hig.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Comparing Explicit Exemplar-Based and Rule-Based Corrective Feedback: Introducing Analogy-Based Corrective Feedback
University of Gävle, Faculty of Education and Business Studies, Department of Humanities, English.
2018 (English)In: The Modern language journal, ISSN 0026-7902, E-ISSN 1540-4781, Vol. 102, no 2, p. 371-391Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This study introduces an approach to providing corrective feedback to L2 learners termed analogy-based corrective feedback that is motivated by analogical learning theories and syntactic alignment in dialogue. Learners are presented with a structurally similar synonymous version of their output where the erroneous form is corrected, and they must decode the analogy-based feedback to understand the correction. A quasi-experimental classroom-based study was conducted with upper secondary Swedish EFL learners (N = 49) to investigate the effectiveness of corrective feedback varying in mode (inductive exemplar-based or deductive rule-based) on English subject-verb agreement. Explicit correction, metalinguistic, and analogy-based corrective feedback, all explicitly providing evidence of error and including reformulation prompts, were assessed by timed and untimed grammaticality judgment and sentence completion tasks in a between-groups pretest, posttest, delayed posttest design with a control group. Results indicate significant delayed gains for all feedback types on the untimed grammaticality judgment task for ungrammatical items. No clear advantage was seen for rule-based or exemplar-based CF. Descriptive statistics indicate different trends over successive testing times, where analogy-based feedback often led to lowest performance on the immediate posttest but showed improvement on the delayed posttest, unlike the other two CF types.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Blackwell Publishing Inc. , 2018. Vol. 102, no 2, p. 371-391
Keywords [en]
Analogical learning, Corrective feedback, Exemplars vs. rules, Explicit instruction, Interactive alignment, Prompts
National Category
General Language Studies and Linguistics Educational Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-26240DOI: 10.1111/modl.12470ISI: 000432035700007Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85042141879OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-26240DiVA, id: diva2:1190888
Available from: 2018-03-15 Created: 2018-03-15 Last updated: 2018-06-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Thomas, Kavita Elisheba

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Thomas, Kavita Elisheba
By organisation
English
In the same journal
The Modern language journal
General Language Studies and LinguisticsEducational Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 24 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf