recast

Various studies have confirmed the influential role of corrective feedback (CF) in the development of different linguistic skills and components. However, little, if any, research has been conducted on comparing types of linguistic errors treated by teachers through CF. To bridge this gap, this study sought to investigate the linguistic errors addressed and the types of CF provided by teachers. To this end, the classes of 40 teachers teaching at the intermediate level were audio-recorded for two successive sessions. The detailed analysis of around 128 hours of classroom interactions showed that explicit correction was the most frequent CF type, accounting for 48.5 percent of all CF types provided, and recast was the second most frequently used CF type, constituting 29.5 percent of all CF types. All the other CF types (i.e. request for clarification, confirmation check, repetition, metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, and multiple feedback) constituted 22 percent of the CF. Repetition was the least frequently used CF type, amounting to 0.66 percent of the CF given by teachers. As to the linguistic focus of CF, pronunciation errors were found to be the mostly noticed target for teachers’ CF, constituting 47 percent of all errors addressed, while vocabulary was the least frequently addressed linguistic target, accounting for 17.5 percent of all errors. The study suggests that teachers prefer explicit corrective strategies over implicit ones and that they provide CF mainly to correct pronunciations errors. The study suggests that there is a need for change in the types of CF teachers use and the relative attention they assign to different linguistic error types they treat through CF

The role of oral corrective feedback has been investigated by SLA researchers from various perspectives. Focusing on Iranian EFL context, the present study aimed to explore the role of receiving corrective feedback in the learning of English grammatical structures. It also probed the association between the type of corrective feedback and EFL learners’ learning styles. This was an experimental study examining a sample of 128 intermediate-level EFL learners through pretest-posttest control group design. Data of the study was analysed through one-way ANOVA conducted on post-test scores. Results of the study indicated that there were statistically significant differences between experimental groups and control group in terms of receiving feedback. These findings implied the outperformance of the metalinguistic feedback group over recast group and also the superiority of providing EFL learners with feedback compared to no-feedback. The results obtained from two-way ANOVA revealed an effectively significant interaction between the type of oral corrective feedback and the learners’ learning styles. The study discussed how both types of corrective feedback and learning styles could manipulate L2 acquisition which might have some implications for EFL language teachers in the classroom.

Based on the controversial beliefs among L2 teachers about effective corrective feedback (CF) strategies, recast and prompts as 2 kinds of CF have drawn the attention of L2 researchers(e.g., Braidi, 2002; Iwashita, 2003; Loewen & Philp, 2006; Panova & Lyster, 2002; Sheen, 2004). Despite these numbers of studies, debate continues to exist about their usefulness as a CF technique. Whereas recasts provide a correct reformulation of L2 learners’ nontarget utterance, the other alternative type of feedback in L2 classroom settings is referred to as prompts (Lyster, 2004) because they provide signals that prompt L2 learners to self-repair rather than provide them with a correct reformulation of their nontarget utterance. Hence, the focus of this study was to examine the effect of recasts in comparison to prompts on the learning of English third person singular marker “s” by Iranian preintermediate L2 learners. Two CF techniques of recasts and prompts were utilized in 2 experimental groups in response to their errors in using the correct form of the verb for third person singular subject. In the third group as the control group, No-CF was provided by the L2 teacher. The results revealed that the Prompts Group had outperformed the Recast Group and No-CF Group. Thus, it could be concluded that prompts as a CF strategy led to more gains than CF that provided the L2 learners with the correct form (recast) than No-CF.  

This study examined the effect of two types of feedback, post-text as a written feedback and recast as an oral one on written grammatical accuracy of Iranian intermediate EFL learners. To this end, 45 intermediate students who were studying at Ideal Language Institute in Sari were selected based on their performance on the Nelson proficiency test, and then divided into three groups (two experimental and one control groups) randomly. As pretest, the participants were asked to write 150-200 words about the worst memory they had in their life. Then, they were exposed to 10 weeks of treatment. Each week, they received a topic to write. One of the experimental groups received post-text feedback and another one recast. Afterwards, the three groups sat for the posttest. The obtained results were compared using ANCOVA. The findings revealed that there was a significant difference between the post-test scores of the students in different groups. It was made clear that both treatments were effective on the reduction of students grammatical errors in writing, but post-text feedback was much more effective than recast.

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.

This study investigated the effects of corrective feedback (CF) on the acquisition of English prepositions to find out which one would be more effective for third-grade high school learners in their grammar performance. This study also examined declarative and interrogative recasts to see which one the participants preferred to improve their grammar performance. To this end,75 out of 130 female students at the intermediate level in Khorramshar took part in this study. The participants were randomly assigned into one control and two experimental groups. All three groups took the same pre and posttests; however, the treatment was different. The recast group received CF in the form of recast and the other in the form of metalinguistic clues. The control group only received general comments, like good, bad, etc. The results indicated that both experimental groups improved in preposition recognition and production in their grammar performances. The findings also showed that there was no significant difference between the students'' performance in experimental groups, but metalinguistic CF was more helpful. A careful calculation using a questionnaire based on 5-points Likert Scale showed that there was no significant difference between the participants'' preference for two types of recast by the group receiving recasts.

