Prompting in CALL: A longitudinal study of learner uptake

Modern Language Journal

Volumn 94, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 198-216

  Heift, Trude ^a  

^a SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954002499     PISSN: 00267902     EISSN: 15404781     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01017.x     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Ammar A, Spada N. One size fits all? Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2006, 28:543-574.
2. Austin J L. How to do things with words 1962, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press
3. Bationo B D. The effects of three feedback forms on learning through a computer-based tutorial. CALICO Journal 1992, 10:45-52.
4. Bley-Vroman R. What is the logical problem of foreign language learning. Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition 1989, 41-68. Gass SSchachter J. Eds., New York, Cambridge University Press
5. Bowles M. Effects of verbalization condition and type of feedback on L2 development in a CALL task 2005, Washington, DC, Georgetown University
6. Brandl K K. Strong and weak students' preferences for error feedback options and responses. Modern Language Journal 1995, 79:194-211.
7. Carroll S. Input and evidence: The raw material of second language acquisition 2001, Philadelphia, Benjamins
8. Carroll S, Swain M. Explicit and implicit negative feedback: An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 1993, 15:357-386.
9. Chapelle C A, Douglas D. Assessing language through computer technology 2006, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
10. Chaudron C. Second language classrooms: Research on teaching and learning. 1988, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
11. DeKeyser R M. What makes learning second-language grammar difficult? A review of issues. Language Learning 2005, 55(Suppl. 1):1-25.
12. Doughty C. Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. Cognition and second language instruction 2001, 206-257. Robinson P. Ed., Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
13. Doughty C, Varela E. Communicative focus on form. Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition 1998, 114-138. Doughty C, Williams J. Eds., Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
14. Doughty C, Williams J. Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition 1998, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
15. Ellis R. The study of second language acquisition 1994, Oxford, Oxford University Press
16. Ellis R. Second language acquisition 1997, Oxford, Oxford University Press
17. Ellis R. Learning a second language through interaction 1999, Oxford, Oxford University Press
18. Ellis R, Basturkmen H, Loewen S. Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning 2001, 51:281-318.
19. Ellis R, Loewen S, Erlam R. Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2006, 28:339-368.
20. Ferris D R. The " grammar correction" debate in L2 writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime ... ?). Journal of Second Language Writing 2004, 13:49-62.
21. Gass S M, Varonis E M. Input, interaction, and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 1994, 16:283-302.
22. Harley B. Functional grammar in French immersion: A classroom experiment. Applied Linguistics 1989, 10:331-360.
23. Hegelheimer V, Chapelle C A. Methodological issues in research on learner-computer interactions in CALL. Language Learning and Technology 2000, 4:41-59.
24. Heift T. Error-specific and individualized feedback in a Web-based language tutoring system: Do they read it. ReCALL 2001, 13:129-142.
25. Heift T. Learner control and error correction in ICALL: Browsers, peekers and adamants. CALICO Journal 2002, 19:295-313.
26. Heift T. Corrective feedback and learner uptake in CALL. ReCALL 2004, 16:416-431.
27. Heift T. Developing an intelligent language tutor. CALICO Journal 2010, 27(3), 443-459.
28. Heift T, Rimrott A. Learner responses to corrective feedback for spelling errors in CALL. System 2008, 36:196-213.
29. Hyland F. Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System 2003, 31:217-230.
30. Hyland K, Hyland F. Feedback on second language students' writing. Language Teaching 2006, 39:1-46.
31. James C. Errors in language learning and use: Exploring error analysis 1998, Harlow, UK, Longman
32. Kaminski K, Seel P, Cullen K. Technology literate students. EDUCAUSE Quarterly 2003, 26:34-40.
33. Kim J H. Issues of corrective feedback in second language acquisition. Teachers College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics 2003, 4:1-24.
34. Krashen S. The input hypothesis: Issues and implications 1985, London, Longman
35. Levy M. Design processes in CALL: Integrating theory, research and evaluation. Computer-assisted language learning 1999, 83-108. Cameron K. Ed., Lisse, The Netherlands, Swets & Zeitlinger
36. Lightbown P M. The importance of timing in focus on form. Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition 1998, 114-138. Doughty CWilliams J. Eds., New York, Cambridge University Press
37. Lightbown P M. Classroom SLA research and second language teaching. Applied Linguistics 2000, 21:431-462.
38. Lochtman K. Negative feedback and learner uptake in analytic foreign language teaching. Investigations in instructed second language acquisition 2005, 333-352. Housen APerrard M. Eds., Berl Mouton de Gruyter
39. Loewen S. Uptake in incidental focus on form in meaning-focused ESL lessons. Language Learning 2004, 54:153-188.
40. Loewen S, Nabei T. Measuring the effects of oral corrective feedback on L2 knowledge. Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies 2007, 361-377. Mackey A, Ed., Oxford, Oxford University Press
