The Recast: Frequency and Effectiveness in EFL Communicative Language Schools in Thailand
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research investigates the types, frequency and effectiveness of various methods of corrective feedback used by English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers in their communicative language classes. A review of prior research in the area of corrective feedback, along with a focus on the various types or methods of corrective feedback that educators consistently use, reveals that the recast method is of particular interest. The recast is a common, yet controversial, method of error correction that has been used extensively by EFL teachers for many years. However, the recast has recently lost favor among language acquisition researchers and language teaching experts. In order to investigate this, the corrective feedback techniques of four native speaking English teachers working in Thailand were recorded to discover if the recast is used with more or less frequency than other types of corrective feedback by EFL teachers, and in addition, whether or not it proved to be more or less effective than other forms of learner error correction. The results revealed that the recast was neither the most frequently used nor the most effective method of EFL learner correction. The results also showed that a combination of repetition, clarification requests, and elicitation could well yield better learner uptake results than either the recast used exclusively or combinations of feedback that include the recast. The paper concludes with recommendations for further research.
Article Details
Materials in THAITESOL JOURNAL may be photocopied for educational purposes. Under no circumstances may any part of this journal be photocopied for commercial purposes.
References
Toward a more comprehensive view of second language education. In B. Harley, P. Allen,
J. Cummins, & M. Swain (Eds.), The Development of Bilingual Proficiency (pp. 57-81).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Benati, A., Laval, C., & Arche, M. (2014). The Grammar Dimension in Instructed Second
Language Learning. London, England: Bloomsbury Academic.
Byrne, D. (1987). Techniques for classroom interaction. Harlow, UK: Longman.
Chaudron, C. (1977). A descriptive model of discourse in the corrective treatment of learners’
errors. Language Learning, 27, 29-46.
Chomsky, N. (1975). Reflections on Language. New York: Pantheon.
Crookes, G., & Chaudron, C. (2001). Guidelines for classroom language teaching. In M.
Celce-Murcia (Ed.). Teaching English as a Second Language or a Foreign Language
(pp.29-42). MA Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Dabaghi, A. (2006). Error correction: report on a study. Language Learning Journal, 1(34),
10-13.
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.
Ellis, R., Basturkman, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL
lessons. Language Learning, 5(2), 281-318.
Farahani, D. B., & Mirsharif, F. (2008). Effective and less effective teacher questioning and
corrective feedback behavior in an EFL context. Pazhuhesh-e Zabanha-ye Khareji, 1(41),
5-23.
Gass, S. M., Behney, J., & Plonsky, L. (2013). Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory
Course. London, England: Taylor & Francis.
Han, Z., & Kim, J. H. (2008). Corrective recasts: what teachers might want to know. Language
Learning Journal, 36, 35-44.
Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. (3rd ed.). Harlow, UK:
Longman.
Hendrickson, J. (1978). Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research
and practice. Modern Language Journal, 62, 387-97.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and Practices in Second Language Acquisition. New York:
Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. D. (1981). The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the
Classroom. San Francisco: Pergamon Press.
Lynch, T. (2009). Responding to learners’ perceptions of feedback: the use of comparators in
second language speaking courses. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 3(2),
191-203.
Lyster, R. (2001). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types
and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 51, 265-301.
Lyster, R., & Izquiredo, J. (2009). Prompts versus recasts in dyadic interaction. Language
Learning, 59(2), 453-498.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake negotiation of form I
communicative classrooms. SSLA, 20, 37-66.
Mackey, A., Maymona, A., Atanassova, G., Hama, M., & Logan-Terry, A. (2007). Teachers’
intentions and learners’ perceptions about corrective feedback in the L2 classroom.
Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1, 129-152.
McDonough, K., & Mackey, A. (2006). Responses to recasts: Repetitions, primed production,
and linguistic development. Language Learning, 56(4), 693-720.
Morris, F. A., & Tarone, E. E. (2003). Impact of classroom dynamics on the effectiveness of
recasts in second language acquisition. Language Learning, 53(2), 325-368.
Muranoi, H. (2007). Focus on form through interaction enhancement: Integrating formal
instruction into a communicative task in EFL classrooms. Language Learning, 50, 617-
673.
Narciss, S. (2013) Designing and evaluating tutoring feedback strategies for digital learning
environments on the basis of the interactive tutoring feedback model. Digital Education
Review, 23, 7-26.
Nassaji, H. (2007). Elicitation and reformulation and their relationship with learner repair in
dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 57(4), 511-548.
Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners.
Language Learning, 51(4), 719-758.
Oberli, C. (2003). Questioning and Feedback in the Interactive Classroom. Retrieved October
24, 2018, from https://www.cels.bham.ac.uk/resources/essays/berliM1A.pdf
Perdomo, B. (2008). Effectiveness of recasts in the teaching of EFL. The Asian EFL Journal,
10(2), 155-166.
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.
Rinvolucri, M. (1994). Feedback. ELT Journal, 48(3), 287-288.
Seedhouse, P. (1997). The case of the missing ‘no’: The relationship between pedagogy and
interaction. Language Learning, 47, 547-83.
Scrivener, J. (2005). Learning teaching. UK: Macmillan.
Seedhouse, P. (1997). The case of the missing ‘no’: The relationship between pedagogy and
interaction. Language Learning, 47, 547-83.
Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms
across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8(3), 263-300.
Spada, N., & Fröhlich, M. (1995). COLT. Communicative Orientation of Language Teaching
Observation Scheme: Coding Conventions and Applications. Sydney, Australia: National
Centre for English Language Teaching Research.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and
comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass, & C. Madden, (Eds.), Input in
Second Language Acquisition (pp.235-252). Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Zhai, K., & Gao, X. (2018). Effects of corrective feedback on EFL speaking task complexity
in China’s university classroom. Cogent Education, 5, 1-13.