This quasi-experimental study investigated the noticeability and effectiveness of three corrective feedback (CF) techniques (recasts, prompts and a combination of the two) delivered in the language classroom. The participants were four groups of high-beginner college level francophone learners of English as a second language (ESL) (n = 99) and their teachers. Each teacher was assigned to a treatment condition that fit his CF style, but the researcher taught the controls. CF was provided to the learners in response to their production problems with the simple past and questions in the past. While the noticing of CF was assessed through immediate recall protocols, learning outcomes were measured by way of picture description and spot-the-differences tasks administered through a pre-test/post-test design. The results indicated that the noticeability of CF is dependent on the grammatical target it addresses (i.e. feedback on past tense errors was noticed more) and that the CF techniques that push learners to self-correct alone or in combination with target exemplars are more effective in bringing out the corrective intent of the feedback move. In relation to the learning outcomes, the past tense accuracy levels increased more than those for questions, but the differences between the two targets were not significant across groups.
AmmarA. (2008). Prompts and recasts: Differential effects on second language morphosyntax. Language Teaching Research, 12, 183–210.
2.
AmmarA.SatoM. (2010a). Corrective feedback, noticing, and individual differences: Exploration into their relationship with second language acquisition. Paper presented at the annual conference of Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
3.
AmmarA.SatoM. (2010b). The importance of noticing in meaning-oriented second language classrooms. Paper presented at the 10th International Conference of the Association for Language Awareness, University of Kassel, Germany.
4.
AmmarA.SpadaN. (2006). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 543–574.
5.
AmmarA.SatoM.KartchavaE. (2010). How should noticing be measured? Evidence from classroom research on corrective feedback. Paper presented at the annual conference of American Association of Applied Linguistics, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
6.
Bardovi-HarligK. (1998). Narrative structure and lexical aspect: Conspiring factors in second language acquisition of tense-aspect morphology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 471–508.
7.
BraidiS.M. (2002). Reexamining the role of recasts in native-speaker/nonnative-speaker interactions. Language Learning, 52, 1–42.
8.
CarrollS.E. (1995). The irrelevance of verbal feedback to language learning. In EubankL.SelinkerL.SharwoodM. (Eds.), The current state of interlanguage (pp. 73–88). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
9.
ChaudronC. (1977). A descriptive modal of discourse in the corrective treatment of learners’ errors. Language Learning, 27, 29–46.
10.
CollinsL. (2002). The roles of L1 influence and lexical aspect in the acquisition of temporal morphology. Language Learning, 52, 43–94.
11.
CollinsL. (2007). L1 differences and L2 similarities: Teaching verb tenses in English. ELT Journal, 61, 295–303.
12.
CollinsL.TrofimovichP.WhiteJ.CardozoW.HorstM. (2009). Some input on the easy/difficult grammar question: An empirical study. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 336–353.
13.
DeKeyserR. (1993). The effect of error correction on L2 grammar knowledge and oral proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 77, 501–514.
14.
DeKeyserR. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In DoughtyC.WilliamsJ. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 42–63). New York: Cambridge University Press.
15.
DeKeyserR.M. (2005). What makes learning second-language grammar difficult? A review of issues. In DeKeyserR.M. (Ed.), Grammatical development in language learning (pp. 1–25). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
16.
DoughtyC. (1994). Fine-tuning of feedback by competent speakers to language learners. In AlatisJ.E. (Ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1993 (pp. 96–108). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
17.
DoughtyC.VarelaE. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In DoughtyC.WilliamsJ. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114–138). New York: Cambridge University Press.
18.
DoughtyC.WilliamsJ. (1998). Pedagogical choice in focus on form. In DoughtyC.WilliamsJ. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197–262). New York: Cambridge University Press.
19.
EgiT. (2007). Recasts, learners’ interpretations, and L2 development. In MackeyA. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 249–267). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20.
EllisN. C. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305–352.
21.
EllisR.BasturkmenH.LoewenS. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51, 218–318.
22.
EllisR.LoewenS.ErlamR. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339–368.
23.
GassS.M. (1997). Input, interaction and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erkbaum Associates, Publishers.
24.
GassS.M.VaronisE. (1994). Input, interaction and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 283–302.
25.
GatbontonE. (1994). Bridge to fluency: Speaking (book 1). Scarborough, ON: Prentice-Hall Canada Inc.
26.
HanZ. (2002). A study of the impact of recasts on tense consistency in L2 output. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 543–572.
27.
HavranekG. (1999). The effectiveness of corrective feedback: Preliminary results of an empirical study. Acquisition et Interaction en Language Étrangère, 2, 189–206.
28.
HertelT.J. (2003). Lexical and discourse factors in second language acquisition of Spanish word order. Second Language Research, 19, 273–304.
29.
IshidaM. (2004). Effects of recasts on the acquisition of the aspectual form of -te i (ru) by learners of Japanese as a foreign language. Language Learning, 54, 311–394.
30.
LeemanJ. (2003). Recasts and second language development: Beyond negative evidence. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 35–63.
