Jenefer Philp & Shawn Loewen University of Auckland, New Zealand

1. Recasts in the ESL classroom: Comparing the effectiveness of different types of corrective feedback Jenefer Philp & Shawn Loewen University of Auckland, New Zealand

2. Recasts • Target-like reformulations following a learner’s non-TL utterance. • Maintains the central meaning, while changing elements of the form (lexical, morphological, syntactic, phonological components). (Long, 1996)

3. Example 1 (Loewen 2002) Kao: his crime was uh when he was uh seventeen uh he over drunk he drank too much and get fight with some boy and the boy uh get got into unconscious T: became unconscious Kao: became unconscious and permanently damaged his brain

4. Example 2 (Philp, 1998) NNS why why is the why is he why is the son read read the table? NS why is he ah setting the table? NNS uh huh

5. Features of recasts • Provides implicit negative feedback • Juxtaposes the learners’ incorrect utterance with the target-like version • Contingent on the learner’s production • Incidental

6. Corrective feedback in the L2 classroom • Elicitation moves : repetition, clarification requests, prompts • Informs: explicit correction • Recasts

7. Recasts in the classroom • Impact of context (Morris & Tarone, 2003; Seedhouse, 1997; van Lier, 1988) • Range in explicitness and salience (Nicholas, Lightbown & Spada, 2001; Ellis, to appear)

8. Salience and response moves 1.Ph driver 2.T a driver did you say? 3.Ph screw screw driver 4.T what’s a school driver? Screwdriver 5.Ph screwdriver 6.T a screwdriver 7. Ph screwdriver 8. T yeah I think I’d call that a tool that’s that’s not an appliance it’s not powered by electricity

9. 1.T: you have to tell this story to Jack okay not your story you’re telling the story “girl had bullet in her scalp”. 2.S: the title of the story is girl had blood in her scalp 3.T: blood? 4.S: bloot 5.T: bullet bullet= 6. S: =bullet bullet in her scalp is about is about

10. Prosodic emphasis (stress) 1.H: some people have racism 2.T: some people ARE racist 3.H: are racist

11. Segmentation 1.Thom: yeah and uh when they went to the ban the gateway and they stu- stu- in 2.T: got stuck 3.Thom: got stuck on the rova, ro:

12. Intonation • Declarative recast • Interrogative recast (Lyster 1998; Sheen 2004)

13. Are recasts beneficial? • Juxtaposition of the correct with the incorrect • Congruent with the learner’s production • Maps meaning to form • Incidental & transitory (Doughty, 2001; Long, to appear; Philp, 1998)

14. If noticed… • Noticing is crucial (Gass, 1997; Mackey, in press; Philp, 1998; Schmidt, 1993, 2001) • Recasts may help learners ‘notice the gap’

15. Potential limitations of recasts • Ambiguous • Learners are not pushed in their output • Differentially beneficial depending on form • Other forms of feedback may be more beneficial (Ellis, to appear; Lyster, 1998, 2004; Lyster & Ranta, 1997; Panova & Lyster, 2002)

16. Research Questions • Description of recasts in the L2 classroom • Effectiveness of recasts (post tests / successful uptake) • Differences between recasts and effects on test performance / successful uptake

17. Data (Loewen, 2002) • 17 hours of classroom interaction • 12 ESL classrooms • 118 adult intermediate-level learners • Tailor-made tests 1-3 days and 2 weeks later

18. TEST: Correction Example The following sentences are incorrect or inappropriate. Please listen and tell me how you could make the sentences better. 1. I used to wear the balaclava for protection to wind and cold. S: when I was soldier I used to wear the balaclava T: and why did you wear it S for protection from the cold or for another reason S: just wind uh protection to wind and cold T: protection from S: uh from wind and cold T: right, okay not for a disguise

19. Test: Pronunciation • Learners were asked to first read aloud a sentence containing the targeted word/phrase and then to read aloud the target word/phrase in isolation.

20. Coding of data • Type of feedback move • Recasts: segmentation, stress, length, number of changes, complexity and intonation • Uptake: successful uptake, no uptake, no chance • Test performance: correct, incorrect

21. 1. Response moves

22. 2. What is the nature of recasts in the L2 classroom?

23. Linguistic focus

24. Length of recast

25. Stress

26. Intonation

27. Response moves

28. Segmentation

29. Recall on Post Test • Learners were able to recall at least 50% of test items • No significant differences in learners’ ability to recall correctly on the tests and they type of feedback they had received. • Post test: Chi square (2, 180) p =.114 • Delayed post test: Chi square (2, 188) p = .577

30. Successful Uptake • Recasts resulted in high levels of successful uptake (72.6%) • Elicitation moves associated with significantly higher numbers of successful uptake (88.3%) • Informs associated with significantly higher levels of Unsuccessful uptake • Chi square (2, 363) = 16.63, p<.001

31. Successful uptake and test performance (Logistic regression) • Successful uptake predicted by : Stress 13.235 .000 Complexity 5.052 .000 Intonation .351 .014 Number of changes .519 .068

32. Recasts and test performance (Logistic regression) • Correct and partially correct test scores predicted by : Morpheme Length .509 .149 Intonation 2.206 .084 Number of changes .519 .068

33. Summary • 50% of corrective feedback moves are recasts. • High levels of successful uptake, with 88% for elicitation moves. • No significant difference between teachers’ response moves and performance on tests. Recasts were associated with 50% success rate.

