Corrective Feedback And Teacher Development

Peer Reviewed
Title:
Corrective Feedback and Teacher Development
Journal Issue:
L2 Journal, 1(1)
Author:
Ellis, Rod, Chang Jiang Scholar of Shanghai International Studies and University of Auckland
Publication Date:
2009
Publication Info:
L2 Journal
Permalink:
http://escholarship.org/uc/item/2504d6w3
Abstract:
This article examines a number of controversies relating to how corrective feedback (CF) has been viewed in SLA and language pedagogy. These controversies address (1) whether CF contributes to L2 acquisition, (2) which errors should be corrected, (3) who should do the correcting (the teacher or the learner him/herself), (4) which type of CF is the most effective, and (5) what is the best timing for CF (immediate or delayed). In discussing these controversies, both the pedagogic and SLA literature will be drawn on. The article will conclude with some general guidelines for conducting CF in language classrooms based on a sociocultural view of L2 acquisition and will suggest how these guidelines might be used for teacher development.
Copyright Information:
All rights reserved unless otherwise indicated. Contact the author or original publisher for any necessary permissions. eScholarship is not the copyright owner for deposited works. Learn more at http://www.escholarship.org/help_copyright.html#reuse

eScholarship provides open access, scholarly publishing services to the University of California and delivers a dynamic research platform to scholars worldwide.

L2 Journal, Volume 1 (2009), pp. 3-18

http://repositories.cdlib.org/uccllt/l2/vol1/iss1/art2/

Corrective Feedback and Teacher
Development
ROD ELLIS
Shanghai International Studies and University of Auckland
E-mail: [e-mail]
This article examines a number of controversies relating to how corrective feedback (CF) has been viewed in SLA and language pedagogy. These controversies address (1) whether CF contributes to L2 acquisition, (2) which errors should be corrected, (3) who should do the

References: Aljaafreh, A. & J. Lantolf. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the Zone of Proximal Development Allwright, R. (1975). Problems in the study of language teacher 's treatment of error. In M. Burt & H. Dulay (Eds.), On TESOL '75: New Directions in Second-Language Learning, Teaching and Bilingual Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 543-574. Anton, M. (1999). A learner-centered classroom: Sociocultural perspectives on teacher-learner interaction in the second language classroom Basturkmen, H., Loewen, S., & Ellis, R. (2004). Teachers’ stated belief about incidental focus on form and their classroom practices Batstone, R. (forthcoming 2010). Sociocognitive aspects of second language learning and teaching. Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing Burt, M. (1975). Error analysis in the adult EFL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 53-63. Carroll, S., & Swain, M. (1993). Explicit and implicit negative feedback: An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations Chaudron, C. (1977). A descriptive model of discourse in the corrective treatment of learners’ errors. Language Learning, 27, 29-46. Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5: 161169. Chun, A., Day, R., Chenoweth, A., & Luppescu, S. (1982). Errors, interaction, and correction: A study of nonnative conversations. TESOL Quarterly, 16, 537-547. Doughty, C. (2001). Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp Doughty, C., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.). Ellis, R. (1993). Second language acquisition and the structural syllabus. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 91-113. Ellis, R. (2006). Researching the effects of form-focused instruction on L2 acquisition. In K. Bardovi-Harlig & Z Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. English Language Teaching Journal, 63, 97-107. Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51, 281-318. Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2005). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar Ellis, R., & Sheen, Y. (2006). Re-examining the role of recasts in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 575–600. Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008).The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Ferris, D. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction L2 Journal Vol. 1 (2009) 17 Han, Z. (2002). A study of the impact of recasts on tense consistency in L2 output. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 543-72. Harmer, J. (1983). The practice of English language teaching. London: Longman. Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hendrickson, J. (1978). Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research and practice. Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon. Loewen, S., & Philp, J. (2006). Recasts in the adult English L2 classroom: characteristics, explicitness, and effectiveness Long, M. (2006). Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Lyster, R. (1998). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399-432. Lyster, R., & L. Ranta. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms Mackey, A. (Ed.). (2007). Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies Nystrom, N. (1983). Teacher-student interaction in bilingual classrooms: Four approaches to error feedback. In H Oliver, R. (2000). Age differences in negotiation and feedback in classroom and pairwork. Language Learning, 50, 119–151. Richards, J., & Farrell, T. (2005). Professional development for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Russell, J., & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for acquisition of L2 grammar: A meta-analysis of the research Seedhouse, P. (1997). The case of the missing “no”: The relationship between pedagogy and interaction. Seedhouse, P. (2004). The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective Sheen, Y. (2006). Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner uptake. Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development. London: Heinemann. Truscott, J. 1996. The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327-369. Truscott, J. (1999). What’s wrong with oral grammar correction. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 55, 437-455. Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 255-272. Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Vann, R., Meyer, D., & Lorenz, F VanPatten, B. (1992). Second-language acquisition research and foreign language teaching, part 2. ADFL