Skip to main content

Correcting students' spoken errors

In the run-up to the publication of the second edition of The Language Teacher Toolkit (Smith and Conti, 2023), I shall post the occasional blog post with short extracts from the text. This little section is about correcting correcting students' spoken errors. In the research literature this is usually referred to as corrective oral feedback. I previously posted something about 'learned attention', drawing on the work of Nick Ellis. This extract picks out some key research in this complex field of oral error correction. Elsewhere in the text we go into some detail about the value of correcting written errors.

******************************************************************************

A commonly asked question concerns the correction of students’ spoken errors. Should we do it? Which errors should we correct? How? When? The research in this area is copious and has, alas, produced mixed findings. Two terms are often used to describe how we correct oral errors: prompts and recasts. A prompt is an explicit correction of some type, e.g. where we correct the student or by the tone of our voice or facial expression, make it clear there was an error. A recast is where we give a correct reformulation of what a student said, without making it clear there was an error. (This distinction between prompts and recasts may not be clear-cut, since we cannot be sure if a student has grasped that the recast is actually a correction.)

Lyster and Ranta (1997) carried out an influential study of how teachers correct in the classroom and which types of correction work best. They found that recasts were the most common type of corrective feedback, but that students only occasionally ‘repaired’ (i.e. improved) their output as a response. It is pretty obvious why teachers like recasts, since they do not want to discourage students by correcting them. When students do repair their speech, the authors argue that this allows students to automatise the retrieval of L2 knowledge that already exists in some form. But also, when students repair, they draw on their own resources and confront errors which may lead to changes in their hypotheses about the L2.

In a nutshell, there is value in correction, done in the right way, at the right time, with the right students. Be aware that recasts may not be noticed, especially by less proficient students, and be selective with corrections, choosing errors which impede communication and students who may benefit from the correction. It is a subtle business!


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).
Post a Comment
Read more

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,
4 comments
Read more

12 principles of second language teaching

This is a short, adapted extract from our book The Language Teacher Toolkit . "We could not possibly recommend a single overall method for second language teaching, but the growing body of research we now have points to certain provisional broad principles which might guide teachers. Canadian professors Patsy Lightbown and Nina Spada (2013), after reviewing a number of studies over the years to see whether it is better to just use meaning-based approaches or to include elements of explicit grammar teaching and practice, conclude: Classroom data from a number of studies offer support for the view that form-focused instruction and corrective feedback provided within the context of communicative and content-based programmes are more effective in promoting second language learning than programmes that are limited to a virtually exclusive emphasis on comprehension. As teachers Gianfranco and I would go along with that general view and would like to suggest our own set of g
2 comments
Read more