Publishing Partner: Cambridge University Press CUP Extra Publisher Login
amazon logo
More Info


New from Oxford University Press!

ad

Sorry About That

By Edwin L. Battistella

Sorry About That "explores why we apologize or don't and how our apologies succeed or fail."


New from Cambridge University Press!

ad

Sociolinguistics from the Periphery

By Sari Pietikäinen, Alexandra Jaffe, Helen Kelly-Holmes, Nik Coupland

Sociolinguistics from the Periphery "presents a fascinating book about change: shifting political, economic and cultural conditions; ephemeral, sometimes even seasonal, multilingualism; and altered imaginaries for minority and indigenous languages and their users"


Academic Paper


Title: Differential Effects of Oral and Written Corrective Feedback in the ESL Classroom
Author: Younghee Sheen
Institution: American University
Linguistic Field: Applied Linguistics; Language Acquisition
Abstract: This article examines whether there is any difference between the effect of oral and written corrective feedback (CF) on learners’ accurate use of English articles. To this end, the current research presents the results of a quasi-experimental study with a pretest, immediate-posttest, delayed-posttest design, using 12 intact intermediate English-as-a-second-language classes with adult learners of various first language backgrounds. Five groups were formed: oral recasts (n = 26), oral metalinguistic (n = 26), written direct correction (n = 31), written direct metalinguistic (n = 32), and control (n = 28). All four experimental groups completed two 30-min communicative narrative tasks. For the oral CF groups, students were asked to retell a story during which CF was provided. For the written CF groups, students were first asked to rewrite a story and then given CF. The acquisition of English articles was measured by means of a speeded dictation test, a written narrative test, and an error correction test. One-way ANOVAs with post hoc comparisons indicated that all CF groups, except for oral recasts, significantly outperformed the control group in the immediate and delayed posttests. These findings show that, whereas implicit oral recasts that involve article errors were not facilitative to learning, the other CF types were effective in helping learners improve the grammatical accuracy of English articles irrespective of language analytic ability. Overall, these results suggest that the degree of explicitness of both oral and written CF—rather than the medium in which the CF is provided—is the key factor that influences CF effectiveness.

CUP AT LINGUIST

This article appears IN Studies in Second Language Acquisition Vol. 32, Issue 2, which you can READ on Cambridge's site or on LINGUIST .



Add a new paper
Return to Academic Papers main page
Return to Directory of Linguists main page