مقایسه اثرات بازخوردهای تصحیحی استخراجی، بازتولیدی و فرازبانی بر یادگیری دستور زبان انگلیسی در آموزش مبتنی بر فرم

نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی(عادی)

نویسندگان

دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی

چکیده

این مقاله به‌ بررسی نقش انواع بازخورد تصحیحی در فراگیری جمله‌های شرطی توسط ایرانیان فراگیر انگلیسی به عنوان زبان دوم می پردازد. پنجاه زبان‌آموز، به طورتصادفی، به پنج گروه 10 نفره تقسیم شدند. غیر از گروه شاهد، دیگر گروه‌ها آموزش مبتنی بر فرم دریافت کردند و سه گروه از آن‌ها افزون بر آموزش مبتنی بر فرم، یکی از انواع بازخورد تصحیحی بازتولیدی، فرازبانی و استخراجی را دریافت کردند. انواع جمله‌های شرطی در جلسات جداگانه آموزش داده شد. پیش از آغاز دورۀ آموزشی، آزمون قضاوت صحت دستوری به زبان‌آموزان داده شد. پس‌آزمون فوری، یک جلسه بعد از آموزش انواع جمله‌های شرطی، و پس‌آزمون تاخیری نیز دو هفته بعد از آموزش انجام شد. یافتهها گویای آن بودند که نوع ساخت زبانی، نوع بازخورد تصحیحی و زمان پس‌آزمون نقش مهمی در میزان فراگیری ساختار شرطی دارند. آگاهی از آثار مفید بازخوردهای تصحیحی بر دانش زبانی فراگیران در زمینه دستور زبان، می تواند برای برنامه‌ریزان درسی روشنگر باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Differential Effects of Corrective Feedback Types on the Acquisition of Conditional Sentences

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fahimeh Marefat
  • Hessamaldin Ghanbar
چکیده [English]

The current study aimed at examining the differential effects of corrective feedback (CF) on the acquisition of conditional sentences. To this end, 50 Iranian high intermediate EFL learners were randomly selected and assigned to 5 groups of 10: elicitation + focus on form (FFI), recasts + FFI, metalinguistic feedback + FFI, FFI-only and control. FFI was implemented by the input enhancement technique along with input manipulation in the form of text reconstruction during which CFs were provided. Each conditional type was targeted in three sessions and the related immediate posttests were given in the following sessions, and the delayed versions were run with a two-week interval. Results suggested that CF effectiveness is a multifaceted phenomenon and the linguistic target, type of feedback, and timing of posttests play key roles. Awareness of the impact of CF on the the development of knowledge of grammar serves helpful for teachers to plan their syllabi

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • conditional sentences
  • Corrective feedback
  • Elicitation
  • Form-focused Instruction
  • Metalinguistic feedback
  • Recast
References
Adams, R., Nuevo, A., & Egi, T. (2011). Explicit and implicit feedback, modified output and SLA: Does explicit and implicit feedback promote learning learning and learner-learner interaction. Modern Language Journal, 95, 42–63.
Allwright, R.L. (1975). Problems in the study of the language teacher’s treatment of learner errors. In M.K. Burt, & H.C. Dulay (Eds.), New directions in second language learning, teaching and bilingual education (pp. 96–109). Selected papers from the Ninth Annual TESOL Convention, Los Angeles.
Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 543–574.
Cohen, J.W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nded). Hilsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Doughty, C. (2001). The cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.),Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. Doughty, & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197–261). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Egi, T. (2007). Interpreting recasts as linguistic evidence: The roles of linguistic target,  length, and degree of change. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29, 511–537.
Ellis, R. (2001). Form-focused instruction and second language learning.  Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. English Language Teaching Journal, 63, 97-107.
Ellis, R. (2010). Epilogue. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 335–349.
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Preemptive focus on form in the ESL  classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 281–318.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339–368.
Fowler, W.S., & Coe, N. (1976). Nelson English language tests. Thomas Nelson Ltd.
Han, Z-H. (2002). A study of the impact of recasts on tense consistency in L2 output. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 543–572.
Havranek , G., & Cesnik, H. (2001). Factors affecting the success of corrective feedback. EUROSLA Yearbook,  1, 99–122.
Ishida, M. (2004). Effect of recasts on the acquisition of the aspectual form-te i-(ru) by  learners of Japanese as a foreign language. Language Learning, 54, 311–394.
Iwashita, N. (2003). Negative feedback and positive evidence in task-based interaction: Differential effects on L2 development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 1–36.
Jones, C., & Waller, D. (2011). If only it were true: the problem with the four conditionals. ELT Journal, 65, 24–32.
Li, S. (2010), The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 309–365.
Loewen, S., & Philip, J. (2006). Recasts in the adult English L2 classroom: Characteristics, explicitness, and effectiveness. Modern Language Journal, 90, 536–556.
Loewen, S., & Philp, J. (2006). Recasts in the adult English L2 classroom: Characteristics, explicitness, an effectiveness. Modern Language Journal, 90, 536-556.
Lyster, R. (2001). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 51 (Suppl. 1), 265–301.
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399–432.
Lyster, R., & Izquierdo, J. (2009). Prompts versus recasts in dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 59, 453–498.
Lyster, R., & Mori, H. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 321–341.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37–66.
Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 27, 450–430.
Nassaji, H. (2007). Elicitation and reformulation and their relationship with learner in dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 57, 511–548.
Nassaji, H. (2009). Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of  feedback explicitness. Language Learning, 59, 411–452.
Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S. (2004). Current developments in research on the teaching of  grammar. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 126–145.
Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching grammar in second language classrooms. London: Routledge Publication.
Norris , J., & Ortega, L. (2006). The value and practice of research synthesis for language learning and teaching . In J. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 3–52 ). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and  quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.
Ohta, A. (2000). Rethinking recasts: A learner-centered examination of corrective feedback in the Japanese classroom. In J.K. Hall & L. Verplaetse (Eds.), Second and foreign language through classroom interaction (pp. 47–71). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Plonsky, L. and Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “Big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64, 878–912.
Saito, K., & Lyster, R. (2012). Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of /r/ by Japanese learners of English. Language Learning, 62, 595–633.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language acquisition (pp. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8, 263–289.
Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners' acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 255–283.
Sheen, Y. (2011). Corrective feedback, individual differences and second language learning. New York: Springer.
Sheen, Y., & Ellis, R. (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 593–610). New York: Routledge.
Sheen,Y.  (2010). The role of oral and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32, 169–179.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Spada, N. (1997). Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching, 29, 1–15.
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of  language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 263–308.
Spada, N., Lightbown, P., & White, J. (2008). The importance of form/meaning mappings in explicit form-focused instruction. Investigations in Instructed Second Language Acquisition, 4, 171–206.
Trofimovich, R., Ammar, A., & Gatbonton, E. (2007). How effective are recasts? The  role of attention, memory, and analytical ability. In A. Mackey (Ed), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (pp. 171–195). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Williams, J. (2005). Form-focused instruction. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook on research  in second language teaching and learning (pp. 673–691). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Yang, Y., & Lyster, R. (2010). Effects of form-focused practice and feedback on learners’acquisition of regular and irregular past tense forms. Studies in Second Language  Acquisition, 32, 235–263.