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 1540-4781Article 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. © 2018 by The Modern Language Journal.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Blackwell Publishing Inc. , 2018.
Keyword [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.12470Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85042141879OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-26240DiVA, id: diva2:1190888
Available from: 2018-03-15 Created: 2018-03-15 Last updated: 2018-03-15Bibliographically 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: 8 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