Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Second Language Pronunciation
Vol. 5:1 (2019) ► pp.49–71

Correction timing

Does it affect teacher oral feedback?

| The University of Tennessee Knoxville

The current study set out to investigate the effects of oral corrective feedback (OCF) and examine the impact of correction timing on lexical stress and sentence intonation accuracy in a Persian context. The data was collected from a sample of upper-intermediate EFL students (N = 61). Immediate teacher-explicit OCF, delayed teacher-explicit OCF, and a control group were randomly assigned to three classes. A list of 50 new words, contextualized in 50 statements/questions, were utilized to measure any possible gains. Analysis of post-test results confirmed that the teacher immediate OCF (n = 20) and teacher delayed OCF (n = 20) classes outperformed the control group (n = 21). Post-hoc analysis revealed that the treatment groups were not significantly different in lexical stress accuracy gains. In contrast, the immediate group had significantly higher gains than the delayed one in sentence intonation accuracy.

Keywords: oral corrective feedback, feedback timing, teacher feedback, explicit feedback, lexical stress, sentence intonation
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Background
    • 1.2OCF in Second Language Acquisition (SLA)
    • 1.3Target structures in the present study
    • 1.4Existing OCF research shortcomings
    • 1.5Research questions
  • 2.Methodology
    • 2.1Design of the study
    • 2.2Operationalization of variables
    • 2.3Context
    • 2.4Participants
    • 2.5In-class language input and phonetic instruction
    • 2.6Instruments and procedure
      • 2.6.1Homogeneity test
      • 2.6.2Treatments
      • 2.6.3Pretest and posttest
        • 2.6.3.1Procedure
      • 2.6.4Data collection and analysis
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Lexical stress accuracy
    • 3.2Sentence intonation accuracy
  • 4.Discussion
    • 4.1Research questions 1 and 2: Impact of OCF timing
    • 4.2Differences in lexical stress and sentence intonation gains
    • 4.3OCF as a pedagogical tool
  • 5.Conclusion: Pedagogical implications and study limitations
  • References
Published online: 13 March 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.17004.sae
References

