The role of error correction in online exchanges

Handbook of Research on Computer-Enhanced Language Acquisition and Learning

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 326-341

  Vinagre, Margarita ^a   Lera, Maria ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD ANTONIO DE NEBRIJA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79551552296     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-895-6.ch019     Document Type: Chapter

References (41)

1. Appel, M.C. (1999). Tandem learning by e-mail: Some basic principles and a case study. CLCS Occasional Paper No. 54. Dublin: Trinity College, Centre for Language and Communication Studies.
2. Barker, T., & Kemp, F. (1990). Network theory: A postmodern pedagogy for the writing classroom. In C. Handa (Ed.), Computers and community: teaching composition in the twenty-first century (pp.1-27).Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.
3. Bartram, M., & Walton, R. (1991). Correction: A positive approach to language mistakes. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
4. Brammerts, H. (1996). Language learning in tandem using the internet. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning: proceedings of the Hawaii symposium (pp. 121-130). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
5. Chapelle, C. (1998). Multimedia call: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed SLA. Language Learning and Technology, 2(1), 22-34. Retrieved May 5, 2006 from http://llt.msu.edu/vol2num1/article1
6. Chaudron, C. (1977). The role of error correction in second language teaching. In B. K. Das (Ed.), Patterns in classroom interaction in Southeast Asia (pp. 17-50). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.
7. Chaudron, C. (1986). Teachers's priorities in correcting learners' errors in French immersion classes. In R. R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 64-84). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
8. Dam, L. (1995). Learner autonomy 3: From theory to classroom practice. Dublin: Authentik.
9. Esch, E. (1996). Promoting learner autonomy: Criteria for the selection of appropriate methods. In R. Pemberton et al. (Eds.), Taking control-autonomy in language learning (pp.35-48). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
10. Hyland, K. (1990). Providing productive feedback. ELT Journal, 44(4), 279-285.
11. James, C. (1998): Errors in language learning and use: Exploring error analysis. Essex: Longman.
12. Kelly, G. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.
13. Kelm, O. (1996). The application of computer networking in foreign language education: Focusing on principles of second language acquisition. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Tellecollaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 19-28). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
14. Kötter, M. (2002). Tandem learning on the Internet: Learner interactions in virtual online environments (MOOs). Frankfurt: Perter Lang.
15. Kötter, M.(2003). Negotiation of meaning and code switching in online tandems. Language Learning & Technology. 7(2), pp. 145-172. Retrieved May 5, 2006 from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/kotter
16. Krashen, S. (1977). The monitor model for adult second language performance. In M. Burt, H. Dulay, & M. Finocchiaro (Eds.), Viewpoints on english as a second language (pp. 152-161). New York: Regents.
17. Krashen, S. (1994). The input hypothesis and its rivals. In N. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 45-77). London: Academic Press.
18. Lewis, T., & Walker, L.(Eds.). (2003). Autonomous language learning in tandem. Sheffield: Academy Electronic Publications.
19. Little, D. (1991). Learner autonomy 1: Definitions, issues and problems. Dublin: Authentik.
20. Little, D., & Brammerts, H. (Eds).(1996). A guide to language learning in tandem via the Internet. CLCS Occasional Paper No.46. Dublin: Trinity College, Centre for Language and Communication Studies.
21. Little, D., Ushioda, E., Appel, M. C., Moran, J., O'Rourke, B., & Schwienhorst, K.(1999). Evaluating tandem learning by e-mail: Report on a bilateral project. CLCS Occasional Paper No 55. Dublin: Trinity College, Centre for Language and Communication Studies.
22. Long, M. (1983). Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5(2), 177-193.
23. Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment on second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie, & T. Bathia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). New York: Academic Press.
24. Lyster, R. (2001). Negotiation of form, recasts and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 51(Suppl 1), 265-301.
25. Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66.
26. Lyster, R., Lightbown, M. & Spada, N. (1999). A response to Truscott's 'What's wrong with oral grammar correction.' The Canadian Modern Language Review, 55(4), 457-467.
27. Morris, F. (2002). Negotiation and recasts in relation to error types and learner repair. Foreign Language Annals, 35(4), 395-404.
28. Morris, F. (2005). Child-to-child interaction and corrective feedback in a computer mediated L2 class. Language Learning and Technology 9(1), 29-45. Retrieved May 5, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol9num1/morris/default.html
29. Myles, J. (2002). Second language writing and research: The writing process and error analysis in student text. TESL-EJ, 6(2), 1-20.
30. Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. Tesol Quarterly, 36(4), 573-585.
31. Schwienhorst, K. (1997). Talking on the MOO: Learner autonomy and language learning in tandem. Paper presented at the CALLMOO: Enhancing Language Learning Through Internet Technologies, Bergen, Norway. Online document: http://www.tcd.ie/CLCS/assistants/kschwien/Publications/CALLMOOtalk.htm
32. Schwienkorst, K. (1998). The "third place" -Virtual reality applications for second language learning. ReCALL, 10(1), 118-126.
33. Söntgens, K. (1999). Autonomy through collaboration. Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, article 69, 567-574. Proceedings of the 1999 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning.
34. Stickler, U., & Lewis, T. (2003). Tandem learning and intercultural competence. In T. Lewis, & L. Walker (Eds.), Autonomous language learning in tandem (pp. 93-104). Sheffield: Academy Electronic Publications.
35. Vinagre, M. (2005). Fostering language learning via e-mail: An English-Spanish exchange. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(5), 369-388.
36. Vinagre, M., & Lera, M. (2005). Long-distance tandem learning by e-mail: Evaluation of a case study. ES Review 26, 241-263.
37. Vygotsky, L.(1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
38. Warschauer, M. (1996a). Computer-assisted language learning: An introduction. In S. Fotos (Ed.), Multimedia language teaching (pp. 3-10). Tokyo: Logos International.
39. Warschauer, M. (Ed.). (1996b). Tellecollaboration in foreign language learning. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
40. Woodin, J. (2001). Tandem learning as an intercultural activity. In M. Byram, A. Nichols, & D. Stevens (Eds.), Developing intercultural competence in practice (pp. 189-203). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
41. Woodin, J. (2003). Encouraging intercultural competence in tandem learning. In T. Lewis, & L. Walker (Eds.), Autonomous language learning in tandem (pp. 71-78). Sheffield: Academy Electronic Publications.