Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T06:43:51.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Opportunities for Corrective Feedback During Study Abroad: A Mixed Methods Approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2018

Lara Bryfonski  and
Cristina Sanz
Lara Bryfonski
Affiliation:
Georgetown UniversityLeb110@georgetown.edu
Cristina Sanz
Affiliation:
Georgetown Universitysanzc@georgetown.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The provision of corrective feedback during oral interaction has been deemed an essential element for successful second language acquisition (Gass & Mackey, 2015a). However, corrective feedback—especially corrective feedback provided by peer interlocutors—remains understudied in naturalistic settings. The present mixed methods study aimed to identify the target and type of corrective feedback provided by both native-speaker and peer interlocutors during conversation groups while abroad. U.S. study abroad students (N = 19) recorded group conversations with native speakers (N = 10) at the beginning, middle, and end of a 6-week stay in Barcelona, Spain. Results indicate a significant decrease in the provision of corrective feedback by both native speakers and peer learners over the course of the program. Qualitative analyses revealed that both learners and natives alike engage in negotiations for meaning throughout the program, which for learners resulted in successful recall on tailor-made quizzes. The use of the first language by both the study abroad students and the native speakers promoted these opportunities in some instances. Results are discussed in terms of their contribution to the study abroad literature as well as to research into the effects of feedback on second language development.

Type
Research Article
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 38 , September 2018 , pp. 1 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The experiment in this article earned an Open Materials badge for transparent practices. The materials are available at https://www.iris-database.org/iris/app/home/detail?id=york%3a934331&ref=search