This paper aimed at examining the Iranian EFL teachers and learners’ preferences for two types of direct oral corrective feedback, including explicit correction and metalinguistic clues, and two types of indirect oral corrective feedback, including recast and repetition. The participants included 39 teachers and 84 EFL learners, selected through purposive sampling. A scenario-based questionnaire was constructed based on Lyster and Ranta’s (1997) typology of corrective feedback (CF) for the purpose of collecting data on the teachers and learners’ preferences for the type of CF. Feedback scenarios were extracted from the literature on CF. The questionnaire was distributed to the participants by one of the researchers. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted in order to triangulate the data gathered through the questionnaire. The results of the study indicated that the EFL teachers and learners preferred direct CF more than indirect CF. The results also revealed significant differences among EFL teachers with differing levels of teaching experience (i.e., low, moderate and high). The present study drew attention to the fact that direct types of CF were preferred over others in EFL context. This study has implications for EFL teachers, learners, and material developers.

This study investigated the effects of recast and explicit corrective feedback on Iranian IELTS test-takers anxiety in speaking across different levels of proficiency. Ninety male and female learners, aged 21 to 45, who were preparing themselves to take the IELTS Mock test, were divided into upper-intermediate and advanced levels. Then, they were randomly assigned to control and experimental groups (recast and explicit correction). There were 10 treatment sessions for each group. In the recast group, the students’ mistakes were corrected using reformulation. In the explicit correction group, mistakes were not tolerated, and they were corrected on the spot. In order to measure the anxiety in speaking performance, Chowdhury’s (2014) questionnaire was given to the participants once before the treatment and once after the treatment. Then, the score of each learner was calculated and recorded for the data analysis. The results showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the control and explicit corrective group and the control and recast groups at the upper-intermediate level. However, there was a statistically significant difference between the control and recast groups and the control and explicit group at the advanced levels.

Language learners receive different types of corrective feedback during the process of second language acquisition. Recast, as an approach to corrective feedback, is one of the most-frequently error correction techniques in classroom contexts. A plethora of research has addressed recast; however, the present study focused on comparing learners’ grammar achievement via oral and writing modalities through two perspectives, cognitive and ecological, who received recast. One hundred and twenty language learners, all first-year college students at Islamic Azad University and Applied Science University in Tehran participated in this study. They were assigned to four groups. The participants in all groups were exposed to different instructional programs based on the cognitive and ecological perspectives to language learning orally or in writing, and all learners received recast orally. Results obtained by a pretest and a posttest indicated that all groups made progress in their grammar achievement, while there was a statistically significant difference between the groups in the posttest. The participants in the ecological group had higher gains of grammatical structures than those in the cognitive group. However, data analysis revealed that there was no statistically significant difference between two oral and writing groups in their grammar achievement.

Corrective feedback has been evidenced to be a propitious pedagogical tool to promote second language (L2) knowledge, yet little is known about the role of interactional feedback in maximizing L2 learners’ pragmatic knowledge and their reciprocity patterns to corrective feedback in teacher-student interactions. Therefore, the current study made an attempt to bridge this gap. To do so, twenty (11 male and nine female) intermediate English as a foreign language (EFL) participant with an age range of 19 to 31 were recruited and were provided with recast for their inappropriate request strategies. The participants were assigned to perform requests in various scenarios that varied in terms of power, familiarity, and social distance. To gauge their performance, a pretest and posttest Discourse Completion Test (DCT) was run. The obtained data gave evidence to the efficiency of recast in improving L2 pragmatics. Moreover, classroom interactions were recorded and transcribed to identify the emerging reciprocity patterns. The findings revealed several reciprocity patterns, including repetition of trigger, modification of trigger, acknowledgement, topic continuation, and inability to respond. The findings have implications for L2 teachers and augment our understandings of the role of recast in L2 pragmatics and reciprocity patterns of students.

Findings on recast as feedback on learners’ erroneous forms tend to be less than conclusive or confirmatory. Also, the conventional formulations in literature give partial accounts of recasting as an effective methodological practice. The present study proposes recast enriched by negotiation (REN) on the learners’ part as an alternative. For investigating the hypothetical effect, three all-female groups were concentrated on, namely explicit feedback, recast and REN. Summary writing task as post-test concentrated on the learners’ accuracy in terms of error-free T units, and complexity regarding word per sentence ratio as well as lexical density. One-way ANOVA for three independent samples and post hoc analyses revealed that accuracy and word per sentence ratio did not vary significantly; however, lexical density improved as a result of REN. Findings and implications of the study are discussed in the light of methodological potentials and literature.