THE EFFECTIVENESS OF IMPLICIT AND

EXPLICIT CF ON THE ACQUISITION OF

JAPANESE PARTICLES Takehiro Iizuka

CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK (CF) CF has significant and durable effects on

target language development (Lyster & Saito, 2010)

What type of CF benefits L2 acquisition??

PREVIOUS STUDIES Ellis, Loewen and Erlam (2006) Li (2010)

ELLIS ET AL. (2006)

Implicit CF in the

form of recast

Explicit CF in the

form of metalinguistic

explanation

Clear advantage of explicit CF over implicit CF for both the delayed oral imitation and grammaticality judgment posttests

LI (2010) - META-ANALYSIS

Explicit CF was more effective than implicit CF on the immediate and short-delayed posttests, but the opposite was true on the long-delayed posttests.

Implicit CF

Explicit CF

CONTRADICTION Ellis et al. (2006)

Explicit CF is better for developing implicit knowledge

Li (2010)

Implicit CF is better for developing implicit knowledge

TIMING OF POSTTESTImmediate posttests

Delayed posttests

Ellis et al. (2006

)

Li (2010

)

1 day

2 week

s

Immediate posttests

Short-term delayed posttests

Long-term delayed

posttestsless

than 7 days

8-29 days

30 days

or later

???

RESEARCH QUESTIONS1. Is implicit oral corrective feedback in

the form of recast more effective in the long run than explicit oral corrective feedback in the form of metalinguistic explanation for building up implicit knowledge of Japanese locative particles?

NATURE OF LEARNER PARTICIPATION

T

S

S

SS

S

S

SCF

AddresseeAuditors

IncidentalRecast

OHTA (2001) Incidental recasts are available to the

learner by attending to classroom interaction in the role of auditor or overhearer.

Auditors may have greater resources available in working memory than addressees, who may be occupied with formulating a response.

HOWEVER… “The target of corrective feedback is more

accurately understood by learners when the feedback is directed to them as opposed to their classmates” (Mackey, Al-Khalil, Atanassova, Hama, Logan-Terry & Nakatsukasa, 2007)

“(The participant) tended not to listen to the conversation when the interaction took place between the teacher and another student during teacher-fronted activity.” (Nabei & Swain, 2002)

RESEARCH QUESTIONS2. How much learning occurs to the

learners who directly received each type of feedback?

3. How much learning occurs to the learners who indirectly received each type of feedback?

VARIABLES OF THIS STUDY Type of CF: implicit (recast) vs. explicit

(metalinguistic explanation) Nature of learner participation:

addressee (those directly received CF) vs. auditor (those indirectly received CF)

PARTICIPANTS JFL students who enrolled in the second

semester beginning course at Texas Tech University (N = 15).

TARGET LINGUISTIC FEATURES Japanese locative particles: de and ni;

specifically…a) de: /place noun X/ + de + /predicate of activity Y/ e.g. Toshokan de hon o yomimashita. (I read a book at the library)

b) ni: /place noun X/ + ni + /predicate of motion Y/ e.g. Toshokan ni ikimashita. (I went to the library.)

c) ni: /place noun X/ + ni + /predicate of static, inactive location Y/ e.g. Makudonarudo wa ginkou no tonari ni arimasu. (McDonald’s is next to the bank.)

TREATMENT Picture Description Task

Metalinguistic Feedback Group (N = 8) vs.

Recast Group (N = 7)

35 minutes

METALINGUISTIC FEEDBACK Output-prompting

Output Hypothesis (Swain, 1985)

The increase of control of partially acquired forms

Prompts are more effective than recasts because they induce learners to self-

correct. (Lyster, 2004)

METALINGUISTIC CF EPISODE EXAMPLES13: Mearii-san wa gogo goji de.. goji ni

uchi de [incorrect form] kaerimasu. (Mary goes home at 5 p.m.)

T: Etto, kaeru wa movement desu. (Well, “go” is movement.)

S13: Uchi ni [correct form] kaerimashita. ((She) went home.)

RECAST Input-providing

Recasts free attention needed for processing the linguistic contrasts. (Ohta, 2001)

The learning of new forms

Negotiation involving recasts is especially facilitative of

acquisition because they provide learners with both negative and positive evidence. (Long, 2008)

RECAST CF EPISODE EXAMPLES6: Uchi de [incorrect form] kaerimashita.

((She) went home.) T: Hai, uchi ni kaerimashita. (Yes, (she) went home.)S6: Uchi ni [correct form] kaerimashita. ((She) went home.)

TREATMENT PROCEDURE

ASSESSMENT Timed Picture Description Test

(for implicit knowledge) Untimed Grammaticality Judgment Test

(for explicit knowledge)

TIMED PICTURE DESCRIPTION TEST 10 target items (6 old items & 4 new

items) 5 distractors

10 seconds for each description

UNTIMED GRAMMATICALITY JUDGMENT TEST 5 target items (3 old items & 2 new

items)10 distractors

PROCEDURE

pretest(2 days

before T)treatment

immediate posttest

(1 day after T)

delayed posttest(4 weeks after T)

RESULTS

PRETEST: UNTIMED GRAMMATICALITY JUDGMENT TEST

N = 15

Mean 3

Mode 4

Median 3

Min 1

Max 4

SD 1.13

Key 5

PRETEST: TIMED PICTURE DESCRIPTION TESTN = 15

Mean 2.5

Mode 0

Median 2

Min 0

Max 7

SD 2.26

Key 10

TREATMENTMetalinguistic

FeedbackGroup (N = 8)

RecastGroup (N = 7)

Number of target CF episodes

16 19

Number of CFE: Activity

6 6

Number of CFE: Movement

3 4

Number of CFE: Static Location

7 9

IMMEDIATE POSTTEST: UNTIMED GRAMMATICALITY JUDGMENT TEST

N = 15 (pretest)

Mean 2.7 (3)

Mode 2 (4)

Median 2 (3)

Min 0 (1)

Max 5 (4)

SD 1.53 (1.13)

Key 5

IMMEDIATE POSTTEST: TIMED PICTURE DESCRIPTION TEST

Metalinguistic Feedback

Group (N = 8)(pretest)

RecastGroup (N = 7)

(pretest)

Mean 4.13 (2.75) 4.14 (2.28)

Mode 2 (0) 4 (0)

Median 3 (2.5) 4 (2)

Min 0 (0) 0 (0)

Max 10 (7) 8 (5)

SD 3.52 (2.49) 3.02 (2.14)

Key 10 10

ADDRESSEE VS. AUDITOR

Addressee Auditor

Total 40%(4/10)

24%(10/41)

Metalinguistic CF 50%(3/6)

28%(7/25)

Recast 25%(1/4)

19%(3/16)

DISCUSSION No improvement of explicit knowledge Some gains in implicit knowledge No difference was found between the

two groups (Metalinguistic vs. Recast) Those who directly received CF

(addressees) benefited from the feedback more than those who indirectly received CF (auditors)

LIMITATIONS Small number of participants Short length of treatment Small number of test items Test repetition effects