The Effect of the Corrective Feedback on Iranian EFL Learners' Speaking Accuracy and Breakdown Fluency

Document Type: Research article

Authors

1 English Dept., Faculty of Farsi Literature, University of Tabriz

2 English Department Faculty of Farsi Literature University of Tabriz Tabriz Iran

Abstract

The purpose of the current study was to explore the effects of different corrective feedback (CF) conditions on Iranian EFL learners’ spoken general accuracy and breakdown fluency and their relationships. Consequently, four pre-intermediate intact classes were randomly selected as the control, delayed explicit metalinguistic CF, extensive recast, and intensive recast groups; these groups participated in spoken reproduction tasks for six sessions and their errors were treated differently. Then, the data was transcribed, coded for accuracy and fluency, and analyzed. The results indicated that the different CF conditions had insignificant effects on the number of error free Analysis of Speech (AS)-units, as an index of the spoken general accuracy. Considering the fluency, although different CF conditions had insignificant effects on the number of pauses the participants produced, it had a significant effect on the whole number of pauses; there was a significant correlation between participants' pauses and the whole number of pauses, with a medium effect size. The correlations between the general accuracy and breakdown fluency of all groups were negative and insignificant. In addition, different CF conditions had insignificant effects on the relationship between the accuracy and fluency. These findings suggest that there is no trade-off between spoken general accuracy and breakdown fluency. In addition, different CF conditions have insignificant effects on the EFL learners' spoken general accuracy, breakdown fluency, and their relationships.

Keywords


Ahmadian, M. J., & Tavakoli, M. (2010). The effects of simultaneous use of careful online planning and task repetition on accuracy, complexity, and fluency in EFL learners’ oral production. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 35–59. doi:10.1177/1362168810383329

Ammar, A. , & Spada , N. ( 2006 ). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 543–574.

Ansarian, A. A., & Chehr Azad, M. H. (2015). Differential effects of focused and unfocused recasts on the EFL learners’ oral accuracy. Colomb. Appl. Linguist. J., 17(1), 86-97.

Brumfit, G. J. (1984). General English syllabus design. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Bygate, M. (2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, and M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 23–48). Harlow: Longman.

Bygate, M., & Samuda, V. (2005). Integrative planning through the use of task-repetition. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 37–74). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.

Chehr Azad, M. H., Farrokhi, F., & Zohrabi, M. (2017a). The Impact of corrective feedback (CF) on Iranian EFL learners’ spoken complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) and trade-off among them. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Chehr Azad, M. H., Farrokhi, F., & Zohrabi, M. (2017b). Corrective feedback, spoken accuracy and fluency, and the trade-off hypothesis. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Doughty, C. J. (2001). Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 206–257). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Dougthy, C, J., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. J. Doughty, & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114–138). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Dougthy, C. J., & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on from. In C. J. Doughty, & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on from in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197–261). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, N. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305 – 352.

Ellis, R. (1991). Second language acquisition and language pedagogy. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Ellis, R. (1994 ). A theory of instructed second language acquisition. In N. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 79–114). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Ellis, R. (2001). Investigating form-focused instruction. Language Learning, 51(1), 1–46.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task based language learning and teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford Universi-ty Press.

Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. (2009 a). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1(1), 3–18.

Ellis, R. & Barkhuizen, G. (2005). Analyzing learner language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis. R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339–358.

Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008). The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language context. System, 36, 353–371.

Farrokhi, F. & Chehr Azad, M. (2012). The effects of planned focus on form on Iranian EFL learners’ oral accuracy. World Journal of Education, 2(1), 70-81.

Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 293–323.

Gass, S. M., & Varonis, E. M. (1994). Input, interaction, and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 283–302.

Harley, B., & Swain, M. (1984). The interlanguage of immersion students and its implications for second language teaching. In A. Davis, C. Criper, & A. Howatt (Eds.), Interlanguage (pp. 291–311). Edinburg: Edinburg University Press.

Hill, L. A. (1988). Steps to understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hoseini Fatemi, A., & Harati, N., A. (2014). The Impact of Recast versus Prompts on the Grammatical Accuracy of Iranian EFL Learners’ Speech. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4, 532–543.

Kamiya, N. (2015). The effectiveness of intensive and extensive recasts on L2 acquisition for implicit and explicit knowledge. Linguistics and Education, 29, 59–72.

Kim, H., & Mathes, G. (2001). Explicit vs. implicit corrective feedback. Korea TESOL Journal, 4, 1-15.

Lambert, C.P., & Engler, S. (2007). Information distribution and goal orientation in second language task design. In M.P.G. Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning, (pp. 25-43). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Li, S. (2010). The Effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 309–365. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x

Loewen, S. (2011). Focus on form. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 576–592). London: Routledge.

Long. M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. De Bot, R. Ginsberg, & C. K. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39–52). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399–432.

Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and the learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37–66.

Mackey, A., & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 407–452). Oxford: Oxford Universi-ty Press.

Maftoon, P., & Kolahi, S. (2009). The impact of recasts on the syntactic accuracy of Iranian EFL university students’ oral discourse. The Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(2), 160–178.

Michel, M. C., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007). The influence of complexity in monologic versus dialogic tasks in Dutch L2. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 45, 241–259.

Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners.

Language Learning, 51, 719–758.

Rahimi, A., & Vahid Dastjerdi, H. (2012). Impact of immediate and delayed error correction on EFL learners’ oral production: CAF. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 45–54.

Rahimpour, M., Salimi, A., & Farrokhi, F. (2012). The effect of planned vs. unplanned

form-focused strategies on L2 learners’ accuracy in oral task performance. Education Research Journal, 2, 247–252.

Russell, J., & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for second language acquisition: A meta-analysis of the research. In J. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.),Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 131–164). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Sadeghi Beniss, A.R., & Edalati Bazzaz, V. (2014). The impact of pushed output on accuracy and fluency of Iranian EFL learners’ speaking. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research 2(2), 51-72.

Salimi, A. (2015). The effect of focus on form and task complexity on L2 learners’ oral task performance. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 6(6), 54–62.

Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency development: monitoring, practice and proceduralization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 591–626.

Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–158.

Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Seyed Motahari, M., & Ghasemi Nik Manesh, A. (2014). The comparative effect of explicit corrective feedback and clarification request feedback on impulsive and reflective EFL learners’ oral fluency. International Journal of Enhanced Research in Educational Development (IJERED), 2 (2), 32–42.

Sheen, Y. (2007). The effects of corrective feedback, language aptitude, and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp.301–322). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sheen, Y., Wright, D., & Moldawa, A. (2009). Differential effects of focused and unfocused written correction on the accurate use of grammatical forms by adult ESL learners. System, 37, 556–569.

Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implication of task based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17, 38–61.

Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30, 510–532.doi:10.1093/applin/amp047

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research, 1, 185–211.

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and Tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and Second Language Instruction (pp. 183–205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Van Patten, B. (1990). Attending to form and content in the input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 287–301.

Vercellotti, M. L. (2012). Complexity, accuracy, and fluency as properties of language performance: The development of the multiple subsystems over time and in relation to each other (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

Wendel, J. (1997). Planning and second language narrative production (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Temple University, Japan.

Yuan, F., & Ellis, R. (2003). The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24, 1–27. doi: 10.1093/applin/24.1.1