34. The majority of recasts in these ESL classrooms were: • Short • Stressed More • Declarative Explicit • Segmented

35. Recasts and Successful Uptake • Stress • >1 response move successful uptake • One change • Falling intonation

36. Recasts and Post Test Recall • Rising intonation • Shorter recasts recall on post tests • One change

37. Discussion

38. References • Chaudron, C. (1977). A descriptive model of discourse in the corrective treatment of learners' errors. Language Learning, 27(1), 29-46. • Doughty, C. (1994). Fine-tuning of feedback by competent speakers to language learners. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics (pp. 96-108). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. • Doughty, C. (2001). Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and Second Language Instruction (pp. 206-257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. • Doughty, C., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114-138). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. • Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998a). Issues and terminology. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 1-11). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

39. Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (Eds.). (1998b). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. • Ellis, R. (1991). The interaction hypothesis: A critical evaluation. In E. Sadtono (Ed.), Language acquisition in the second/foreign language classroom (pp. 179-114). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre. • Ellis, R. (2001). Investigating form-focused instruction. Language Learning, 51(Supplement 1), 1-46. • Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51(2), 281-318. • Gass, S. (1997). Input, interaction and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass. • Gass, S. M., & Varonis, E. (1994). Input, interaction and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 283-302.

40. Ishida, M. (2004). Effects of recasts on the acquisition of the aspectual form -te i-(ru) by learners of Japanese as a foreign language. Language Learning, 54(2), 311-394. • Iwashita, N. (1999). Tasks and Learners' Output in Nonnative-Nonnative Interaction. In K. Kanno (Ed.), The Acquisition of Japanese as a Second Langauge (pp. 31-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. • Iwashita, N. (2003). Negative Feedback and Positive Evidence in Task-Based Interaction: Differential Effects on L2 Development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(1), 1-36. • Leeman, J. (2003) Recasts and second langauge development: Beyond negative evidence. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 37-63. • Lightbown, P. (1998). The importance of timing in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition (pp. 177-196). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

41. Loewen, S. (2002). The occurrence and effectiveness of incidental focus on form in meaning-focused ESL lessons. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. • Loewen, S. (2004). Uptake in incidental focus on form in meaning-focused ESL lessons. Language Learning, 54(1), 153-187. • Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego: Academic Press. • Long, M. (to appear). Recasts in SLA: The story so far.Unpublished manuscript. • Long, M., Inagaki, S., & Ortega, L. (1998). The role of implicit negative feedback in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 357-371. • Lyster, R. (2004) Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 26, 399-432.

42. Lyster, R. (1998a). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 48, 183-218. • Lyster, R. (1998b). Recasts, repetition, and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 51-81. • Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66. • Mackey, A. (In press). Interaction and second language development: Perspectives from SLA research. In R. DeKyser (Ed.), Practice in second language learning: Perspectives from linguistics and psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. • Mackey, A., & Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses and red herrings. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 338-356.

43. Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language Learning, 51(4), 719-758. • Ohta, A. S. (2000). Rethinking recasts: a learner-centered examination of corrective feedback in the Japanese language classroom. In J. K. Hall & L. S. Verplaeste (Eds.), Second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction (pp. 47-71). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. • Oliver, R. (1995). Negative feedback in child NS-NNS conversation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 459-481.

44. Oliver, R. (2000). Age differences in negotiation and feedback in classroom and pairwork. Language Learning, 50(1), 119-151. • Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and Focus on Form in L2 Oral Performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(1), 109-148. • Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36(4), 573-595. • Philp, J. (1998). Interaction, noticing and second language acquistition. Unpublished PhD, University of Tasmania, Launceston. • Philp, J. (2003). Constraints on 'noticing the gap': Nonnative speakers' noticing of recasts in NS-NNS interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 99-126. • Pica, T. (1994). Research on Negotiation: What Does It Reveal about Second-Language Learning Conditions, Processes, and Outcomes? Language Learning, 44(3), 493-527. • Schmidt, R. (1993). Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 206-226. • Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and Second Language Instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

45. Seedhouse, P. (1997). The case of the missing 'no': The relationship between pedagogy and interaction. Language Learning, 47, 547-583. • Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research 8, 263-300. • Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principles and practice in applied linguistics; Studesi in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press. • Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: mediating acquistiion through collaborative dialogue. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford: Oxford University Press. • van Lier, L. (1988). The Classroom and the language learner: Ethnography and second-language classroom research. London: Longman. • Williams, J. (2001). The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System, 29, 325-340.