31.
LightbownP.M. (1998). The importance of timing in focus on form. In DoughtyC.WilliamsJ. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 177–196). New York: Cambridge University Press.
32.
LochtmanK. (2002). Oral corrective feedback in the foreign language classroom: How it affects interaction in analytic foreign language teaching. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 271–283.
33.
LoewenS.PhilpJ. (2006). Recasts in the adult L2 classroom: characteristics, explicitness and effectiveness. Modern Language Journal, 90, 536–556.
34.
LongM. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In de BotK.GinsbergR.KramschC. (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39–52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
35.
LongM. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In RitchieW.C.BhatiaT.K. (Eds.), Handbook of language acquisition: Volume 2: Second Language Acquisition (pp. 413–468). New York: Academic Press.
36.
LongM.InagakiS.OrtegaL. (1998). The role of implicit negative feedback in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 357–371.
37.
LongM.H.RobinsonP. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In DoughtyC.WilliamsJ. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15–41). New York: Cambridge University Press.
38.
LysterR. (1999). La négociation de la forme: La suite … mais pas la fin [Negotiation of the form: The following … but not the end]. The Canadian Modern Language Review / La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 55, 355–381.
39.
LysterR. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts on form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399–432.
40.
LysterR.IzquierdoJ. (2009). Prompts versus recasts in dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 59, 453–498.
41.
LysterR.MoriH. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 269–300.
42.
LysterR.RantaL. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37–66.
43.
LysterR.SaitoK. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 265–302.
44.
MackeyA. (1999). Input, interaction, and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 557–587.
45.
MackeyA. (2006). Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 27, 405–430.
46.
MackeyA.GooJ. (2007). Interaction in SLA: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. In MackeyA. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (pp. 407–452). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
47.
MackeyA.PhilpJ. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings?The Modern Language Journal, 82, 338–356.
48.
MackeyA.GassS.M.McDonoughK. (2000). How do learners perceive implicit negative feedback?Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 471–497.
49.
MackeyA.PhilpJ.EgiT.FujiiA.TasumiT. (2002). Individual differences in working memory, noticing of interactional feedback in L2 development. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 181–209). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
50.
McDonoughK. (2005). Identifying the impact of negative feedback and learners’ responses on ESL development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 79–103.
51.
McDonoughK. (2007). Interactional feedback and the emergence of simple past activity verbs in L2 English. In MackeyA. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (pp. 323–338). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
52.
McDonoughK.MackeyA. (2006). Responses to recasts: Repetitions, primed production and linguistic development. Language Learning, 56, 693–720.
53.
NassajiH. (2009). Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning, 59, 411–452.
54.
OhtaA. (2000). Rethinking recasts: A learner-centered examination of corrective feedback in Japanese classroom. In HallJ.K.VerplaesteL. (Eds.), The construction of second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction (pp. 47–71). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
55.
OrtegaL. (2007). Meaningful L2 practice in foreign language classrooms: A cognitive-interactionist SLA perspective. In DeKeyserR. (Ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 180–207). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
56.
PanovaI.LysterR. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 573–595.
57.
PhilpJ. (2003). Constraints on ‘noticing the gap’: Nonnative speakers; noticing of recasts in NS–NNS interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 99–126.
58.
PienemannM.JohnstonM. (1987). Factors influencing the development of language proficiency. In NunanD. (Ed.), Applying Second Language Acquisition Research (pp. 45–141). Adelaide: National Curriculum Resource Centre, Adult Migrant Education Program.
59.
RobinsonP. (1995). Attention, memory and the ‘Noticing Hypothesis’. Language Learning, 45, 283–331.
60.
RobinsonP. (2001). Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude complexes, and learning conditions in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 17, 368–392.
61.
RobinsonP. (2003). Attention and memory during SLA. In DoughtyC.LongM.H. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 631–678). Oxford: Blackwell.
62.
RussellJ.SpadaN. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for second language acquisition: A meta-analysis of the research. In NorrisJ.OrtegaL. (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 131–164). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
63.
SalaberryR. (2000). The development of past tense morphology in L2 Spanish. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
64.
SchmidtR. (1983). Interaction, acculturation, and the acquisition of communicative competence. In WolfsonN.JuddE. (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition (pp. 137–174). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
65.
SchmidtR. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–158.
66.
SchmidtR. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In SchmidtR. (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1–63). Honolulu: Hawaii: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
67.
SchmidtR. (2001). Attention. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
68.
SheenY. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8, 263–300.
69.
SheenY. (2006). Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner uptake. Language Teaching Research, 10, 361–392.
70.
SpadaN. (1997). Form-focussed instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching, 30, 73–87.
71.
SpadaN.LightbownP. M. (1999). Instruction, first language influence, and developmental readiness in second language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 1–22.
72.
SwainM.LapkinS. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371–391.
73.
TrofimovichP.AmmarA.GatbontonE. (2007). How effective are recasts? The role of attention, memory, and analytical ability. In MackeyA. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 171–195). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
74.
YangY.LysterR. (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.