References

Ammar, A., & Spada, N.
(2006) One size fits all? Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(4), 543–574. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arciuli, J., & Cupples, L.
(2006) The processing of lexical stress during visual word recognition: Typicality effects and orthographic correlates. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(05), 920–948. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Butler, A. C., Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger III, H. L.
(2007) The effect of type and timing of feedback on learning from multiple-choice tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 13(4), 273–281.Google Scholar
Carroll, S. E.
(2001) Input and evidence: The raw material of second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carroll, 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), 357–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dalton, C., & Seidlhofer, B.
(1994) Pronunciation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R.
(2003) Implicit and explicit learning. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313–348). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J.
(2005) Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: A research-based approach. TESOL Quarterly, 39(3), 379–397. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., Munro, M. J., & Thomson, R. I.
(2007) A longitudinal study of ESL learners’ fluency and comprehensibility development. Applied Linguistics, 29(3), 359–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., Munro, M. J., & Wiebe, G.
(1997) Pronunciation instruction for fossilized learners: Can it help? Applied Language Learning, 8(1), 185–203.Google Scholar
(1998) Evidence in favor of a broad framework for pronunciation instruction. Language Learning, 48(3), 393–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dlaska, A., & Krekeler, C.
(2013) The short-term effects of individual corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation. System, 41(1), 25–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R.
(1994) The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R.
(2006) Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(02), 339–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Field, J.
(2005) Intelligibility and the listener: The role of lexical stress. TESOL Quarterly, 39(3), 399–423. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flege, J. E., & Liu, S.
(2001) The effect of experience on adults’ acquisition of a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23(4), 527–552. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hahn, L. D.
(2004) Primary stress and intelligibility: Research to motivate the teaching of suprasegmentals. TESOL Quarterly, 38(2), 201–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H.
(2007) The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Havranek, G.
(2002) When is corrective feedback most likely to succeed? International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3), 255–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hendrickson, J. M.
(1978) Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research, and practice. The Modern Language Journal, 62(8), 387–398.Google Scholar
Horwitz, E. K.
(1999) Cultural and situational influences on foreign language learners’ beliefs about language learning: A review of BALLI studies. System, 27(4), 557–576. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, J.
(2004) Research in teaching pronunciation and intonation. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 241, 109–125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kang, O.
(2010) Relative salience of suprasegmental features on judgments of L2 comprehensibility and accentedness. System, 38(2), 301–315. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kang, O., Rubin, D., & Pickering, L.
(2010) Suprasegmental measures of accentedness and judgments of language learner proficiency in oral English. The Modern Language Journal, 94(4), 554–566. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S., & Terrell, T.
(1983) The natural approach. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Alemany Press, Regents/Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C.-L. C.
(1988) Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Review of Educational Research, 58(1), 79–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, A. H., & Lyster, R.
(2015) The effects of corrective feedback on instructed L2 speech perception. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. Advance online publication. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lesley, T., Sandy, C., Hansen, C., & Zukowski, J.
(2005) Interchange Passages placement evaluation package (3rd edition). New York City, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Levis, J. M.
(2002) Reconsidering low-rising intonation in American English. Applied Linguistics, 23(1), 56–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, S.
(2010) The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) Oral corrective feedback. ELT journal, 68(2), 196–198. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, S., Zhu, Y., & Ellis, R.
(2016) The effects of the timing of corrective feedback on the acquisition of a new linguistic structure. The Modern Language Journal, 100(1), 276–295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lochtman, K.
(2002) Oral corrective feedback in the foreign language classroom: How it affects interaction in analytic foreign language teaching. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3), 271–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Long, M.
(1983) Does second language instruction make a difference? A review of research. TESOL Quarterly, 17(3), 359–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) Problems in SLA: Second language acquisition research series. Lawrence Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
The Longman dictionary of contemporary English
(5th ed.) (2009) New York, NY: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Lyster, R.
(2004) Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(3), 399–432. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L.
(1997) Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R., & Saito, K.
(2010) Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 265–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M.
(2013) Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46(01), 1–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., & Goo, J.
(2007) Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in SLA: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 408–452). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Philp, J.
(1998) Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 338–356. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nakata, T.
(2014) Effects of feedback timing on second language vocabulary learning: Does delaying feedback increase learning? Language Teaching Research, 19(4), 416–434. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pickering, L.
(2001) The role of tone choice in improving ITA communication in the classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 35(2), 233–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) Current research on intelligibility in English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 261, 219–233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Richards, J. C., & Sandy, C.
(2008) Passages: Students’ book 1 (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Russell, J., & Spada, N.
(2006) The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar: A meta-analysis of the research. In J. Norris & L. Ortega, Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching, (pp. 133–164). Amsterdam, John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Saito, K.
(2013) Reexamining effects of form-focused instruction on L2 pronunciation development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(1), 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., & Lyster, R.
(2012) Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of /ɹ/ by Japanese learners of English. Language Learning, 62(2), 595–633. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R.
(1993) Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 131, 206–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schulz, R. A.
(1996) Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: Students’ and teachers’ views on error correction and the role of grammar. Foreign Language Annals, 29(3), 343–364. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sheen, Y.
(2006) Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner uptake. Language Teaching Research, 10(4), 361–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M.
(2008) Form-focused instruction: Isolated or integrated? TESOL Quarterly, 42(2), 181–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trofimovich, P., & Baker, W.
(2006) Learning second language suprasegmentals: Effect of L2 experience on prosody and fluency characteristics of L2 speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(1), 1–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waniek-Klimczak, E.
(2015) Factors affecting word stress recognition by advanced Polish learners of English. In E. Waniek-Klimczak & M. Pawlak (Eds.), Teaching and researching the pronunciation of English (pp. 139–151). Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
Willis, D., & Willis, J.
(2008) Doing task-based teaching. Oxford University Press: London, the UK.Google Scholar
Yilmaz, Y.
(2012) The relative effects of explicit correction and recasts on two target structures via two communication modes. Language Learning, 62(4), 1134–1169. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Burri, Michael
2023. Comparing L2 Teachers’ Practices With Learners’ Perceptions of English Pronunciation Teaching. Profile: Issues in Teachers' Professional Development 25:1 ► pp. 129 ff. DOI logo
Levis, John M.
2019. Teaching-oriented research. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation 5:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Martin, Ines A. & Lieselotte Sippel
2021. Is giving better than receiving?. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation 7:1 ► pp. 62 ff. DOI logo
Sippel, Lieselotte & Ines A. Martin
2023. Immediate and long-term improvement in lexical stress perception: the role of teacher and peer feedback. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 61:3 ► pp. 1173 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.