References

REFERENCES

Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 543–574.Google Scholar
Antón, M., & DiCamilla, F. J. (1999). Socio-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. Modern Language Journal, 83, 233–247.Google Scholar
Azkarai, A., & García Mayo, M. P. (2015). Task-modality and L1 use in EFL oral interaction. Language Teaching Research, 19 (5), 550–571.Google Scholar
Azkarai, A., & García Mayo, M. P. (2017). Task repetition effects on L1 use in EFL child task-based interaction. Language Teaching Research, 21 (4), 480–495.Google Scholar
Brown, D. (2016). The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 20 (4), 436–458.Google Scholar
Bryfonski, L. & Mackey, A. (in press). Interaction in study abroad settings. In Sanz, C. & Morales-Front, A. (Eds.). The Routledge handbook of study abroad research and practice. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Carpenter, H., Jeon, K.-S., MacGregor, D., & Mackey, A. (2006). Learners’ interpretations of recasts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 209–236.Google Scholar
Centeno-Cortés, B., & Jiménez Jiménez, A. F. (2004). Problem-solving tasks in a foreign language: The importance of the L1 in private verbal thinking. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14 (1), 7–35.Google Scholar
Chu, R.-X. (2013). Effects of peer feedback on Taiwanese adolescents’ English speaking practices and development (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.Google Scholar
Churchill, E., & DuFon, M. A. (2006). Evolving threads in study abroad research. In DuFon, M. A. & Churchill, E. E. (Eds.), Language learners in study abroad contexts (pp. 1–29). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Collentine, J. (2009). Study abroad research: Findings, implications, and future directions. In Long, M. H. & Doughty, C. J. (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 218–233). Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781444315783.ch13Google Scholar
Collentine, J., & Freed, B. F. (2004). Learning context and its effects on second language acquisition: Introduction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26 (2), 153–171. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263104262015Google Scholar
Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 402–423.Google Scholar
Davidson, D. 2010. Study abroad: When, how long, and with what results? New data from the Russian front. Foreign Language Annals, 43 (1), 6–26. doi: 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2010.01057.xGoogle Scholar
Dewey, D. P. (2004). A comparison of reading development by learners of Japanese in intensive domestic immersion and study abroad contexts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26 (2), 303–327. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263104262076Google Scholar
Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In Lantolf, J. P. & Appel, G. (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 33–56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Du, H. (2013). The development of Chinese fluency during study abroad in China. Modern Language Journal, 97 (1), 131–143.Google Scholar
Duff, P., & Polio, C. (1990). How much foreign language is there in the foreign language classroom? Modern Language Journal, 74 (2), 154–166.Google Scholar
Egi, T. (2007). Recasts, learners’ interpretations, and L2 development. In Mackey, A. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 249–267). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Egi, T. (2008). Investigating stimulated recall as a cognitive measure: Reactivity and verbal reports in SLA research methodology. Language Awareness, 17 (3), 212–228.Google Scholar
Fernández García, M., & Martínez Arbelaiz, A. (2007). Negotiated Interaction in a study abroad context: Gauging the opportunities for interlanguage development. In Boers, F., Darquennes, J., & Temmerman, R. (Eds.), Multilingualism and applied comparative linguistics (Vol. 1, pp. 41–66). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Fernández-García, M., & Martínez-Arbelaiz, A. (2014). Native speaker-non-native speaker study abroad conversations: Do they provide feedback and opportunities for pushed output? System, 42 (1), 93–104. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.10.020Google Scholar
Freed, B. F. (1998). An overview of issues and research in language learning in a study abroad setting. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 9, 31–60.Google Scholar
Fujii, A., & Mackey, A. (2009). Interactional feedback in learner-learner interactions in a task-based EFL classroom. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 47, 267–301.Google Scholar
Fujii, A., Ziegler, N., & Mackey, A. (2016). Learner-learner interaction and metacognitive instruction in the EFL classroom. In Sato, M. & Ballinger, (Eds.), Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning (pp. 63–89). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2015a). Input, interaction and output in second language acquisition. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 175–199). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2015b). Stimulated recall methodology in second language research (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Goo, J., & Mackey, A. (2013). The case against the case against recasts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35 (1), 127. doi:10.1017/S0272263112000708Google Scholar
Grey, S., Cox, J. G., Serafini, E. J., & Sanz, C. (2015). The role of individual differences in the study abroad context: Cognitive capacity and language development during short-term intensive language exposure. Modern Language Journal, 99 (1), 137–157.Google Scholar
Howell, D. C. (2002). Statistical methods for psychology. Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury/Thomson Learning.Google Scholar
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kasper, G., & Kim, Y. (2015). Conversation-for-learning: Institutional talk beyond the classroom. In Markee, N. (Ed.), Handbook of classroom discourse and interaction (pp. 390–408). Malden, MA: Wiley.Google Scholar
Keck, C. M., Iberri-Shea, G., Tracy-Ventura, N., & Wa-Mbaleka, S. (2006). Investigating the empirical link between interaction and acquisition: A quantitative meta-analysis. In Ortega, L. & Norris, J. (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 91–131). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kuntz, P., & Belnap, R. K. (2001). Beliefs about language learning held by teachers and their students at two Arabic programs abroad. al-’Arabiyya, 34, 91–113.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
LaPierre, D. (1994). Language output in a cooperative learning setting: Determining its effects on second language learning (Unpublished master's thesis). Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
Larson-Hall, J. (2010). A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS. New York. NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Leeman, J. (2003). Recasts and second language development: Beyond negative evidence. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 37–63.Google Scholar
Leow, R., & Morgan-Short, K. (2004). To think aloud or not to think aloud: The issue of reactivity in SLA research methodology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 35–57.Google Scholar
Levine, G. S. (2003). Student and instructor beliefs and attitudes about target language use, first language use, and anxiety: Report of a questionnaire study. Modern Language Journal, 87 (3), 343–364.Google Scholar
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60 (2), 309–365.Google Scholar
Llanes, À. 2011. The many faces of study abroad: An update on the research on L2 gains emerged during a study abroad experience. International Journal of Multilingualism, 8 (3), 189–215. doi: 10.1080/14790718.2010.550297Google Scholar
Llanes, À., & Muñoz, C. 2009. A short stay abroad: Does it make a difference? System, 37 (3), 353–365.Google Scholar
