ELT for a Day 2017: Current Trends Saturday 20th May 2017 Corrective Feedback in EFL Classrooms George Michaeloudes michaeloudes.george@ucy.ac.cy PhD Candidate, English Department, University of Cyprus

Definition of Corrective Feedback FA and Corrective Feedback OVERVIEW Introduction Definition of Corrective Feedback FA and Corrective Feedback Feedback frameworks Types of Corrective Feedback The current study Framework of analysis Findings and discussion

INTRODUCTION This presentation aims to provide an insight on how teachers and more specifically foreign/second language teachers can use various corrective feedback types to correct learners and promote learning and language acquisition.

Corrective feedback any reaction of the teacher that clearly transforms, disapprovingly refers to, or demands improvement of the learner utterance” Chaudron, 1977, p. 31

DEFINITION OF FA “Practice in a classroom is formative to the extent that evidence about student achievement is elicited, interpreted, and used by teachers, learners, or their peers, to make decisions about the next steps in instruction that are likely to be better, or better founded, than the decisions they would have taken in the absence of the evidence that was elicited” Black and Wiliam (2009, p.9)

LEARNING THEORIES AND FA Behaviourism (Skinner, 1957) Constructivism (Bell & Cowie, 2000) Interaction hypothesis (Block, 2003) ‘Comprehensible Input Hypothesis’ (Krashen, 1985) ‘Interaction Hypothesis’ (Long, 1981) ‘Output Hypothesis’ (Swain, 1985) Sociocultural theory of learning (SCT) (Vygotsky, 1978)

EFFECTIVENESS OF FA Gives confidence to teachers Motivates and encourages learners Makes learners responsible and aware of their own learning Promotes self-esteem Engages learners with work and attainment Advances learners’ language performance and skills

FA TECHNIQUES Formative feedback ‘Self-’ and ‘peer-’ assessment Sharing learning objectives and success criteria Formative use of summative tests Observation Questioning

TYPES OF CLASSROOM INTERACTION Teachers’ perceptions I R E Teachers’ knowledge Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) Mehan (1979) Cazden (1988) Gourlay (2005) Teachers’ attitudes “Triadic Dialogue” Lemke (1990) Teachers’ practices

FEEDBAck Evaluative and Descriptive (Tunstall and Gipps, 1996) Implicit-Explicit (Aljaafreh & Lantolf, 1994) Corrective (Chaudron, 1977)

FEEDBACK Evaluative and Descriptive

FEEDBACK Implicit - Explicit 0. Tutor asks the learner to read, find the errors, and correct them independently, prior to the tutorial. 1. Construction of a “collaborative frame” prompted by the presence of the tutor as a potential dialogic partner. 2. Prompted or focused reading of the sentence that contains the error by the learner or the tutor. 3. Tutor indicates that something may be wrong in a segment (e.g., sentence, clause, line)-“Is there anything wrong in this sentence?” 4. Tutor rejects unsuccessful attempts at recognizing the error. 5. Tutor narrows down the location of the error (e.g., tutor repeats or points to the specific segment which contains the error). 6. Tutor indicates the nature of the error, but does not identify the error (e.g., “There is something wrong with the tense marking here”). 7. Tutor identifies the error (“You can’t use an auxiliary here”). 8. Tutor rejects learner’s unsuccessful attempts at correcting the error. 9. Tutor provides clues to help the learner arrive at the correct form (e.g., “It is not really past but some thing that is still going on”). 10. Tutor provides the correct form. 11. Tutor provides some explanation for use of the correct form. 12. Tutor provides examples of the correct pattern when other forms of help fail to produce an appropriate responsive action.

Clarification request Metalinguistic feedback Elicitation Repetition Corrective Explicit correction Recast Clarification request Metalinguistic feedback Elicitation Repetition

23 Classroom observations 5 EFL primary school teachers The current study 23 Classroom observations 5 EFL primary school teachers Video/audio-recorded-transcribed (SoundScriber) Analysis: Grounded theory approach Framework of analysis (Atlas.ti)

Feedback Incorrect Answer Implicit Feedback Incorrect answer Explicit Code Acronym Description FCR Feedback Corrective Recast Teacher repeats the wrong answer without mentioning the mistake FCC Feedback Corrective Clarification Request Teacher asks for clarification FCE Feedback Corrective Elicitation Teachers uses elicitation techniques to get the correct answer FCRP Feedback Corrective Repetition Teacher repeats the wrong answer FRR Feedback Repetition of the Question Teacher repeats the question Feedback Incorrect answer Explicit Code Acronym Description FCEV Feedback Evaluative Incorrect Teacher rejects the wrong answer FCE Feedback Corrective Explicit Correction Teacher explicitly corrects the wrong answer FCM Feedback Corrective Metalinguistic Teacher provides extra information/comments/questions relevant to the correct form of the answer FCP Feedback Corrective Peer Teacher-redirecting to peers and asks them to answer the question.

