A Vygotskian Perspective on Corrective Feedback in L2: The Effect of Random Versus Negotiated Help on the Learning of English Articles

Nassaji, Hossein; Swain, Merrill

doi:10.1080/09658410008667135

Cited by 320 publications

(200 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

175

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Sarangi (1998) also emphasizes the importance of the social and interpersonal aspects of teacher-learner interaction, as do Kress, Ogborn & Martins (1998). Nassaji & Swain (2000) provide support for the effectiveness of consciousness raising feedback, negotiated between teacher and learner, and taking the learner's stage of development into account.…”

Section: Language Awareness and Teaching Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Language awareness and language learning

Svalberg¹

2007

Lang. Teach.

220

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Language Awareness and Teaching Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Language awareness and language learning

Svalberg¹

2007

Lang. Teach.

220

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Aljaafreh and Lantolf developed a "regulatory scale" to reflect the extent to which the help provided by the tutor was implicit or explicit. Nassaji and Swain (2000), in a follow-up study, examined whether or not corrective feedback provided to two Korean L2 writers would improve their knowledge of English articles. They found that the corrective feedback given within the zone of proximal development (ZPD) was more effective than the feedback given irrespective of the learners' ZPD.…”

Section: Studies Looking At Feedback From a Sociocultural Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Feedback on the Feedback: Sociocultural Interpretation of Saudi ESL Learners’ Opinions about Writing Feedback

Mustafa

2012

ELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This qualitative study employed informal conversational interviews and semi-structured individual interviews to capture the Saudi students' opinions about the feedback they receive, and about their perceptions on what constitutes helpful feedback. Sociocultural theory was used as the framework of this study. The findings suggest that the Saudi students do not think highly of the feedback, and that the feedback they desire is markedly different from what they receive. The students mentioned several impediments to feedback. From a sociocultural perspective, the feedback practices do not adhere to the best practices of the theory, resulting in major hindrances to the students' learning/writing development.

show abstract

“…In spite of the fact that social interactionism has not received enough empirical evidence, a few seminal works, such as Aljaafreh and Lantolf [1] and Nassaji [28,29], provide support for it, although CF was not the main focus of these two studies. Russell [31] in her review and Ellis [9] in his proposed framework for CF both indicated a big gap in researching CF from a social perspective.…”

Section: Social Interactionist Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the broadest sense, cognitive-interactionism is concerned with internal factors of human interaction, while socioculturalism is concerned with the external factors of human interaction [19,[21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34]. Both perspectives address and value the utility of corrective feedback obtained through conversational (i.e., teacher-students) interaction, which in turn is claimed to lead to language learning and development [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corrective Feedback: A Bridge between Cognitive Interactionist and Social Interactionist Perspectives

Althobaiti

2014

EDUCATION

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This presentation tries to explain oral corrective feedback (CF) as provided through conversational interaction. In this presentation, CF, as provided through the interaction, is viewed from two perspectives: the cognitive interactionist and the social interactionist. Although, both of these two perspectives value interaction, they explicate the provision of CF through interaction differently. The cognitive interactionists explain the provision of CF through, but not limited to, Interaction Hypothesis, Noticing Hypothesis, and Output Hypothesis. The social interactionists emphasize the roles of teachers and learners within the process of corrective feedback. They also emphasize the context in which they work and the specific pedagogic activity in which they are involved (Ellis, 2008;2010). This presentation is hoped to contribute a better understanding of EFL learning facilitated through the provision of CF. In addition, it provides some recommendations for future researchers, language educators, and EFL teachers.

show abstract

A Vygotskian Perspective on Corrective Feedback in L2: The Effect of Random Versus Negotiated Help on the Learning of English Articles

Cited by 320 publications

References 0 publications

Language awareness and language learning

Language awareness and language learning

Feedback on the Feedback: Sociocultural Interpretation of Saudi ESL Learners’ Opinions about Writing Feedback

Corrective Feedback: A Bridge between Cognitive Interactionist and Social Interactionist Perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About