Abstract
Goo and Mackey (this issue) outline several apparent design flaws in studies that have compared the impact of different types of corrective feedback (CF). Furthermore, they argue that SLA researchers should stop comparing recasts to other types of CF because they are inherently different kinds of phenomena. Our response to their article addresses (a) the claim that the recast-learning relationship has been “settled,” (b) the misleading representation of our views on uptake, (c) the characterization of the CF comparison studies as being weak and invalid, and (d) Goo and Mackey’s recommendations concerning the most appropriate approach to investigating the effect of feedback on second language learning.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics,Education
Reference71 articles.
1. Feedback and uptake in teacher-student interaction: An analysis of 18 English lessons in Hong Kong secondary classrooms;Tsang;Regional Language Centre Journal,2004
2. Feedback for Language Transfer Errors
3. Beyond form-focused instruction: Reflections on past, present and future research
Cited by
126 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献