Beliefs about peer interaction and peer corrective feedback: Efficacy of classroom intervention

Modern Language Journal

Volumn 97, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 611-633

  Sato, Masatoshi ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD ANDRÉS BELLO   (Chile)

Author keywords

Classroom intervention; Factor analysis; Learner beliefs; Mixed methods; Peer corrective feedback; Peer interaction

Indexed keywords

EID: 84882660310     PISSN: 00267902     EISSN: 15404781     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12035.x     Document Type: Article

References (116)

1. Adams, R. (2007). Do second language learners benefit from interacting with each other?. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 29-51). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Alderson, J. (1992). Guidelines for evaluation of language education. In J. Alderson & A. Beretta (Eds.), Evaluating second language education (pp. 275-299). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Allwright, D. (1996). Social and pedagogical pressures in the language classroom: The role of socialization. In H. Coleman (Ed.), Society and the language classroom (pp. 209-228). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Ammar, A& Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 543-574.
5. Anderson, J. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6. Baleghizadeh, S& Rezaei, S. (2010). Pre-service teacher cognition on corrective feedback: A case study. Journal of Technology & Education, 4, 321-327.
7. Ballinger, S. (2013). Towards a cross-linguistic pedagogy: Biliteracy and reciprocal learning strategies in French immersion. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 1, 131-148.
8. Bang, Y. (1999). Reactions of EFL students to oral error correction. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 3, 39-51.
9. Bardovi-Harlig, K& Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Do language learners recognize pragmatics violations? Pragmatic versus grammatical awareness in instructed L2 learning. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 233-262.
10. Bax, S. (2003). The end of CLT: A context approach to language teaching. ELT Journal, 57, 278-287.
11. Berlin, L. (2002). Effective ESL instruction: Common themes from the voices of the students. Journal of Intensive English Studies, 14, 1-21.
12. Bernaus, M& Gardner, R. (2008). Teacher motivation strategies, student perceptions, student motivation, and English achievement. Modern Language Journal, 92, 387-401.
13. Berns, M. (1990). "Second" and "foreign" in second language acquisition/foreign language learning: A sociolinguistic perspective. In B. VanPatten & J. Lee (Eds.), Second language acquisition/Foreign language learning (pp. 3-11). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
14. Block, D. (2003). The social turn in second language acquisition. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
15. Borg, M. (2003). Teacher cognition language teaching: A review of research on what teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36, 81-109.
16. Brandl, K. (1995). Strong and weak students' preferences for error feedback options and responses. Modern Language Journal, 79, 194-211.
17. Brown, A. (2009). Students' and teachers' perceptions of effective foreign language teaching: A comparison of ideals. Modern Language Journal, 93, 46-60.
18. Brown, D. (2001). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
19. Busch, D. (2010). Pre-service teacher beliefs about language learning: The second language acquisition course as an agent for change. Language Teaching Research, 14, 318-337.
20. Cathcart, R& Olsen, J. (1976). Teachers' and students' preferences for correction of classroom conversation errors. In J. Fanselow & R. Crymes (Eds.), On TESOL '76 (pp. 41-53). Washington, DC: TESOL.
21. Chamot, ABarnhardt, SEl-Dinary, P& Robbins, J. (1999). The learning strategies handbook. New York: Longman.
22. Chenoweth, N. ADay, RChun, A. E& Luppescu, S. (1983). Attitudes and preferences of ESL students to error correction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6, 79-87.
23. Corbin, J& Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
24. Creswell, J& Plano Clark, V. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
25. De Groot, E. (2002). Learning through interviewing: Students and teachers talk about learning and schooling. Educational Psychologist, 37, 41-52.
26. de Jong, N& Perfetti, C. (2011). Fluency training in the ESL classroom: An experimental study of fluency development and proceduralization. Language Learning, 61, 533-568.
27. DeKeyser, R. (2001). Automaticity and automatization. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 125-151). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. DeKeyser, R (Ed.). (2007). Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Understanding L2 motivation: On with the challenge. Modern Language Journal, 78, 515-523.
30. Dörnyei, Z. (1997). Psychological processes in cooperative language learning: Group dynamics and motivation. Modern Language Journal, 81, 482-493.
31. Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration and processing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
32. Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1, 3-18.
33. Ellis, RBasturkmen, H& Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51, 281-318.
34. Ellis, RLoewen, S& Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339-368.
35. Ellis, R& Sheen, Y. (2006). Reexamining the role of recasts in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 575-600.
36. Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
37. Foster, P& Ohta, A. (2005). Negotiation for meaning and peer assistance in second language classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 26, 402-430.
