How Written Recasts Influence the Processing of Corrective Feedback: A Case of Noticeability and Explicitness

doi:10.65961/AJELT-2015-1-002

PDF(382 KB)

Asian Journal of English Language Teaching ›› 2015, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (1) : 35-62. DOI: 10.65961/AJELT-2015-1-002

Articles

How Written Recasts Influence the Processing of Corrective Feedback: A Case of Noticeability and Explicitness

Baburhan UZUM

Author information +

History +

Abstract

The present study explores whether written recasts influence the processing of corrective feedback. Following an experimental design, lower-intermediate level ESL learners (N=32, Asian and Arabic) studying at an American university were randomly put into three groups. Group A (aural recasts) received recasts only through an aural channel, Group V (visual recasts) received recasts only through a visual channel, and Group AV (aural and visual recast) received feedback through both channels in the treatment sessions. The statistical data gathered from pre-test and post-test scores were submitted to a series of ANOVA and ANCOVA tests, and interpretations were drawn from the findings. The study tested the hypothesis that learners receiving recasts through both modalities outperform the other groups in relation to their post-test performance. The results indicated that Group AV outperformed V and A groups regarding their performance in the written and oral measures, suggesting a significant contribu- tion of the modality in which recasts are provided. In order to increase the explicitness of corrective feedback, recasts should be given in aural and visual modalities to be easily noticeable, unambiguous, and efficient, considering classroom time limitations.

Cite this article

EndNote

Ris (Procite)

Bibtex

Download Citations

Baburhan UZUM. (2015). How Written Recasts Influence the Processing of Corrective Feedback: A Case of Noticeability and Explicitness.Asian Journal of English Language Teaching , 25(1): 35-62. https://doi.org/10.65961/AJELT-2015-1-002

References

Askildson, V. D. (2007). How learners’ affective variables impact their perception of recasts in the acquisition of grammatical gender in L2 French. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Arizona, Tucson.
Ayoun, D. (2001). The role of negative and positive feedback in the second language acquisition of the passé composé and imparfait. The Modern Language Journal, 85(2), 227-243.
Ayoun, D. (2004). The effectiveness of written recasts in the second language acquisition of aspectual distinctions in French: A follow-up study. The Modern Language Journal, 88(1), 31-55.
Carrol, S., & Swain, M. (1993). Explicit and implicit negative feedback: An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(3), 357-386.
Doughty, C. (1991). Second language instruction does make a difference: Evidence from an empirical study of SL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13(4), 431-469.
Ellis R., Loewen S., & Erlam R. (2006). Implicit and explicit correctıve feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339-368.
Ellis, R., & Sheen, Y. (2006). Reexamining the role of recasts in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(4), 575-600.
Gass S., Behney J., & Uzum B. (2013). Inhibitory control, working memory, and L2 interaction gains. In K. Drozdzial-Szelest & M. Pawlak (Eds.),Psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic perspectives on second language learning and teaching. pp. 91-114. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Izumi, S. (2002). Output, input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(4), 541-577.
Leeman, J. (2003). Recasts and second language development: Beyond negative evidence. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(1), 37-63.
Leow, R. (2001). Do learners notice enhanced forms while interacting with the L2?: An online and offline study of the role of written input enhancement in L2 reading. Hispania, 84(3), 496-509.
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309-365.
Lluna, M. (2006). Development of Spanish L2 competence in a synchronous CMC (Chat Room) environment: The role of visually-enhanced recasts in fostering grammatical knowledge and changes in communicative language use.(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge.
Loewen, S., & Philp, J. (2006). Recasts in the adult English L2 classroom: Characteristics, explicitness, and effectiveness. The Modern Language Journal, 90(4), 536-556.
Long, M. (1996). The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), The Handbook of Language Acquisition (Vol. 2, pp. 413-468). New York: Academic Press.
Long M., Inagaki S., & Ortega L. (1998). The role of implicit negative feedback in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 357-371.
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(3), 399-432.
Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (Eds.). (2006). Synthesizing research on language learning andteaching. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Philp, J. (2003). Constraints on noticing the gap: Nonnative speakers’ noticing of recasts in NS-NNS interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(1), 99-126.
Rassaei, E. (2015). Effects of textual enhancement and input enrichment on L2 development.TESOL Journal, 6(2), 281-301.
Sagarra, N. (2007). From CALL to face-to-face interaction: The effect of computer-delivered recasts and working memory on L2 development. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 229-248). New York: Oxford University Press.
Sagarra, N., & Abbuhl, R. (2013). Optimizing the noticing of recasts via computer-delivered feedback: Evidence that oral input enhancement and working memory help second language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 97(1), 196-216.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129-158.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effects of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 301-322). New York: Oxford University Press.
Sheen, Y. (2010). Differential effects of oral and written corrective feedback in the ESL classroom.Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 203-234.