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

Naif Althobaiti^1,

¹Department of Foreign Languages, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia

Cite this paper:
Naif Althobaiti. Corrective Feedback: A Bridge between Cognitive Interactionist and Social Interactionist Perspectives. American Journal of Educational Research. 2014; 2(10):950-954. doi: 10.12691/education-2-10-15

Abstract

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.

Keywords:
corrective feedback interaction cognitive interactionist social interactionist EFL context

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J. P., Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. The Modern Language Journal, 78(4), 465-483 (1994).
[2]	Althobaiti, N., EFL teachers' beliefs, instructional practices and professional development about corrective feedback in Saudi universities. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Queensland, Brisbane (2013).
[3]	Bitchener, J. & Storch, N., Written corrective feedback for SLA: Theoretical perspectives and empirical research. UK: Multilingual Matters (2013).
[4]	Corder, S. P., The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5, 161-169 (1967).
[5]	Darhower, M., Interactional features of synchronous computer-mediated communication in the intermediate L2 class: A sociocultural case study. CALICO Journal, 19(2), 249-277 (2002).
[6]	Donato, R., Sociocultural contributions to understanding the foreign and second language classroom. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 27-52). NY: Oxford University Press (2000).
[7]	Donato, R., A sociocultural perspective on language learning strategies: The role of mediation. The Modern Language Journal, 78(4), 453-464 (1994).
[8]	Egi, T., Verbal reports, noticing, and SLA research. Language Awareness 13, 243-264 (2004).
[9]	Ellis, R., Epilogue: A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 335-349 (2010).
[10]	Firth, A., & Wagner, J., On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. The Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 285-300 (1997).
[11]	Gass, S. M. & Selinker, L., Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory Course. London: Lawrence Earlbaum (2001).
[12]	Gass, S., Input and interaction. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 224-255). Oxford: Blackwell (2003).
[13]	Gass, S., Input, interaction and the second language learner. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum (1997).
[14]	Gitsaki, C., & Althobaiti, N., ESL teachers' use of corrective feedback and its effect on learners' uptake. Asia TEFL, 7(1), 197-219 (2010).
[15]	Hatch, E., Discourse analysis and second language acquisition. In E. Hatch (Ed.), Second language acquisition. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House (1978).
[16]	Hermans-Nymark, L. D., English in the EFL classrooms: Why not? (Doctoral dissertation). Nijmegen: Radboud University. (2007).
[17]	Izumi, S., Output, input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis.
[18]	Krashen, S., Principles and practice in second language acquisition. London: Pergamon Press (1982).
[19]	Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L., Sociocultural theory and second language learning. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 201-224). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (2007).
[20]	Lantolf, J. P., Socio-cultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2000).
[21]	Long, M., Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum (2007).
[22]	Long, M. H. Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Philadelphia: Benjamins (1991).
[23]	Long, M. H., The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (Vol. 2: Second language acquisition, pp. 413-468). New York: Academic (1996).
[24]	Long, M., & Robinson, P., Focus on form: Theory, research and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15-41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1998).
[25]	Lyster, R., & Mori, H., Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 269-300 (2006).
[26]	Mitchell R., & Myles, F., Second Language Learning Theories (2nd ed.). Great Britain: Hodder Arnold (2004).
[27]	Nabei, T., Recasts in classroom interaction: A teacher's intention, learners' attention, and second language learning. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Toronto, Canada (2002).
[28]	Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S., Teaching grammar in second language classrooms: Integrating form-focused instruction in communicative context. New York: Routledge (2011).
[29]	Nassaji, H., & Swain, M., A Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2: The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness, 9(1), 34-51 (2000).
[30]	Ortega, L., Meaningful L2 practice in foreign language classrooms: A cognitive-interactionist SLA perspective. In: Practice in a Second Language. pp. 180-207. [Online]. Cambridge Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (2007).
[31]	Russell, V., Corrective feedback, over a decade of research since Lyster and Ranta (1997): Where do we stand today? Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 6(1), 21-31 (2009).
[32]	Schmidt, R., Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press (2001).
[33]	Schmidt, R., The role consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 1, 129-158 (1990).
[34]	Selinker, L., Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10, 209-31 (1972).
[35]	Sheen, Y., Corrective feedback, individual differences and second language learning. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer (2012).
[36]	Sheen, Y., Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8(3), 263-300 (2004).
[37]	Swain, M., Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House (1985).
[38]	Swain, M., Examining dialogue: Another approach to content specification and to validating inferences drawn from test scores. Language Testing, 18(3), 275-302 (2001).
[39]	Vygotsky, L. S. Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky (Vol. 1, pp. 37-285). New York: Plenum Press (1987).