Eintrag weiter verarbeiten
The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis
Gespeichert in:
| Zeitschriftentitel: | Language Teaching Research |
|---|---|
| Personen und Körperschaften: | |
| In: | Language Teaching Research, 20, 2016, 4, S. 436-458 |
| Format: | E-Article |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| veröffentlicht: |
SAGE Publications
|
| Schlagwörter: |
| author_facet |
Brown, Dan Brown, Dan |
|---|---|
| author |
Brown, Dan |
| spellingShingle |
Brown, Dan Language Teaching Research The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis Linguistics and Language Education Language and Linguistics |
| author_sort |
brown, dan |
| spelling |
Brown, Dan 1362-1688 1477-0954 SAGE Publications Linguistics and Language Education Language and Linguistics http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168814563200 <jats:p> Research on corrective feedback (CF), a central focus of second language acquisition (SLA), has increasingly examined how teachers employ CF in second language classrooms. Lyster and Ranta’s (1997) seminal study identified six types of CF that teachers use in response to students’ errors (recast, explicit correction, elicitation, clarification request, metalinguistic cue, and repetition) as well as target linguistic foci (lexical, phonological, and grammatical errors). These taxonomies have remained dominant in observational studies conducted in a growing range of second language teaching contexts. Several studies have acknowledged that contextual factors may influence how teachers provide CF (e.g. Mori, 2002; Sheen, 2004) with few generalizable conclusions. The present study brings together research in this area in the first comprehensive synthesis of classroom CF research seeking to aggregate proportions of CF types teachers provide, as well as their target linguistic foci. Findings reveal that recasts account for 57% of all CF while prompts comprise 30%, and grammar errors received the greatest proportion of CF (43%). The study further identifies a range of contextual and methodological factors (i.e. moderators) that may influence CF choices across teaching contexts, such as student proficiency, teacher experience, and second/foreign language context. A clearer picture of the patterns of CF that teachers provide and the variables that influence these choices serves to complement the growing body of research investigating the efficacy of CF in second language pedagogy. </jats:p> The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis Language Teaching Research |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1177/1362168814563200 |
| facet_avail |
Online |
| finc_class_facet |
Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft, Indogermanistik, Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen Pädagogik |
| format |
ElectronicArticle |
| fullrecord |
blob:ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTE3Ny8xMzYyMTY4ODE0NTYzMjAw |
| id |
ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTE3Ny8xMzYyMTY4ODE0NTYzMjAw |
| institution |
DE-L229 DE-D275 DE-Bn3 DE-Brt1 DE-D161 DE-Gla1 DE-Zi4 DE-15 DE-Pl11 DE-Rs1 DE-105 DE-14 DE-Ch1 |
| imprint |
SAGE Publications, 2016 |
| imprint_str_mv |
SAGE Publications, 2016 |
| issn |
1362-1688 1477-0954 |
| issn_str_mv |
1362-1688 1477-0954 |
| language |
English |
| mega_collection |
SAGE Publications (CrossRef) |
| match_str |
brown2016thetypeandlinguisticfocioforalcorrectivefeedbackinthel2classroomametaanalysis |
| publishDateSort |
2016 |
| publisher |
SAGE Publications |
| recordtype |
ai |
| record_format |
ai |
| series |
Language Teaching Research |
| source_id |
49 |
| title |
The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis |
| title_unstemmed |
The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis |
| title_full |
The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis |
| title_fullStr |
The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed |
The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis |
| title_short |
The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis |
| title_sort |
the type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the l2 classroom: a meta-analysis |
| topic |
Linguistics and Language Education Language and Linguistics |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168814563200 |
| publishDate |
2016 |
| physical |
436-458 |
| description |
<jats:p> Research on corrective feedback (CF), a central focus of second language acquisition (SLA), has increasingly examined how teachers employ CF in second language classrooms. Lyster and Ranta’s (1997) seminal study identified six types of CF that teachers use in response to students’ errors (recast, explicit correction, elicitation, clarification request, metalinguistic cue, and repetition) as well as target linguistic foci (lexical, phonological, and grammatical errors). These taxonomies have remained dominant in observational studies conducted in a growing range of second language teaching contexts. Several studies have acknowledged that contextual factors may influence how teachers provide CF (e.g. Mori, 2002; Sheen, 2004) with few generalizable conclusions. The present study brings together research in this area in the first comprehensive synthesis of classroom CF research seeking to aggregate proportions of CF types teachers provide, as well as their target linguistic foci. Findings reveal that recasts account for 57% of all CF while prompts comprise 30%, and grammar errors received the greatest proportion of CF (43%). The study further identifies a range of contextual and methodological factors (i.e. moderators) that may influence CF choices across teaching contexts, such as student proficiency, teacher experience, and second/foreign language context. A clearer picture of the patterns of CF that teachers provide and the variables that influence these choices serves to complement the growing body of research investigating the efficacy of CF in second language pedagogy. </jats:p> |
| container_issue |
4 |
| container_start_page |
436 |
| container_title |
Language Teaching Research |
| container_volume |
20 |
| format_de105 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_de14 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_de15 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_de520 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_de540 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_dech1 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_ded117 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_degla1 |
E-Article |
| format_del152 |
Buch |
| format_del189 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_dezi4 |
Article |
| format_dezwi2 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_finc |
Article, E-Article |
| format_nrw |
Article, E-Article |
| _version_ |
1792346468200218627 |
| geogr_code |
not assigned |
