This chapter summarizes research on the timing of written and oral corrective feedback (CF) on L2 grammatical errors. A careful analysis of a comprehensive array of CF timing studies indicates that there are learning benefits from both immediate and delayed CF. The analysis also demonstrates the need for more uniform construct definitions and more rigidly designed studies in the area of CF timing research. The chapter then explains several theoretical proposals about how immediate and delayed CF facilitate L2 development. These proposed explanations include sociocultural theory, Transfer Appropriate Processing, skill acquisition theory, and cognitive comparison via reactivation and reconsolidation. In addition, this chapter discusses the potential implications that research and theory might have for L2 pedagogy, concluding that at this juncture, the literature provides teachers with justifications for using both immediate and delayed CF. Finally, the chapter ends with recommendations about what future research might best be conducted in the area of CF timing.

We provide an overview of research that explains what oral corrective feedback is, how it can be expressed by teachers and peers, and how it may impact the language development process. We define oral corrective feedback as a negative evidence provided in response to learner error in an oral mode. A theoretical rationale for the role of feedback is described, drawing on research from both cognitive-interactionist and sociocultural explanations of second language learning through oral communication. Examples from numerous studies are incorporated to exemplify the range of ways feedback is provided on different types of linguistic errors. Research on the relative effectiveness of different types of feedback is reviewed, as well as empirical inquiry into the role of individual and social factors that can enhance or limit the effectiveness or oral feedback, concluding that oral corrective feedback is an important factor for language learning in instructed settings. We close with recommendations for research-driven teaching practice with respect to oral corrective feedback, cautioning that teachers need to consider learner experiences and expectations of feedback, their pedagogical objectives and approach, as well as learners developmental needs, self-monitoring skills, and ability to provide feedback to one another.

A question that received considerable interest from language teachers and researchers alike is what corrective feedback (CF) should look like to be maximally beneficial to learners’ second language development. This chapter zooms in on two feedback types that have been distinguished in the CF literature: focused and unfocused CF. After a careful characterization of these two feedback options, theoretical, methodological, and pedagogical arguments are discussed for both of them. The chapter furthermore provides a synthesis of oral and written feedback studies into the (relative) value of focused and unfocused CF. It concludes with suggestions for further research and implications for L2 classrooms.

This chapter addresses the topic of training in corrective feedback. The chapter discusses the role and importance of training and also how feedback training can assist feedback provision and processing. To this end, empirical studies on both teacher and student training of feedback and their implications are discussed. This discussion is limited to oral corrective feedback, since much of the research on feedback training concerns oral feedback. Pedagogical implications as well as directions for future investigations are also discussed.

The current chapter focuses on two main stakeholders of corrective feedback: teachers and learners, and it discusses whether and how teachers’ and learners’ beliefs or attitudes toward corrective feedback impact the effectiveness of corrective feedback. Previous research on both oral and written corrective feedback is reviewed. In terms of teachers’ beliefs of corrective feedback and their feedback practices, some research findings showed that teachers’ beliefs are not always in line with their actual classroom practices related to the use of different types of oral corrective feedback. Learners’ beliefs about the effectiveness of corrective feedback, particularly written corrective feedback, were found to be an important factor of learner engagement with corrective feedback. Recent corrective feedback research claims that teacher and learner beliefs are not static. Accordingly, the current literature review shows methodological changes over time, capturing the situational and dynamic patterns of learners’ and teachers’ beliefs about corrective feedback. The overall findings suggest that teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about CF are multifaceted and could be impacted by various contextual factors.

This chapter examines the role of nonverbal feedback, particularly gestures. It reviews and evaluates the findings of current research in this area and offers suggestions for future research. The chapter begins by discussing how gestures are used in a language classroom followed by an examination of their effectiveness in the development of different language skills including vocabulary, pronunciation, grammar, and comprehension. The relationship between learners’ individual differences, gestures, and corrective feedback is also addressed.