38. Freed, BDewey, DSegalowitz, N& Halter, R. (2004). The language contact profile. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 349-356.
39. Gass, S& Lewis, K. (2007). Perceptions of interactional feedback: Differences between heritage language learners and non-heritage language learners. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 79-99). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40. Gass, S& Varonis, E. (1989). Incorporated repairs in nonnative discourse. In M. Eisenstein (Ed.), The dynamic interlanguage: Empirical studies in second language variation (pp. 71-86). New York: Plenum Press.
41. Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
42. Grotjahn, R. (1991). The research programme: Subjective theories. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 187-214.
43. Harumi, S. (2011). Classroom silence: Voices from Japanese EFL learners. ELT Journal, 65, 260-269.
44. Holliday, A. (1994). Appropriate methodology and social context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45. Hu, G& Lam, S. T. E. (2010). Issues of cultural appropriateness and pedagogical efficacy: Exploring peer review in a second language writing class. Instructional Science, 38, 371-394.
46. Hutcheson, G& Sofroniou, N. (1999). The multivariate social scientist: Introductory statistics using generalized linear models. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
47. Ivankova, NCreswell, J& Stick, S. (2006). Using mixed-methods sequential explanatory design: From theory to practice. Field Methods, 18, 3-20.
48. Jean, G& Simard, D. (2011). Grammar teaching and learning in L2: Necessary, but boring? Foreign Language Annals, 44, 467-494.
49. Johnson, ROnwuegbuzie, A& Turner, L. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 112-133.
50. Karp, D& Yoels, W. (1976). The college classroom: Some observations on the meaning of student participation. Sociology and Social Research, 60, 421-439.
51. Katayama, A. (2007). Japanese EFL students' preferences toward correction of classroom oral errors. Asian EFL Journal, 9, 289-305.
52. Kim, J& Han, Z. (2007). Recasts in communicative EFL classes: Do teachers intent and learner interpretation overlap?. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 269-297). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
53. Lasagabaster, D& Sierra, J. M. (2005). Error correction: Students' versus teachers' perceptions. Language Awareness, 14, 112-127.
54. Ledesma, R. D& Valero-Mora, P. (2007). Determining the number of factors to retain in EFA: An easy-to-use computer program for carrying out Parallel Analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12, Retrieved March 18, 2012, from http://pareonline.net/pdf/v12n2.pdf
55. Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 309-365.
56. Lightbown, P. (2008). Transfer appropriate processing as a model for class second language acquisition. In Z. Han (Ed.), Understanding second language process (pp. 27-44). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
57. Lluida, E. (2005). Looking at the perceptions, challenges, and contributions...or the importance of being a non-native teacher. In E. Lluida (Ed.), Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges and contribution to the profession (pp. 1-9). New York: Springer Science + Business Media.
58. Loewen, SLi, SFei, FThompson, ANakatsukasa, KAhn, Set al. (2009). L2 learners' beliefs about grammar instruction and error correction. Modern Language Journal, 93, 91-104.
59. Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399-432.
60. Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
61. Lyster, R& Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66.
62. Lyster, R& Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 265-302.
63. Lyster, RSaito, K& Sato, M. (2013). State-of-the-Art Article: Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46, 1-40.
64. Lyster, R& Sato, M. (2013). Skill acquisition theory and the role of practice in L2 development. In M. García Mayo, J. Gutierrez-Mangado, & M. Martínez Adrián (Eds.) Contemporary approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 71-92). Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
65. 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 University Press.
66. Maxwell, J. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
67. McCargar, D. (1993). Teacher and student role expectations: Cross-cultural differences and implications. Modern Language Journal, 77, 192-207.
68. Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
69. Miyagi, KSato, M& Crump, A. (2009). To challenge the unchallenged: Potential of non-"standard" Englishes for Japanese EFL learners. JALT Journal, 31, 261-273.
70. Mori, Y. (1999). Epistemological beliefs and language learning beliefs: What do language learners believe about their learning? Language Learning, 49, 377-415.
71. Morris, CBransford, J& Franks, J. (1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Bahavior, 16, 519-533.
72. Nation, P. (1989). Improving speaking fluency. System, 17, 377-384.
73. Naughton, D. (2006). Cooperative strategy training and oral interaction: Enhancing small group communication in the language classroom. Modern Language Journal, 90, 169-184.
74. Nicholas, HLightbown, P& Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language Learning, 51, 719-758.
75. Nolasco, R& Arthur, L. (1990). You try doing it with a class of forty. In R. Rossner & R. Bolitho (Eds.) Currents of change in English language teaching (pp. 188-195). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
76. Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the "laws" of statistics. Advances in Health Science Education, 15, 625-632.