| last_indexed |
2024-03-01T17:39:51.958Z |
| geogr_code_person |
not assigned |
| openURL |
url_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fvufind.svn.sourceforge.net%3Agenerator&rft.title=The+type+and+linguistic+foci+of+oral+corrective+feedback+in+the+L2+classroom%3A+A+meta-analysis&rft.date=2016-07-01&genre=article&issn=1477-0954&volume=20&issue=4&spage=436&epage=458&pages=436-458&jtitle=Language+Teaching+Research&atitle=The+type+and+linguistic+foci+of+oral+corrective+feedback+in+the+L2+classroom%3A+A+meta-analysis&aulast=Brown&aufirst=Dan&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1177%2F1362168814563200&rft.language%5B0%5D=eng |
| SOLR | |
| _version_ | 1792346468200218627 |
| author | Brown, Dan |
| author_facet | Brown, Dan, Brown, Dan |
| author_sort | brown, dan |
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 436 |
| container_title | Language Teaching Research |
| container_volume | 20 |
| description | <jats:p> Research on corrective feedback (CF), a central focus of second language acquisition (SLA), has increasingly examined how teachers employ CF in second language classrooms. Lyster and Ranta’s (1997) seminal study identified six types of CF that teachers use in response to students’ errors (recast, explicit correction, elicitation, clarification request, metalinguistic cue, and repetition) as well as target linguistic foci (lexical, phonological, and grammatical errors). These taxonomies have remained dominant in observational studies conducted in a growing range of second language teaching contexts. Several studies have acknowledged that contextual factors may influence how teachers provide CF (e.g. Mori, 2002; Sheen, 2004) with few generalizable conclusions. The present study brings together research in this area in the first comprehensive synthesis of classroom CF research seeking to aggregate proportions of CF types teachers provide, as well as their target linguistic foci. Findings reveal that recasts account for 57% of all CF while prompts comprise 30%, and grammar errors received the greatest proportion of CF (43%). The study further identifies a range of contextual and methodological factors (i.e. moderators) that may influence CF choices across teaching contexts, such as student proficiency, teacher experience, and second/foreign language context. A clearer picture of the patterns of CF that teachers provide and the variables that influence these choices serves to complement the growing body of research investigating the efficacy of CF in second language pedagogy. </jats:p> |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/1362168814563200 |
| facet_avail | Online |
| finc_class_facet | Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft, Indogermanistik, Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen, Pädagogik |
| format | ElectronicArticle |
| format_de105 | Article, E-Article |
| format_de14 | Article, E-Article |
| format_de15 | Article, E-Article |
| format_de520 | Article, E-Article |
| format_de540 | Article, E-Article |
| format_dech1 | Article, E-Article |
| format_ded117 | Article, E-Article |
| format_degla1 | E-Article |
| format_del152 | Buch |
| format_del189 | Article, E-Article |
| format_dezi4 | Article |
| format_dezwi2 | Article, E-Article |
| format_finc | Article, E-Article |
| format_nrw | Article, E-Article |
| geogr_code | not assigned |
| geogr_code_person | not assigned |
| id | ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTE3Ny8xMzYyMTY4ODE0NTYzMjAw |
| imprint | SAGE Publications, 2016 |
| imprint_str_mv | SAGE Publications, 2016 |
| institution | DE-L229, DE-D275, DE-Bn3, DE-Brt1, DE-D161, DE-Gla1, DE-Zi4, DE-15, DE-Pl11, DE-Rs1, DE-105, DE-14, DE-Ch1 |
| issn | 1362-1688, 1477-0954 |
| issn_str_mv | 1362-1688, 1477-0954 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-01T17:39:51.958Z |
| match_str | brown2016thetypeandlinguisticfocioforalcorrectivefeedbackinthel2classroomametaanalysis |
| mega_collection | SAGE Publications (CrossRef) |
| physical | 436-458 |
| publishDate | 2016 |
| publishDateSort | 2016 |
| publisher | SAGE Publications |
| record_format | ai |
| recordtype | ai |
| series | Language Teaching Research |
| source_id | 49 |
| spelling | Brown, Dan 1362-1688 1477-0954 SAGE Publications Linguistics and Language Education Language and Linguistics http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168814563200 <jats:p> Research on corrective feedback (CF), a central focus of second language acquisition (SLA), has increasingly examined how teachers employ CF in second language classrooms. Lyster and Ranta’s (1997) seminal study identified six types of CF that teachers use in response to students’ errors (recast, explicit correction, elicitation, clarification request, metalinguistic cue, and repetition) as well as target linguistic foci (lexical, phonological, and grammatical errors). These taxonomies have remained dominant in observational studies conducted in a growing range of second language teaching contexts. Several studies have acknowledged that contextual factors may influence how teachers provide CF (e.g. Mori, 2002; Sheen, 2004) with few generalizable conclusions. The present study brings together research in this area in the first comprehensive synthesis of classroom CF research seeking to aggregate proportions of CF types teachers provide, as well as their target linguistic foci. Findings reveal that recasts account for 57% of all CF while prompts comprise 30%, and grammar errors received the greatest proportion of CF (43%). The study further identifies a range of contextual and methodological factors (i.e. moderators) that may influence CF choices across teaching contexts, such as student proficiency, teacher experience, and second/foreign language context. A clearer picture of the patterns of CF that teachers provide and the variables that influence these choices serves to complement the growing body of research investigating the efficacy of CF in second language pedagogy. </jats:p> The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis Language Teaching Research |
| spellingShingle | Brown, Dan, Language Teaching Research, The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis, Linguistics and Language, Education, Language and Linguistics |
| title | The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis |
| title_full | The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis |
| title_fullStr | The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis |
| title_short | The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis |
| title_sort | the type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the l2 classroom: a meta-analysis |
| title_unstemmed | The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis |
| topic | Linguistics and Language, Education, Language and Linguistics |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168814563200 |