41. Loewen S, Philp J. Recasts in the adult English L2 classroom: Characteristics, explicitness, and effectiveness. Modern Language Journal 2006, 90:536-556.
42. Long M. Teacher feedback on learner error: Mapping cognitions. On TESOL '77: Teaching and learning English 1977, 278-294. Brown H DYorio CCrymes R. Eds., Washington, DC, TESOL
43. Long M. Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspectives 1991, 39-52. de Bot KCoste DGinsberg RKramsch C. Eds., Amsterdam, Benjamins
44. Long M. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. Handbook of second language acquisition 1996, 413-468. Ritchie W CBhatia T K. Eds., San Diego, CA, Academic Press
45. Long M. Problems in SLA 2007, Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum
46. Long M, Robinson P. Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition 1998, 15-41. Doughty C, Williams J. Eds., Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
47. Lyster R. Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning 1998a, 51(Suppl. 1):265-301.
48. Lyster R. Recasts, repetition, and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 1998b, 20:51-81.
49. Lyster R. Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2004, 26:399-432.
50. Lyster R. Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach 2007, Amsterdam, Benjamins
51. Lyster R, Ranta L. Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 1997, 19:37-66.
52. Mackey A, Gass S M, McDonough K. How do learners perceive interactional feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2000, 22:471-497.
53. Mackey A, Goo J. Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies 2007, 407-452. Mackey A, Ed., Oxford, Oxford University Press
54. Mackey A, Philp J. Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings. Modern Language Journal 1998, 82:338-356.
55. McDonough K. Identifying the impact of negative feedback and learners' responses on ESL question development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2005, 27:79-103.
56. Nabei T, Swain M. Learner awareness of recasts in classroom interaction: A case study of an adult EFL student's second language learning. Language Awareness 2002, 11:43-63.
57. Nagata N. Intelligent computer feedback for second language instruction. Modern Language Journal 1993, 77:330-338.
58. Nagata N. Computer vs. workbook instruction in second language acquisition. CALICO Journal 1996, 14:53-75.
59. Nagata N. An experimental comparison of deductive and inductive feedback generated by a simple parser. System 1997, 25:515-534.
60. Nagata N, Swisher M V. A study of consciousness-raising by computer: The effect of metalinguistic feedback on second language learning. Foreign Language Annals 1995, 28:337-347.
61. Nassaji H. Elicitation and reformulation and their relationship with learner repair in dyadic interaction. Language Learning 2007, 57:511-548.
62. Ohta A S. Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese 2001, Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum
63. Philp J. Constraints on " Noticing the Gap. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2003, 25:99-126.
64. Pujolà J -T. Did CALL feedback feed back? Researching learners' use of feedback. ReCALL 2001, 13:79-98.
65. Rimrott A, Heift T. Evaluating automatic detection of misspellings in German. Language Learning and Technology 2008, 12:73-92.
66. Rosa E, Leow R. Computerized task-based exposure, explicitness and type of feedback on Spanish L2 development. Modern Language Journal 2004, 88:192-217.
67. Russell Valezy J, Spada N. The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar: A meta-analysis of the research. Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching 2006, 133-164. Norris J M, Ortega L. Eds., Amsterdam, Benjamins
68. Sachs R, Suh B. Textually enhanced recasts, learner awareness, and L2 outcomes in synchronous computer-mediated interaction. Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies 2007, 197-227. Mackey A, Ed., Oxford, Oxford University Press
69. Sanz C, Morgan-Short K. Positive evidence versus explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer-assisted study. Language Learning 2004, 54:35-78.
70. Schmidt R. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 1990, 11:129-158.
71. Schmidt R. Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness. Attention and awareness in foreign language teaching and learning 1995, 1-64. Schmidt R. Ed., Tech. Rep. No. 9, Honululu, University of Hawai'i at Manoa
72. Schmidt R. Attention: Cognition and second language acquisition 2001, 3-32. Robinson P. Ed., Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
73. Skehan P. A cognitive approach to language learning 1998, Oxford, Oxford University Press
74. Swain M. Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. Input in second language acquisition 1985, 235-253. Gass S MMadden C G. Eds., Rowley, MA, Newbury House
75. Swain M. Three functions of output in second language learning. Principles and practice in the study of language: Studies in honour of H.G. Widdowson 1995, 125-144. Cook GSeidlhofer B. Eds., Oxford, Oxford University Press
76. Swain M, Lapkin S. Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics 1995, 16:371-391.
77. van der Linden E H. Does feedback enhance computer-assisted language learning. Computers and Education 1993, 21:61-65.
78. Vinther J. Cognitive processes at work in CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning 2005, 18:251-271.
79. Yang J C, Akahori K. An evaluation of Japanese CALL systems on the WWW comparing a freely input approach with multiple selection. Computer Assisted Language Learning 1999, 12:59-79.