error+recast (error followed by the provision of a recast) episodes than in error-recast (error and no recast provided) episodes (though this difference did not reach statistical significance). They were also able to successfully and partially successfully correct more errors in error+recast episodes than in error-recast episodes, and this difference was statistically significant on the written test. The reaction time results also point towards a benefit from recasts, as students were able to complete the task (slightly) more quickly for error+recast episodes than for error-recast episodes.Funding
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC)
References
Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 543-574.
Crookes, G., & Gass, S. (Eds.). (1993). Tasks and language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Dilans, G. (2010). Corrective feedback and L2 vocabulary development: Prompts and recasts in the adult ESL classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 66, 787-816.
Doughty, C., & Pica, T. (1986). ‘Information gap tasks’: An aid to second language acquisition? TESOL Quarterly, 20, 305-325.
Doughty, C., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114-138). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51, 281-318.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339-368.
Ellis, R., & Sheen, Y. (2006). Reexamining the role of recasts in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 575-600.
Farrar, M. (1990). Discourse and the acquisition of grammatical morphemes. Journal of Child Language, 17, 607-624.
Goo, J., & Mackey, A. (2013). The case against the case against recasts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 127-165.
Han, Z. (2002). A study of the impact of recasts on tense consistency in L2 output. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 543-72.
Havranek, G. (1999). The effectiveness of corrective feedback: Preliminary results of an empirical study. Acquisition et Interaction en Langue Étrangère, 2, 189-206.
Hawkes, L. (2007). Recasts revisited: The role of recasts in error detection and correction by adult ESL students. (Unpublished MA thesis). University of Victoria, Victoria BC, Canada.
Ishida, M. (2004). Effects of recasts on the acquisition of the aspectual form –te i-(ru) by learners of Japanese as a foreign language. Language Learning, 54, 311-94.
Iwashita, N. (2003). Negative feedback and positive evidence in task-based interaction: Differential effects on L2 development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 1-36.
Johnson, K. (1981). The four skills in communicative language teaching: Writing. In K. Johnson & K. Morrow (Eds.), Communication in the classroom (pp. 93-107). London: Longman.
Leeman, J. (2003). Recasts and second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 37-63.
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta analysis. Language Learning, 60, 309-365.
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, 271-283.
Loewen, S. (2005). Incidental focus on form and second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 361-386.
Loewen, S., & Philp, J. (2006). Recasts in the adult English L2 classroom: Characteristics, explicitness, and effectiveness. The Modern Language Journal, 90, 536-556.
Long, M. H. (1981). Input, interaction, and second language acquisition. In H. Winitz (Ed.), Native language and foreign language acquisition (pp. 259-278). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
Long, M. H. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4, 126-141.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of research on second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). New York: Academic Press.
Long, M. H. (2006). Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lyster, R. (1998). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 48, 183-218.
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399-432.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 37-66.
Lyster, R. & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 265-302.
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2012). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46, 1-40.
Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 27, 405-30.
Mackey, A., & Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? The Modern Language Journal, 82, 338-356.
McDonough, K., & Mackey, A. (2006). Responses to recasts: Repetitions, primed production, and linguistic development. Language Learning, 56, 693-720.
Nabei, T., & Swain, M. (2002). Learner awareness of recasts in classroom interaction: A case study of an adult EFL student’s second language learning. Language Awareness, 11(1), 43-63.
Nassaji, H. (2006, July). Explicitness of interactional feedback and its role in the learning of the targeted form in student-teacher interaction. Paper presented at the Pacific Second Language Research Forum (PacSLRF), Brisbane, Australia.
Nassaji, H. (2007). Elicitation and reformulation and their relationship with learner repair in dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 57, 511-548.
Nassaji, H. (2009). Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning, 59, 411-452.
Nassaji, H. (2015). The interactional feedback dimension in instructed second language learning: Linking theory, research, and practice. London: Bloomsbury.
Nassaji, H. & Hawkes, L. (2006, October). Focus-on-form in L2 classrooms and the role of language proficiency. Paper presented at the Second Language Research Forum (SLRF), University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language Learning, 51, 719-758.
Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 573-395.
Philp, J. (2003). Constraints on “noticing the gap”: Nonnative speakers’ noticing of recasts in NS-NNS interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 99-126.
Sabbagh, S. (1998). Learners’ reactions to feedback in an adult ESL classroom (Unpublished master’s thesis). Pepperdine University, Malibu, CA, USA.
Saito, K. (2013). The acquisitioned value of recasts in instructed second language speech learning: Teaching the perception and production of English /ɹ/ to adult Japanese learners. Language Learning, 63, 499-529.
Saxton, M. (1997). The contrast theory of negative input. Journal of Child Language, 24, 139-161.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129-158.
Schmidt, R. (Ed.). (1995). Attention and awareness in foreign language learning. Honolulu, Hawai’i: University of Hawaii Press.
Sheen, Y. (2006). Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner uptake. Language Teaching Research, 10, 361-392.
Sheen, Y. (2011). Corrective feedback, individual differences and second language learning. New York: Springer.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury.
License
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.