The present study examines Iranian language learners' views on different types of oral corrective feedback and explores the relationship with learners' language proficiency. It then compares the learners' views with those of their teachers. The study is based on a 36-item questionnaire completed by 154 English as a foreign language (EFL) learners at three different proficiency levels and by 25 EFL teachers. The teachers' views were explored further through semi-structured interviews. The results confirmed that more proficient learners tended to favor more elicitative types of feedback that required self-correction. Despite stronger support for teacher-led feedback, learners at all levels were in general positive about peer feedback. This contrasted with their teachers' more cautious attitudes to peer feedback and immediate feedback on errors. The teachers' attitudes seemed to be based on undue concern about the negative feelings students might experience as a result of such feedback. Given this mismatch between the teachers and learners' views, the study concludes by emphasising the importance of consulting students on their beliefs in order to offer the widest possible range of learning opportunities.

Studies on oral corrective feedback have been mainly directed towards cognitive factors. Practical aspects of error correction have been ignored to a large extent. The present study attempted to fill this gap by investigating teachers' practice and beliefs about oral error correction and the priorities they set for themselves and comparing the results with the recent research findings to find the areas of mismatch between the two domains. Seven teachers were observed, each on two occasions, which made 14 classroom observations overall. Interviews were also conducted with the observed and 30 more teachers. The collected data were analysed using descriptive statistics and content analysis of the interviews. The results indicated that teachers' concerns and priorities were different from those examined in experimental studies, being more affective and practice-oriented in nature. There were also inconsistencies between teachers' beliefs and practice. The results suggested the need to inform teachers about the cognitive aspects of error correction in teacher education programmes and to redress the balance between emotional and cognitive aspects of error correction.

Abstract-Recent developments in the literature provide us with a better understanding of the importance of second language pronunciation teaching which has been intermittently downplayed for years. This study aims at describing and understanding the different approaches to teaching pronunciation. It first gives an account of different views on pronunciation and its teachability. Then segmental and suprasegmental features and their place in language teaching programs are brought to notice. Since achieving settlement in whether teachers should set native-like accent or a fluent but accented style of speaking as the target in the pronunciation teaching programs has remained a thorny issue, a discussion of the related lines of arguments is presented. Finally, the future directions and consequent problems are discussed in the light of findings.

Studies on oral error correction in second language acquisition have been tilted towards cognitive aspects ignoring the affective and practical dimensions. This study attempted to fill this gap by investigating the role of students’ proficiency levels in five English language teachers’ corrective behavior. Follow-up interviews were conducted with the observed teachers. The results showed that the teachers provided more corrections to less proficient learners though they preferred more correction for advanced learners and used mainly recast for both groups, avoiding explicit forms of correction. They were mainly concerned with the affective aspects of oral error correction and acted on their own value system and teaching experience. The findings carry important implications for teacher education programs and the studies in this regard.

This review study was motivated by a debate about the role of recast in L2 learning. Recast is the most frequent type of feedback but probably the least effective one. While some researchers have criticized it as inefficient, others have supported it as an unobtrusive type of feedback especially useful during interactive activities. This review of studies on recast helps pinpoint the factors contributing to the effectiveness of recast. In this regard, two factors were found to have a determining role; saliency and learners' proficiency level. Saliency concerns the noticeability of recast by learners. Different factors affect saliency including shortness of recast, added-stress on the erroneous part, number of corrections, and the focus of recast. On the other hand, the results of studies confirm the role of proficiency. In other words, proficient learners are more likely to notice their errors using recast even when it is insalient. Keywords: Recast, Feedback, Saliency, Proficiency 1. Introduction Recasts as one of the major types of corrective feedback have been under the spotlight in much recent SLA research. Nicholas et al. (2001) defined recasts as "the teachers' correct restatement of learners' incorrectly formed utterance" (p. 720). To put it simply, recasts reformulate a learner's utterance into correct utterance. This feedback type is believed to be conducive to L2 acquisition (e.g., Nassaji, 2009;Sheen, 2006). However, how and under what conditions the most can be obtained from this type of feedback and what characteristics of it work for or against its effectiveness are but a few-not yet conclusively answered-questions in need of further research. This review study is intended to shed some light on these questions and to pinpoint major factors contributing to efficiency of recasts in different instructional and experimental contexts. There are two contrasting views on the effectiveness of recasts. As Ammar and Spada (2006) note, some researchers advocate recast as an effective corrective feedback (CF) technique because they are implicit, unobtrusive, and contingent on the learners' intended meaning (Doughty, 2001;Doughty and Varela, 1998;Leeman, 2003;Long, 1996;Oliver, 1995). On the contrary, some (Truscott, 1999;Truscott and Hsu, 2008) criticize it as ineffective, inefficient and useless. Studies on recast are of two types: observational and experimental. In observational studies, researchers observe a classroom for a period of time and consider learners' errors and language teachers' correction practices accordingly. In these studies, researchers observe and report the effect of different types of feedback on learners' interlanguage development. In experimental studies, on the other hand, the effect of a specific treatment or variable related to feedback on learners' interlanguage development is considered. All the researchers that have conducted their studies using observation (Fanselow, 1977;Lyster, 1998b;Lyster and Ranta, 1997;Panova and Lyster, 2002;Sheen, 2004) have come to the conclusio...