Loewen, S., & Philp, J. (2006). Recasts in the adult English L2 classroom: Characteristics, explicitness, and effectiveness. Modern Language Journal, 90, 536–556.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1981). Questions in foreigner talk discourse. Language learning, 31 (1), 135–157.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. & Bhatia, T. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (2007). Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Loschky, L., & Bley-Vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and task-based methodology. In Crookes, G. & Gass, S. (Eds.), Tasks and language learning (pp. 123–167). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37–66.Google Scholar
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 265–302.Google Scholar
Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21 (4), 557–587.Google Scholar
Mackey, A. (2012). Input, interaction and corrective feedback in L2 classrooms. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Bryfonski, L. (in press). Mixed methodology. In Phakiti, A., De Costa, P., Plonsky, L., & Starfield, S. (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of applied linguistics research methodology. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive interactional feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 471–497.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In Mackey, A. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 407–452). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Oliver, R., & Leeman, J. (2003). Interactional input and the incorporation of feedback: An exploration of NS-NNS and NNS-NNS adult and child dyads. Language Learning, 53, 35–66.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? Modern Language Journal, 82, 338–356.Google Scholar
McDonough, K., & Hernández González, T. H. (2013). Language production opportunities during whole-group interaction in conversation group settings. In McDonough, K. & Mackey, A. (Eds.), Second language interaction in diverse educational contexts (pp. 293–314). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
McDonough, K., & Mackey, A. (2006). Responses to recasts: Repetitions, primed production, and linguistic development. Language Learning, 56, 693–720.Google Scholar
McDonough, K., & Sunitham, W. (2009). Collaborative dialogue between Thai EFL learners during self-access computer activities. TESOL Quarterly, 43, 231–254.Google Scholar
McMeekin, A. (2006). Negotiation in a Japanese study abroad setting. In DuFon, M. A. & Churchill, E. E. (Eds.), Language learners in study abroad contexts (pp. 177–202). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Middlebury Language Schools. (2016). Why study a language at Middlebury? Retrieved from http://www.middlebury.edu/ls/node/197491Google Scholar
Nakatsukasa, K. (2016). Efficacy of recasts and gestures on the acquisition of locative prepositions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38 (4), 1–29.Google Scholar
Pica, T., Lincoln-Porter, F., Paninos, D., & Linnell, J. (1996). Language learners’ interaction: How does it address the input, output and feedback needs of L2 learners? TESOL Quarterly, 30 (1), 59–84. http://doi.org/10.2307/3587607Google Scholar
Polio, C. G., & Duff, P. A. (1994). Teachers’ language use in university foreign language classrooms: A qualitative analysis of English and target language alternation. Modern Language Journal, 78 (3), 313–326.Google Scholar
Polio, C., Gass, S., & Chapin, L. (2006). Using stimulated recall to investigate native speaker perceptions in native-nonnative speaker interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28 (2), 237–267.Google Scholar
Ranta, L., & Meckelborg, A. (2013). How much exposure to English do international graduate students really get? Measuring language use in a naturalistic setting. Canadian Modern Language Review, 69 (1), 1–33.Google Scholar
Russell, J., & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar. In Ortega, L. & Norris, J. (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 133–164). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sato, M. (2007). Social relationships in conversational interaction: A comparison between learner-learner and learner-NS dyads. JALT Journal, 29, 183–208.Google Scholar
Sato, M. (2017). Oral peer corrective feedback: Multiple theoretical perspectives. In Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (Eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications (pp. 19–34). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (2007). Modified output of Japanese EFL learners: Variable effects of interlocutor vs. feedback types. In Mackey, A. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 123–142). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34 (4), 591–626. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000356Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–158.Google Scholar
Shehadeh, A. (2001). Self- and other-initiated modified output during task-based interaction. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 433–457.Google Scholar
Sippel, L., & Jackson, C. N. (2015). Teacher vs. peer oral corrective feedback in the German language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 48 (4), 688–705.Google Scholar
Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2003). Is there a role for the use of the L1 in an L2 setting? TESOL Quarterly, 37 (4), 760–769.Google Scholar
Swain, M. (1997). Collaborative dialogue: Its contribution to second language learning. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, 34, 115–132.Google Scholar
Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 64–81). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In Hinkel, E. (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–483). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Swain, M., Brooks, L., & Tocalli-Beller, A. (2002). Peer-Peer dialogue as a means of second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 171–185.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16 (4), 371–391.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal, 82, 320–337.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2000). Task-based second language learning: the uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research, 4, 251–274.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In Bygate, M., Skehan, P., & Swain, M. (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 99–118). London, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Tannen, D., Kendall, S., & Gordon, C. (Eds.). (2007). Family talk: Discourse and identity in four American families. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tognini, R., & Oliver, R. (2012). L1 use in primary and secondary foreign language classrooms and its contribution to learning. In Soler, E. Alcón, & Jordá, M. P. Safont (Eds.), Discourse and learning across L2 instructional contexts (pp. 53–78). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Varonis, E. M., & Gass, S. (1985). Miscommunication in native/nonnative conversation. Language in Society, 14, 327–343.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, S. (2002). The omnipresent classroom during summer study abroad: American students in conversation with their French hosts. Modern Language Journal, 86 (2), 157–173. http://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00142Google Scholar
Williams, J. (2001). The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System, 29, 325–340.Google Scholar
Yoshida, R. (2008). Learners’ perception of corrective feedback in pair work. Foreign Language Annals, 41, 525–541.Google Scholar
Zappa-Hollman, S., & Duff, P. (2015). Academic English socialization through individual networks of practice. TESOL Quarterly, 49 (2), 333–368. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.188Google Scholar
Zeng, G., & Takatsuka, S. (2009). Text-based peer–peer collaborative dialogue in a computer- mediated learning environment in the EFL context. System, 37, 434–446.Google Scholar
Ziegler, N., Seas, C., Ammons, S., Lake, J., Hamrick, P., & Rebuschat, P. (2013). Interaction in conversation groups: The development of L2 conversational styles. In McDonough, K. & Mackey, A. (Eds.), Second language interaction in diverse educational contexts (pp. 269–292). John Benjamins.Google Scholar