3 The StudyMeta-analysis of 15 published studies on corrective feedback.Classroom-based studies only (as opposed to lab-based)Factor for consideration:Types of corrective feedbackOutcome measuresInstructional settingTreatment lengthLearner age
4 Types of Corrective Feedback Recasts“The teacher’s reformulation of all or part of a student’s utterance, minus the error”Explicit CorrectionsProviding the correct form while “clearly indicating what the student had said was incorrect.”Prompts“Withhold correct forms and instead provide clues to prompt students to retrieve these correct forms from their existing knowledge.”Prompts can include metalinguistic clues, clarifications requests, repetition
5 Types of Corrective Feedback Clarification RequestsRepitionElicitationMetalinguistic CluesMetalinguisitc Clue and repetition or elicitationImplicitExplicitPROMPTSREFORMULATIONSRecastsExplicit Corrections
6 Findings about Types of Corrective Feedback Recasts, prompts, and explicit correction are all significantly effectivePrompts were more effective than recastsPrompts are more pedagogically orientedStudents respond the the negative evidence from promptsPrompts impose a greater demand for students to produce modified outputExplicit corrections could not be distinguished from prompts or recasts
7 Outcome Measures 4 different types: Free constructed-response measures Require learners to produce the target language freely without many constraintsConstrained constructed-response measuresRequire learners to complete tasks in which the use of the target features was necessary.Selected-response measuresRequires learners to select the correct answer among several alternativesMetalinguistic judgementsRequire learners to judge the grammaticality of target structures
8 Findings about Outcome Measures Free Constructed-response measuresMost effective form of CFCF is given in conversational context“with relatively few constraints and with meaningful communication as the goal of L2 production”Constrained constructed-response measuresMetalinguistic judgementsSelected-response measures
9 DurabilityMeasure of the effectiveness of corrective feedback from immediate to delayed posttests (outcome measures)Immediate = within 1 weekDelayed = after 2 weeks and up to 6 weeksFindings:The impact of corrective feedback does not decrease between immediate and delayed posttests.Corrective feedback has long-term learning effects.
10 Instructional Setting Foreign LanguagevsSecond Language“Second language usually has official status or a recognized function within a country which a foreign language does not” (p 280)Findings:There is no difference between FL and SL classroomsUnderlying learning process is essentially the same
11 Length of Treatment Brief treatments = less than 1 hr Short treatments = 1-2 hrsMedium treatments = 3-6 hrsLong treatments = 7+ hrsFindings:Long treatments are much more effective than short to medium treatmentsMay not be a reliable variable to measure effectiveness
12 Age Factors Knowledge going into the study: Child learners – Elementary (10-12 yrs old)Young adult learners – End of high school/college (17-20 yrs old)Adult learners- language school/community college (ESL) (~23 yrs old)Knowledge going into the study:older students: higher expectations for and encouraged to take more risksYounger students: given more structure so less opportunity for mistakes.
13 Age FactorsFindingsAge contributed to a significant percentage of the variance in effectiveness of CFYounger students are much more affected by CF than older learnersMore sensitive to impactCF engages learning mechanisms that are found more often in younger learnersReceived longer treatments
14 Take awayCorrective Feedback has a significant impact on student learningPrompting is the most effective feedbackFree constructed-response are the most effective assessmentCorrective feedback has more impact on younger learnersThe study was limited so all information should be interpreted with caution, however, the findings are sufficient for use in a classroom and to guide future studies.