77. Nunan, D. (1989). Hidden agendas: The role of the learner in programme implementation. In R. Johnson (Ed.), The second language curriculum (pp. 176-186). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
78. O'Donnell, K. (2005). Japanese secondary English teachers: Negotiation of educational roles in the face of curricular reform. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 18, 300-315.
79. Ohta, A. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
80. Oladejo, J. (1993). Error correction in ESL: Learners' preferences. TESL Canada Journal, 10(2), 71-89.
81. Peacock, M. (1999). The links between learner beliefs, teacher beliefs, and EFL proficiency. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 9, 247-263.
82. Philp, JWalter, S& Basturkmen, H. (2010). Peer interaction in the foreign language classroom: What factors foster a focus on form? Language Awareness, 19, 261-279.
83. Pica, TLincoln-Porter, FPaninos, D& Linnell, J. (1996). Language learners' interaction: How does it address the input, output, and feedback needs of L2 learners? TESOL Quarterly, 30, 59-84.
84. Plonsky, L& Mills, S. (2006). An exploratory study of differing perceptions of error correction between teacher and students: Bridging the gap. Applied Language Learning, 16, 55-74.
85. Prabhu, N. (1990). There is no best method-Why? TESOL Quarterly, 24, 161-176.
86. Robinson, PSawyer, M& Ross, S. (2001). Second language acquisition research in Japan: Theoretical issues. JALT Applied Materials, 3-21.
87. Sato, M. (2007). Social relationships in conversational interaction: A comparison between learner-learner and learner-NS dyads. JALT Journal, 29, 183-208.
88. Sato, M. (2011). Constitution of form-orientation: Contributions of context and explicit knowledge to learning from recasts. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14, 1-28.
89. Sato, M& Ballinger, S. (2012). Raising language awareness in peer interaction: A cross-context, cross-method examination. Language Awareness, 21, 157-179.
90. Sato, M& Lyster, R. (2007). Modified output of Japanese EFL learners: Variable effects of interlocutor vs. feedback types. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 123-142). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
91. 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.
92. Sawir, E. (2002). Beliefs about language learning: Indonesian learners' perspectives and some implications for classroom practices. Australian Journal of Education, 46, 323-337.
93. Schulz, R. (1996). Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: Student and teachers' views on error correction and the role of grammar. Foreign Language Annals, 29, 343-364.
94. Schulz, R. (2001). Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA-Colombia. Modern Language Journal, 85, 244-258.
95. Seedhouse, P. (1997). The case of the missing "no": The relationship between pedagogy and interaction. Language Learning, 47, 547-583.
96. Segalowitz, N. (2000). Automaticity and attentional skill in fluent performance. In H. Riggenbach (Ed.), Perspectives on fluency (pp. 200-219). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
97. Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences, (3rd ed.) New York: Teachers College Press.
98. Snook, S. C& Gorsuch, R. L. (1989). Component analysis versus common factor analysis: A Monte Carlo study. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 148-154.
99. Storch, N. (2002). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52, 119-158.
100. Swain, M& Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal, 82, 320-337.
101. Swain, M& Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners' response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 285-304.
102. Tashakkori, A& Teddlie, C. (2010). SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
103. Truscott, J. (1999). What's wrong with oral grammar correction. Canadian Modern Language Review, 55, 437-456.
104. Tulung, G. (2008). Communicative task-generation oral discourse in a second language: A case study of peer interaction and non-native teacher talk in an EFL classroom. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Ottwa, Ottawa, Canada.
105. Vásquez, C& Harvey, J. (2010). Raising teachers' awareness about corrective feedback through research replication. Language Teaching Research, 14, 421-443.
106. van Lier, L. (1988). The classroom and the language learner. London: Longman.
107. Volker, M. (2006). Reporting effect size estimates in school psychology research. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 653-672.
108. Wenden, A. (1986). Helping language learners think about learning. ELT Journal, 40, 3-12.
109. Williams, J. (1999). Learner-generated attention to form. Language Learning, 49, 583-625.
110. Winne, PJamieson-Noel, D& Muis, K. (2002). Methodological issues and advances in researching tactics, strategies, and self-regulated learning. In P. Pintrich & M. Moehr (Eds.), New directions in measures and methods (pp. 121-155). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
111. Wood, D. (2001). In search of fluency: What is it and how can we teach it? Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 573-589.
112. Yang, Y& Lyster, R. (2010). Effects of form-focused practice and feedback on Chinese EFL learners' acquisition of regular and irregular past tense forms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 235-263.
113. Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. Modern Language Journal, 86, 54-66.
114. Yoshida, R. (2008a). Teachers' choice and learners' preference of corrective-feedback types. Language Awareness, 17, 78-93.
115. Yoshida, R. (2008b). Learners' perception of corrective feedback in pair work. Foreign Language Annals, 41, 525-541.
116. Yoshida, R. (2010). How do teachers and learners perceive corrective feedback in the Japanese language classroom? Modern Language Journal, 94, 293-314.