THE ROLE OF CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN IMPROVING SPEAKING ACCURACY: A LITERATURE REVIEW

Shahad Kefah Razzaq; Maryam Sattar Jabbar

Авторы

Shahad Kefah Razzaq Department of English, Imam Ja'afar AL-Sadiq's University, Iraq
Maryam Sattar Jabbar Department of English, University of Kut, Iraq

Ключевые слова:

corrective feedback, speaking accuracy, oral errors in instructional discourse, second language acquisition

Аннотация

This study examines how corrective feedback (CF) affects the speaking accuracy of second language learners. The proficiency of speaking in a second language acquisition (SLA) includes not only the correct use of grammar but also correct pronunciation, and correct use of words in different contexts / appropriateness of words. Speaking accuracy in SLA, however, has not been given its due attention. The term corrective feedback, which refers to a response to learner error which brings to the learner’s attention language that does not conform with the target, has found considerable currency in the literature as being an effective form of instruction. While some types of corrective feedback are more successful than others, and what factors influence their success is widely debated. A review of earlier studies on the main corrective feedback strategies, such as explicit correction, recasts, metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, repetition and peer feedback. This is a critical examination of the reported effects of the feedback on speaking accuracy, as well as how feedback effectiveness is influenced by learner-related factors (proficiency level, learning style, language anxiety, and working memory). According to the literature reviewed, explicit feedback is more likely to lead to better grammatical accuracy while implicit feedback, especially recasts, is more effective for pronunciation. The texts bring out the significance of feedback, self-repair as well as learner engagement for maximum learning. The conclusion summarizes a pedagogical implication of the reviewed studies and some recommendations that may serve language teachers, curriculum designers and teacher educators who wish to implement corrective feedback in speaking-oriented EFL classrooms.

Библиографические ссылки

P. Skehan, A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford University Press, 1998.

R. Ellis, “Instructed Second Language Acquisition: A Literature Review,” Ministry of Education, New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand, 2005.

R. Lyster and L. Ranta, “Corrective feedback and learner uptake,” Stud. Second Lang. Acquis., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 37–66, 1997.

R. Ellis, “Corrective feedback and teacher development,” L2 Journal, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 3–18, 2009.

M. H. Long, “The role of the linguistic environment in SLA,” in Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, Academic Press, 1996, pp. 413–468.

R. Schmidt, “The role of consciousness in second language learning,” Appl. Linguist., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 129–158, 1990.

L. S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press, 1978.

S. Li, “The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis,” Lang. Learn., vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 309–365, 2010.

R. Lyster and K. Saito, “Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis,” Stud. Second Lang. Acquis., vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 265–302, 2010.

R. Ellis, S. Loewen, and R. Erlam, “Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar,” Stud. Second Lang. Acquis., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 339–368, 2006.

Y. Sheen, “The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude,” TESOL Quarterly, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 255–283, 2007.

J. Goo, “Corrective feedback and working memory capacity,” Stud. Second Lang. Acquis., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 445–474, 2012.

R. Lyster, “Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction,” Lang. Learn., vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 183–218, 1998.

A. Ammar and N. Spada, “One size fits all? Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning,” Stud. Second Lang. Acquis., vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 543–574, 2006.

E. Rassaei, “The effect of recasts and metalinguistic feedback on L2 development,” Language Teaching Research, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 89–112, 2013.

K. Saito and R. Lyster, “Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation,” Lang. Learn., vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 595–633, 2012.

H. Nassaji, The Interactional Feedback Dimension. Bloomsbury, 2015.

N. Al-Mohammadi, “Effectiveness of Using Infographics as an Approach for Teaching Programming Fundamentals on Developing Analytical Thinking Skills for High School Students in the City of Makkah in Saudi Arabia,” Global Journal of Educational Studies, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 22, Feb. 2017, doi: 10.5296/gjes.v3i1.10854.

A. R. Rezaei, “Comparing strategies for active participation of students in group discussions,” Active Learning in Higher Education, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 337–351, Feb. 2022, doi: 10.1177/14697874221075719.

E. K. Horwitz, “Language anxiety and achievement,” Annu. Rev. Appl. Linguist., vol. 21, pp. 112–126, 2001.

E. K. Horwitz and others, “Foreign language classroom anxiety and learner participation,” Modern Language Journal, vol. 105, no. 2, pp. 245–260, 2021.

M. Swain, “The output hypothesis,” in Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, Lawrence Erlbaum, 2005, pp. 471–483.

S. Loewen, “Incidental focus on form and second language learning,” Stud. Second Lang. Acquis., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 361–386, 2005.

Y. Watanabe and M. Swain, “Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction,” Language Teaching Research, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 121–142, 2007.

R. Yoshida, “Teachers’ choice and learners’ preference of corrective feedback types,” Language Awareness, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 78–93, 2008.