Book contents
- Lessons from Good Language Teachers
- Lessons from Good Language Teachers
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Preface An Overview of Good Language Teachers
- Part I Macro Perspectives
- Part II Classroom Perspectives
- 8 Method, Methodology, Technological Medium, and Good Language Teachers
- 9 Assessment and Good Language Teachers
- 10 Individual Differences and Good Language Teachers
- 11 Classroom Management and Good Language Teachers
- 12 Corrective Feedback and Good Language Teachers
- 13 Relationships and Good Language Teachers
- 14 Language Learning Strategies and Good Language Teachers
- Part III Instructional Perspectives
- Index
- References
12 - Corrective Feedback and Good Language Teachers
from Part II - Classroom Perspectives
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 April 2020
Book contents
- Lessons from Good Language Teachers
- Lessons from Good Language Teachers
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Preface An Overview of Good Language Teachers
- Part I Macro Perspectives
- Part II Classroom Perspectives
- 8 Method, Methodology, Technological Medium, and Good Language Teachers
- 9 Assessment and Good Language Teachers
- 10 Individual Differences and Good Language Teachers
- 11 Classroom Management and Good Language Teachers
- 12 Corrective Feedback and Good Language Teachers
- 13 Relationships and Good Language Teachers
- 14 Language Learning Strategies and Good Language Teachers
- Part III Instructional Perspectives
- Index
- References
Summary
Chapter 12 examines the effectiveness of corrective feedback as a tool in language teaching. The authors review different types of corrective feedback and key research findings, before presenting a study on the types of feedback used by an experienced teacher when interacting with students in communicative lessons.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Lessons from Good Language Teachers , pp. 151 - 163Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all?: Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(4), 543–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, D. (2016). The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 436–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2006). Researching the effects of form-focussed instruction on L2 acquisition. AILA Review, 19, 18–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2015). Understanding second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2017). Oral corrective feedback in L2 classrooms: What we know so far. In Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (Eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: research, theory, applications, implications (pp. 3–18). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51(2), 281–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fu, T., & Nassaji, H. (2016). Corrective feedback, learner uptake, and feedback perception in a Chinese as a foreign language classroom. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 161–183.Google Scholar
Goo, J., & Mackey, A. (2013). The case against the case against recasts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(1), 127–165.Google Scholar
Isaacs, T., & Trofimovich, P. (2012). Deconstructing comprehensibility: Identifying the linguistic influences on learners’ L2 comprehensibility ratings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(3), 475–505.Google Scholar
Jean, G., & Simard., D. (2011). Grammar learning in English and French L2: Students’ and teachers’ beliefs and perceptions. Foreign Language Annals, 44(3), 467–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kartchava, E. (2016). Learner beliefs about corrective feedback in the language classroom: Perspectives from two international contexts. TESL Canada Journal, 33(2), 19–45.Google Scholar
Kartchava, E., & Ammar, A. (2014a). The noticeability and effectiveness of corrective feedback in relation to target type. Language Teaching Research, 18(4), 428–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kartchava, E., & Ammar, A. (2014b). Learners’ beliefs as mediators of what is noticed and learned in the language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 48(1), 86–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309–365.Google Scholar
Lyster, R. (1998). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 48(2), 183–218.Google Scholar
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(3), 399–432.Google Scholar
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37–66.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Gass, S. M., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive implicit negative feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(4), 471–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 407–452). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2007). Elicitation and reformulation and their relationship with learner repair in dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 57(4), 511–548.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2009). The effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning, 59(2), 411–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2011). Correcting student’s written grammatical errors: The effects of negotiated versus non-negotiated feedback. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 1(3), 315–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2013). Participation structure and incidental focus on form in adult ESL classrooms. Language Learning, 63(4), 835–869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2015). Interactional feedback dimension in instructed second language learning. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2016). Interactional feedback in second language teaching and learning: A synthesis and analysis of current research. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 535–562.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2017a). The effectiveness of extensive versus intensive recasts for learning L2 grammar. The Modern Language Journal, 101(2), 353–368.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2017b). Negotiated oral feedback in response to written errors. In Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (Eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications (pp. 114–128). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H., & Kartchava, E. (Eds.). (2017a). Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H., & Kartchava, E. (2017b). The role of corrective feedback: Theoretical and pedagogical perspectives. In Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (Eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications (pp. ix-xv). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H., & Kartchava, E. (2017c). Conclusion, reflections, and final remarks. In Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (Eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications (pp. 174–182). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nassaji, H., & Swain, M. (2000). A Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback: The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness, 99(1), 34–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language Learning, 51(4), 719–758.Google Scholar
Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36(4), 573–595.Google Scholar
Pawlak, M. (2020). Individual differences and good language teachers. In Griffiths, C. & Tajeddin, Z. (Eds.), Lessons from good language teachers (pp. 121–132). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rahimi, M., Kushki, A., & Nassaji, H. (2015). Diagnostic and developmental potentials of dynamic assessment for L2 writing. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 2(2),185–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulz, R. A. (2001). Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA – Colombia. The Modern Language Journal, 85(2), 244–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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), 235–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziegler, N., & Mackey, A. (2017). Interactional feedback in computer-mediated communication: A review of the art. In Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (Eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications (pp. 80–94). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- 9
- Cited by