Examen de los efectos diferenciales de las reformulaciones y elicitaciones en la captación y el uso de condicionales contrafactuales en inglés por parte de estudiantes turcos de EFL

Onur Uludag

doi:10.30827/portalin.vi44.27494

Authors

Onur Uludag Afyon Kocatepe University https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6912-2979

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi44.27494

Keywords:

oral corrective feedback, reformulations, elicitations, uptake, English past counterfactual conditionals

Abstract

The study investigated the differential effects of reformulations and elicitations during the use of a complex linguistic structure, namely, English past counterfactual conditionals. It also explored how proficiency level of learners mediated the successful use of the target form. Sixty Turkish EFL learners were employed and distributed into three groups: reformulations (n = 20), elicitations (n = 20), and control (n = 20). During the online delivery of courses due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the learners met their instructors synchronously outside class times over a period of five weeks for the administration of the treatment and data collection. To prompt the use of the target linguistic structure, the researcher developed an oral production task. The immediate learner uptake measures and pretest-posttest results were analyzed to evaluate the effectiveness of both feedback strategies. The analysis comparing the measure of learner uptake indicated a greater number of successful corrections for reformulations. The data from the pretest-posttest measures also suggested that the reformulations group outperformed the elicitations and control group. It was also revealed that the proficiency level of learners had a mediating role only for reformulations. The findings of the study were discussed with reference to pedagogical implications.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Onur Uludag, Afyon Kocatepe University

Onur Uludag (PhD) is an assistant professor in the English language teacher training program at Faculty of Education, Afyon Kocatepe University. His research interests include corrective feedback, input processing, L2 vocabulary acquisition, teacher training.

References

Ammar, A. (2008). Prompts and recasts: Differential effects on second language morphosyntax. Language Teaching Research, 12, 183–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807086287

Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 543–574. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060268

Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher’s course. Heinle and Heinle.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. New York, NY: Routledge Academic.

Dilans, G. (2010). Corrective feedback and L2 vocabulary development: Prompts and recasts in the adult ESL classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 66, 787–816. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.66.6.787

Doughty, C. (2001). Cognitive underpinning of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 206–257). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.010

Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339–368.

Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 journal, 1, 3–18. https://doi.org/10.5070/l2.v1i1.9054

Ellis, R. (2017). Oral corrective feedback in L2 classrooms. In H. Nassaji & E. Kartchava (Eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications (pp. 3–18). New York: Routledge.

Gass, S.M. (2003). Input and interaction. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 224-255). Blackwell.

Izumi, S., & Bigelow, M. (2000). Does output promote noticing and second language acquisition? TESOL Quarterly, 34, 239–278.

Izumi, S., Bigelow, M., Fujiwara, M., & Fearnow, S. (1999). Testing the output hypothesis: Effects of output on noticing and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(3), 421–452.

Kamiya, N. (2015). The effectiveness of intensive and extensive recasts on L2 acquisition for implicit and explicit knowledge. Linguistics and Education, 29, 59–72.

Li, S. (2010), The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 309-365. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x

Li S. (2013). The interactions between the effects of implicit and explicit feedback and individual differences in language analytic ability and working memory. Modern Language Journal, 97, 634–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12030.x

Li, S., & Vuono, A. (2019). Twenty-five years of research on oral and written corrective feedback in System. System, 84, 93-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.05.006

Lightbown, P. (1998). The importance of timing in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 177–196). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Loewen, S., & Philp, J. (2006). Recasts in adults English L2 classrooms: Characteristics, explicitness, and effectiveness. Modern Language Journal, 90, 536–556. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00465.x

Loewen, S., & Nabei, T. (2007). The effect of oral corrective feedback on implicit and explicit L2 knowledge. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction and second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (pp. 361-378). Oxford University Press.

Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). Academic Press.

Long, M. (2007). Problems in SLA. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lyster, R. (2002). The importance of differentiating negotiation of form and meaning in classroom interaction. In P. Burmeister, T. Piske, & A. Rohde (Eds.), An integrated view of language development: Papers in honor of Henning Wode (pp. 381–397). Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.

Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399–432. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263104263021

Lyster, R., & Mori, H. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 269–300. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060128

Lyster, R., & Izquierdo, J. (2009). Prompts versus recasts in dyadic interaction. Language learning, 59, 453–498. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00512.x

Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (2013). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(3), 399-430.

Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46(1), 1-40. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000365

Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive interactional feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 471–497. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100004010

Mackey, A., & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 407-452). Oxford University Press.

Nassaji, H. (2009). Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning, 59, 411–452. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00511.x

Nassaji, H. (2010). The occurrence and effectiveness of spontaneous focus on form in adult ESL classrooms. Canadian Modern Language Review, 66, 907–933. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.66.6.907

Nassaji H. (2011). Immediate learner repair and its relationship with learning targeted forms in dyadic interaction. System, 39, 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.01.016

Nassaji, H. (2019). The effects of recasts versus prompts on immediate uptake and learning of a complex target structure. In R.M. DeKeyser & G.P. Botana (Eds.), Doing SLA research with implications for the classroom: Reconciling methodological demands and pedagogical applicability (pp. 107-126). John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (Eds.) (2017). Corrective Feedback in Second Language Teaching and Learning: Research, Theory, Applications, Implications. Routledge.

Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (Eds.) (2021). The Cambridge handbook of corrective feedback in second language learning and teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Oliver, R., & Adams, R. (2021). Oral Corrective Feedback. In H. Nassaji & E. Kartchava (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Corrective Feedback in Second Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 187–206). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108589789.010

Pawlak, M. (2021). Corrective Feedback, Developmental Readiness, and Language Proficiency. In H. Nassaji & E. Kartchava (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Corrective Feedback in Second Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 187–206). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108589789.010

Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129

Song, M., & Suh, B. (2008). The effects of output task types on noticing and learning of the English past counterfactual conditional. System, 36(2), 295-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.09.006.

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Newbury House.

VanPatten, B. (Ed.). (2004). Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Yang, Y., & Lyster, R. (2010). Effects of form-focused practice and feedback on Chinese EFL learners’ acquisition of regular and irregular past tense forms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 235–263. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990519

Yilmaz, Y. (2012). The relative effects of explicit correction and recasts on two target structures via two communication modes. Language Learning, 62, 1134–1169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00726.x