elicitation

This study investigates the effect of four types of oral corrective feedback, namely, explicit elicitation, implicit elicitation, explicit recast and implicit recast on the most commonly mispronounced phonological features among Iranian EFL learners through immediate uptake and retention. Five classes were randomly categorized into four experimental groups and one control group, each with 18 intermediate-level male learners. The treatment was conducted in the form of a retelling task in nine sessions. During the feedback sessions, the learners’ uptake was recorded. The learners’ retention was also perused in one immediate and one delayed post-test. The results revealed that those learners who received explicit recast obtained the highest score in terms of correct uptake, and that the groups performed differently across different time periods. The learners’ scores enhanced over time; however, the increase then leveled off and even dropped in the delayed post-test in all the experimental groups except for the group which received explicit elicitation, apparently leading to more retention of the target phonological features. The study offers insights to teachers regarding the effect of recast and elicitation in their explicit and implicit form on L2 pronunciation.

The current research investigates the impact of two types of corrective feedback such as elicitation, and clarification requests - out of five types of corrective feedback - on the speaking abilities of Iranian intermediate EFL learners who are either introverts or extroverts. Participants in the study included 172 intermediate level students in 11 groups: 10 experimental and 1 control groups. They were language learners studying English in The Iran Language Institute in three branches: two branches in Babol, and one in Sari. The tools applied in this quasi-experimental research were: Oxford Placement Test (OPT) to achieve the homogeneity of the groups, speaking section of IELTS as pre-test and post-test and a Learning Style Survey to examine extraversion and introversion. ANCOVA and two-way ANOVA statistics were employed to analyze the data. The findings revealed that the extroverts had better performance in elicitation while the introverts had better performance in clarification corrective feedback. Employing the findings of the study, teachers can create a supportive and inclusive atmosphere that encourages both introverted and extroverted learners to participate and engage in speaking activities.

The present study sought to compare the effect of two modes of corrective feedback, that is, recast and elicitation, on the speaking accuracy of impulsive and reflective EFL learners. In doing so, 95 intermediate EFL learners who were studying at Tehran's Kish Language School were selected through nonrandom convenience sampling and sat for the Impulsivity Sub-Scale of Eysenck's Impulsive Questionnaire (EIQ). A total of 15 learners who were within the middle range were excluded, thus leaving 80 impulsive and reflective learners. Subsequently, a sample PET speaking test was administered as the pretest to assess the participants' speaking accuracy at the outset. Next, the participants were divided into four subgroups: 20 impulsive and 22 reflective learners undergoing a recast treatment, and 18 impulsive and 20 reflective participants experiencing elicitation. Once the 16-session treatment ended, another sample PET speaking test was administered as the posttest, and all four hypotheses were tested through a two-way analysis of covariance. The findings demonstrated that both recast and elicitation were significantly effective in improving the participants' speaking accuracy, while the elicitation impulsive group benefited the most compared to others. The pedagogical implications of this research and suggestions for further study are elaborated in the paper.