U UPTAKE Code Acronym Description UN Uptake no Learner does not provide an answer after T’s feedback URS Uptake repair self Learners responds to implicit feedback and find the answer by him/her self URG Uptake repair guided Learner finds the answer after receiving feedback from teacher UPR Uptake repair peer Learner responds to T’s feedback with the help of peer. -R Uptake repair Repetition Learner repeats teacher’s feedback -I Uptake repair Incorporation Learner uses teacher’s feedback in a sentence URN Uptake repair needs Learner provides a wrong answer after receiving feedback from teacher. UNO Uptake no Opportunity Learner does not have opportunity for uptake. UI Uptake Incomplete Learner provides an incomplete answer after receiving corrective feedback.

EXPLICIT CORRECTIVE Feedback Excerpt 1. Example of Feedback Corrective Explicit Correction, Corrective Metalinguistic and Evaluative Corrective (1) T: Mmh? Yhea! What else did we call her? What’s her name? (2) S: Tyrannosaurus X! (3) T: Yes, what else called? Mrs T. What’s her name? (4) S: Tyrannosaurus. (5) S: To tyrannosaurus Rex (6) T: No! (6) S: Mr T. (8) T: That’s good Mrs! Mrs! Because she is a lady. She is a girl. She is not a guy like my self. She is a girl like Ifigenia. She is… so she is Mrs T! Mrs T! Ok?

IMPLICIT CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK Excerpt 2. Example of Feedback Corrective Clarification Request and Feedback Corrective Recast (1) S: How many olds? (2) T: How many? (3) S: How old? (4) T: How old is she? Right!

IMPLICIT CORRECTIVE Feedback Excerpt 3. Example of Feedback Corrective Repetition and Feedback Corrective Repetition of the question (1) T: Are there any pictures? Are there any pictures in the living room? (2) S: Yes! (3) T: Yes! Are there any pictures? (4) S: Yes, there is. (5) T: Are there any pictures? (6) S: Yes, there are.

FREQUENCIES OF CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK TEACHERS Feedback Corrective Clarification Request Feedback Corrective Elicitation Feedback Corrective Explicit Correction Feedback Evaluative Incorrect Feedback Corrective Metalinguistic Feedback Corrective Peer Feedback Corrective Recast Feedback Corrective Repetition Feedback Repetition of the Question T1 9 36 15 22 53 6 54 3 T2 2 59 17 47 48 77 4 13 T3 24 11 14 23 T4 1 21 16 18 5 20 T5 7 Total: 147 75 94 146 19 180 40

FREQUENCIES OF UPTAKE 12 46 224 76 TEACHERS Uptake Incomplete Uptake No Uptake No Opportunity Uptake Repair Guided Uptake Repair Needs Uptake Repair Self T1 3 23 110 14 6 T2 9 5 16 63 33 T3 4 21 T4 2 17 1 T5 7 Total: 12 46 224 76

FREQUENCIES OF FEEDBACK AND UPTAKE Repair Guided (URG) Repair Self (URS) No Opportunity (UNO) Incomplete (UI) Repair Needs (URN) No (UN) TYPE OF CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK Metalinguistic 17   8 3 14 Corrective Evaluative 4 2 Explicit Correction 11 5 Recasts 48 37 7 1 Elicitations 45 6 30 Repetition of the Question 12

DISCUSSION Corrective feedback and Input facilitate learning and are crucial for L2 development (Gass & Mackey, 2007; Long, 1996). Implicit and Explicit types of Corrective Feedback contribute to the linguistic development of the learner (Aljaafreh and Lantolf 1994) . Implicit Corrective feedback used more than Explicit Corrective Feedback. The most popular Corrective Feedback Types were: - Recasts (also found popular in other studies Lyster & Ranta, 1997; Panova & Lyster, 2002; Sheen, 2004) - Feedback Corrective Elicitation - Feedback Corrective Metalinguistic Recasts Corrective Metalinguistic Feedback Beneficial for URG Explicit Correction The reason for UNO

michaeloudes.george@ucy.ac.cy George Michaeloudes