Lyster and Ranta
Reading the beginning of the article, I grew a strong interest in it because of the way Lyster and Ranta compromised the various moves in error correction in 2nd language classrooms and applied it to an area of classroom interaction with the intention to relate a teacher’s ability to impose corrective feedback to the students’ actual responses. I definitely think that researching immersion programs is beneficial because they can represent a different kind of approach to communicative language teaching. I also enjoyed the questions listed on page 38, since they are all questions we need to think about as future teachers.
The first couple pages of the article provided a list of the findings of various studies on corrective feedback. However, Lyster and Ranta felt the need to broaden the findings of corrective feedback, providing information on the relationships between different variables they thought to be necessary on the topic.
In the actual study, they received audiorecordings from a variety of lessons in four fourth-grade French immersion classrooms in the Montreal, Canada area. Through Lyster and Ranta’s observations, they came to the conclusion that error correction sequences consist of a student error; and the teacher’s feedback (in the form of explicit correction, clarification requests, recasts, metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, or error repetition.) Uptake is processed in the study as well, in the way that is refers to a student’s utterance immediately proceeding the teacher’s feedback. The two types of student uptake they examine is for one, uptake that results in repair of the error on the focuses feedback, or two, uptake that results in an utterance that still needs repair.
Lyster & Ranta found an overwhelming tendency for teachers to use recasts as error correction (Only 31% of the recast moves lead to uptake). It was observed that the students responded more successfully when the correct form was not supplied for them, and there was negotiation of form. Clarification requests, metalinguistic feedback, and repetition are all similar in the way that they are effective at eliciting uptake from the student. The most successful technique for eliciting uptake is elicitation. All learner utterances following elicitation were observed to involve uptake with a similar distribution between repair and needs-repair.
Overall, I felt that the study was created well in the way that the teacher had an unawareness of the research focus of corrective feedback, and the actual audiorecordings were a good way to find evidence of the student’s ability to notice grammar. However, this study held no benefit for future language teachers to get information out of. I think they should have analyzed a set of guidelines on ways to improve these teachers’ mistakes. Reading this article didn’t give me any tips of information, or relevant real life examples of how to monitor the different kinds of feedback as future teachers.
Task: What, in your opinion is the most significant type of error correction in a classroom? Why do you think this? Do you think some types of error correction are unfair to the student learning? Why or why not? What are your thoughts on the article in general (similar/ different to mine)? The article stated that, “Feedback-uptake sequence engages students more actively when there is negotiation of form, that is, when the correct form is not provided to the students (recasts and explicit correction).” (pg. 58). Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Why?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNice review Lauren. Seems to me like all of the error correction techniques are useful when done correctly. So many of these articles (and ourselves as well) look to find the "best" solution to a problem. From what I gather in class discussions and the results of the research in these articles, there really isn't "one correct way." I think every technique has its benefits when doing correctly.
ReplyDeleteBut to answer your questions more directly, I would definitely agree with the research that elicitation is a great way to make sure the error is understood by the student. With the elicitation method, the students have to cognitively work to find the error in their utterance. This builds the connections in the brain to make the student more aware that they make this error and possibly to prevent it in the future (I think?).
As for whether certain types of correction are unfair, I think simply providing the correct answer doesn't help anyone. Now, in some cases providing the answer directly is totally okay. For example, if you are working on say, prepositional phrases, and the student makes an error in article choice. Example "I would like to go to the Michigan State University in the future." Once again, the focus of the day is on prepositional phrases. The student should have used the null article in this case (crazy English), however this error is NOT one that we are focusing on today. In this situation, I would simple say "no 'the' before MSU" and then move on to say "GREAT JOB! These are some great prepositional phrases!" Remembering the focus of the lesson can prevent "corrective throw up." This is when someone has multiple errors in their utterance and the teacher just goes off for 2 minutes about everything that was wrong with the statement. I don't think "corrective throw up" is an official term, but it should be :) If you are focusing on prepositional phrases, stick with that! It's more than enough for the students to focus on! Huge tangent, but that's all I'm going to write because this got lengthy.
I have to agree with the comment above mine that if an error correction technique is carried out successfully, then any of the techniques can work. I also don't think there is one correct way to correct students. Every student is different and so different techniques work better for different people. I think it's important for teachers to know how to successfully use different techniques and know which ones work best for which students so that they can help all of their students succeed.
ReplyDeleteOne technique that I really like is also elicitation. I really liked metalinguistic feedback and then I saw the elicitation included metalinguistic feedback along with other techniques. I like the metalinguistic feedback part because it forces the student to figure out what's wrong versus having the answer just given to them. When a student has to work to get to an answer, it helps them make connections and remember information.
I think that techniques that just give the student the answer are less effective in that they don't make the student do any work.
When I have to write a research paper, I remember the information I wrote about. If someone just told me one day all of this information, it would be harder for me to remember because I didn't have to do any work to get to the answer. I know this may not have to do with learning a new language but it's a life experience that helps me to understand the different techniques.
I agree with the quote on page 58. I think I have been pretty clear that I believe that material will have more meaning to a learner when they have to work in order to get to an answer.
