Takehiro Iizuka

 CF has significant and durable effects on target language development (Lyster & Saito, 2010) What type of CF benefits L2 acquisition??

 Ellis, Loewen and Erlam (2006)  Li (2010)

Implicit CF in the form of recast Explicit CF in the form of metalinguistic explanation Clear advantage of explicit CF over implicit CF for both the delayed oral imitation and grammaticality judgment posttests

Explicit CF was more effective than implicit CF on the immediate and short-delayed posttests, but the opposite was true on the long-delayed posttests. Implicit CF Explicit CF

 Ellis et al. (2006) Explicit CF is better for developing implicit knowledge  Li (2010) Implicit CF is better for developing implicit knowledge

Immediate posttests Delayed posttests Ellis et al. (2006) Li (2010) 1 day 2 weeks Immediate posttests Short-term delayed posttests Long-term delayed posttests less than 7 days 8-29 days 30 days or later ???

1. Is implicit oral corrective feedback in the form of recast more effective in the long run than explicit oral corrective feedback in the form of metalinguistic explanation for building up implicit knowledge of Japanese locative particles?

T T S S S S S S S S S S S S S S CF Addressee Auditors Incidental Recast Incidental Recast

 Incidental recasts are available to the learner by attending to classroom interaction in the role of auditor or overhearer.  Auditors may have greater resources available in working memory than addressees, who may be occupied with formulating a response.

 “The target of corrective feedback is more accurately understood by learners when the feedback is directed to them as opposed to their classmates” (Mackey, Al-Khalil, Atanassova, Hama, Logan-Terry & Nakatsukasa, 2007)  “(The participant) tended not to listen to the conversation when the interaction took place between the teacher and another student during teacher-fronted activity.” (Nabei & Swain, 2002)

2. How much learning occurs to the learners who directly received each type of feedback? 3. How much learning occurs to the learners who indirectly received each type of feedback?

 Type of CF: implicit (recast) vs. explicit (metalinguistic explanation)  Nature of learner participation: addressee (those directly received CF) vs. auditor (those indirectly received CF)

 JFL students who enrolled in the second semester beginning course at Texas Tech University (N = 15).

 Japanese locative particles: de and ni; specifically… a) de: /place noun X/ + de + /predicate of activity Y/ e.g. Toshokan de hon o yomimashita. (I read a book at the library) b) ni: /place noun X/ + ni + /predicate of motion Y/ e.g. Toshokan ni ikimashita. (I went to the library.) c) ni: /place noun X/ + ni + /predicate of static, inactive location Y/ e.g. Makudonarudo wa ginkou no tonari ni arimasu. (McDonald’s is next to the bank.)

 Picture Description Task Metalinguistic Feedback Group (N = 8) vs. Recast Group (N = 7)  35 minutes

 Output-prompting  Output Hypothesis (Swain, 1985)  The increase of control of partially acquired forms Prompts are more effective than recasts because they induce learners to self-correct. (Lyster, 2004)

S13: Mearii-san wa gogo goji de.. goji ni uchi de [incorrect form] kaerimasu. (Mary goes home at 5 p.m.) T: Etto, kaeru wa movement desu. (Well, “go” is movement.) S13: Uchi ni [correct form] kaerimashita. ((She) went home.)

 Input-providing  Recasts free attention needed for processing the linguistic contrasts. (Ohta, 2001)  The learning of new forms Negotiation involving recasts is especially facilitative of acquisition because they provide learners with both negative and positive evidence. (Long, 2008)

S6: Uchi de [incorrect form] kaerimashita. ((She) went home.) T: Hai, uchi ni kaerimashita. (Yes, (she) went home.) S6: Uchi ni [correct form] kaerimashita. ((She) went home.)

Collecting handouts and announcement of posttests (2 mins) Robert (10mins) Picture Description & Filling in the tables (7 mins)Comprehension Questions (3mins) Takeshi (10 mins) Picture Description & Filling in the tables (7 mins)Comprehension Questions (3mins) Mary (10 mins) Picture Description & Filling in the tables (7 mins)Comprehension Questions (3mins) Explanation of the task (3 mins)

 Timed Picture Description Test (for implicit knowledge)  Untimed Grammaticality Judgment Test (for explicit knowledge)

 10 target items (6 old items & 4 new items) 5 distractors  10 seconds for each description

 5 target items (3 old items & 2 new items) 10 distractors

pretest (2 days before T) treatment immediate posttest (1 day after T) delayed posttest (4 weeks after T)

N = 15 Mean3 Mode4 Median3 Min1 Max4 SD1.13 Key5

N = 15 Mean2.5 Mode0 Median2 Min0 Max7 SD2.26 Key10

Metalinguistic Feedback Group (N = 8) Recast Group (N = 7) Number of target CF episodes 1619 Number of CFE: Activity 66 Number of CFE: Movement 34 Number of CFE: Static Location 79

N = 15(pretest) Mean2.7 (3) Mode2 (4) Median2 (3) Min0 (1) Max5 (4) SD1.53 (1.13) Key5

Metalinguistic Feedback Group (N = 8) (pretest) Recast Group (N = 7) (pretest) Mean4.13 (2.75)4.14 (2.28) Mode2 (0)4 (0) Median3 (2.5)4 (2) Min0 (0) Max10 (7)8 (5) SD3.52 (2.49)3.02 (2.14) Key10

AddresseeAuditor Total 40% (4/10) 24% (10/41) Metalinguistic CF 50% (3/6) 28% (7/25) Recast 25% (1/4) 19% (3/16)

 No improvement of explicit knowledge  Some gains in implicit knowledge  No difference was found between the two groups (Metalinguistic vs. Recast)  Those who directly received CF (addressees) benefited from the feedback more than those who indirectly received CF (auditors)

 Small number of participants  Short length of treatment  Small number of test items  Test repetition effects