Corrective feedback in the chatroom: An experimental study

Computer Assisted Language Learning

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 1-14

  Loewen, Shawn ^a   Erlam, Rosemary ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33746222022     PISSN: 09588221     EISSN: 17443210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09588220600803311     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Abrams, Zs. (2001). Computer-mediated communication and group journals: expanding the repertoire of participant roles. System, 29, 489-503.
2. Abrams, Zs. (2003). The effect of synchronouns and asynchronous CMC on oral performance in German. The Modern Language Journal, 87, 157-167.
3. Beauvois, M. (1997). Write to speak: The effects of electronic communication on the oral achievement of fourth semester French students. In J. Muyskens (Ed.), New ways of learning and teaching; issues in language program direction (pp. 93-116). Boston: Heinle.
4. Beauvois, M. (1998). Conversations in slow motion: computer-mediated communication in the foreign language classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 54, 199-217.
5. Bump, J. (1990). Radical changes in class discussion using networked computers. Computers and the Humanities, 24, 49-65.
6. Chun, D. (1994). Using computer networking to facilitate the acquistion of interactive competence. System, 22, 17-31.
7. Doughty, G., & Williams, J. (Eds.). (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8. Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1974). A new perspective on the creative construction process in child second language acquisition. Language Learning, 24, 253-278.
9. Ellis, R. (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10. Ellis, R. (1995). Interpretation tasks for grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 87-105.
11. Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
12. 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.
13. Erlam, R. (2006). Elicited imitation as a measure of L2 implicit language knowledge: an empirical validation study. Applied Linguistics, 27.
14. Iwasaki, J., & Oliver, R. (2003). Chat-line interaction and negative feedback. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 17, 60-73.
15. Jepson, K. (2005). Conversations - and negotiated interaction - in text and voice chat rooms. Language Learning and Technology, 9, 79-98.
16. Kern, R. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. Modern Language Journal, 79, 457 -476.
17. Kung, S. (2004). Synchronous electronic discussions in an EFL reading class. ELT Journal, 58, 165-173.
18. Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg and C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign Language Research in Cross-Cultural Perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
19. Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie and T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego: Academic Press.
20. Meskill, C., & Anthony, N. (2005). Foreign language learning with CMC: forms of online instructional discourse in a hybrid Russian class. System, 33, 89-105.
21. Nagata, N. (1993). Intelligent computer feedback for second language instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 77, 330-339.
22. Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417-528.
23. Ortega, L. (1997). Processes and outcomes in networked classroom interaction: Defining the research agenda for FL computer-assisted classroom discussion. Language Learning and Technology, 1, 82-93.
24. Payne, J., & Whitney, P. (2002). Developing L2 oral proficiency through synchronous CMC: Output, working memory and interlanguage development. CALICO Journal, 20, 7-32.
25. Pica, T. (1992). The textual outcomes of native-speaker-non-native speaker negotiation: what do they reveal about second language learning? In C. Kramsch, & S. McConnell-Ginet (Eds.), Text and context: cross-disciplinary perspectives on language study. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath and Company.
26. Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes and outcomes? Language Learning, 44, 493-527.
27. Salaberry, M. (2000). L2 morphosyntactic development in text-based computer-mediated communication. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13, 5-27.
28. Sanz, C. (2004). Computer delivered implicit versus explicit feedback in processing instruction. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: theory, research and commentary. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29. Sanz, C., & Morgan-Short, K. (2004). Positive evidence vs. explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer assisted study. Language Learning, 54, 35 - 78.
30. Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: a tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1-63). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
31. Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and Second Language Instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Smith, B. (2005). The relationship between negotiated interaction, learner uptake, and lexical acquisition in task-based computer-mediated communication. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 33 - 58.
33. Smith, B., & Gorsuch, G. (2004). Synchronous computer mediated communication captured by usability lab technologies: new interpretations. System, 32, 553-575.
34. VanPatten, B. (1989). Can learners attend to form and content while processing input? Hispania, 72, 409-417.