I don't think there is one correct way to correct students because each student has a different style of learning and way of comprehending information/taking constructive criticism. I think that if elicited effectively and with much effort, many error correction techniques will work with students. I believe that "spoon-feeding" information to a student is not the way to go about correcting them. When they get a problem/answer wrong, instead of saying "that is incorrect, here's the right answer," it is more beneficial to the student to have them realize what they got wrong, why they got it wrong and try to fix it without the teacher's assistance. Trial and Error works well with kid and when they figure out answers on their own, sometimes they are more motivated to work harder at the next problem for the sole purpose of accomplishing more on their own. As stated above, having the student figure out the problem by themselves can really enhance their knowledge of the material. That's why i believe meta-linguistic feedback would work best with students. They will realize their mistakes and attempt to not make them in future assignments/problems.
ReplyDeleteThe material will be more clear and stick with the learner if they are able to delve into the question/problem/assignment without assistance. I agree with the quote on page 58. I think students will benefit more from a hands-on, trial and error learning with explicit direction only when extremely lost, rather than working until they get stuck and know that they will receive an answer if they ask politely. Students will benefit more if they are not provided the correct form right away.
Great Post. This is something that is so incredibly important within our student's learning and it often goes unnoticed. Many teachers tend to simply think that they need to ask an a question and if they don't hear the exact answer they are looking for then it is time to move on and see what the next student has to say. First of all, what is learning without any motivation? Would it actually be possible for a young second grader to try hard in class if she was constantly being shut down?
ReplyDeleteI think it is important to take note that there is an incredibly large difference in knowledge and performance skills. In other words, just because a student is not telling you a legit answer doesn't mean he/she doesn't know what they are talking about. As we have discussed in class, some students have trouble orally and others have trouble comprehending. These students that have trouble with putting their thoughts into words often get over looked as bad students. So this brings me to the thought of prompting our students thoughts so we can get them in the habit of expressing themselves better. The more we do this the more skill they will gain in this area.
Next, it is important to note over correcting students. This goes right back to the idea of motivation. If everyday in class you were interrupted when expressing your thoughts, how often would you really want to share? When teachers hypocorrect students often become embarrassed to share with their classmates, which could eventually affect his/her oral speaking skills. If there is a student we who chooses not to participate we can use the popsicle sticks that many of us had when we were younger. Sometimes my CT is really sneaky and pulls one out and calls on whoever she wants (not letting the kids know who she pulled out). This is a way to not make the student feel as cornered, but rather that it was luck of the draw.
As far as correction in language I imagine that the situation is somewhat different. It is very important that our students don't get in a bad, hard-to-break habit, so I believe that positive correction is extremely important. If there is a specific sound he/she is struggling with then maybe we can try to use multiple words in the class with that sound that day. Another way that this type of problem can be corrected is to make a general correction to the classroom. This would be more appropriate if the student was one whose listening skills were at an appropriate level.
Great post! Kim
This article was very informative on the corrections Teachers make within the classroom to their L2 learners. It may overwhelm students if they are trying to speak and practice their skills in their L2 if the teacher is constantly correcting them. The teacher needs to know the right time, and right amount to correct them. Otherwise, they will feel frustrated and will not want to participate anymore. However, you cannot give them too much freedom, becuase they may start to form bad habits if they get into a rythm of using incorrect grammatical strucutres. Within my own L2 learning, sometimes I feel lost if a teacher does not correct or reassure my answers. I feel nervous, as if everyone but me knows I am makign a mistake. I want my teacher to reassure me more often if I say it correctly, or wait until after I am finished speaking to correct me.
ReplyDeleteI do not entirely agree that “feedback-uptake sequence engages students more actively when there is negotiation of form…when the correct form is not provided.” I feel that providing the correct form when teaching a language can be very beneficial depending on the manner in which an instructor presents the correction to the learner. While explicit correction can potentially have a negative affect on language acquisition in that in can embarrass and even discourage a student learning a second language, it seems that recasting to correct students is neither threatening nor discouraging to the learner. As an assistant teacher in a preschool, I see daily evidence that recasting can be a beneficial tool is correcting students. While I acknowledge that in the preschool I am correcting an L1 English speaker as opposed to an L2 English speaker, I have also found recasting to be effective when I tutored a 4th grade L2 Spanish speaker in English last year.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that every method of error correction can be effective when used correctly! Just like every student is unique, there is a unique method that works best for them. The last thing I feel I should do as a teacher is correct an error in a way that is not suitable for the student. I would hate to be offensive or discouraging in any way so I will make sure I put forth the effort in making constructive criticisms.
ReplyDeleteElicitation seems to be very effective in helping the student understand the error that they made. This way the students need to use their minds to figure out their error in what they said. They are better able to learn from these mistakes by making this connection in their head.
I think that spoon-feeding information to students is a horrible approach! I have had instances where I kept making errors and when I asked someone for help, instead of showing me where I made an error and explain what I did wrong, I would receive a correct answer with no explanation. I wouldn’t be able to learn how I came up with the wrong answer or how to come up with the correct one. It’s quite a rewarding feeling to work hard for an answer and come up with the correct one after putting forth an effort. Spoon-feeding is too easy of a short cut and doesn’t offer any substance!
Good job with the post, I enjoyed reading it. Good luck with your future assignments!
-Maya
What fascinates me about this topic is how much students think they get corrected and how many errors are actually left uncorrected. In a survey I gave students the majority of them wanted the teacher to correct all mistakes and thought that their teacher did, when only about 6% of the errors were actually corrected.
ReplyDelete