Publication | Closed Access
EXPLORING LEARNER PERCEPTION AND USE OF TASK-BASED INTERACTIONAL FEEDBACK IN FTF AND CMC MODES
146
Citations
32
References
2013
Year
Second Language LearningInteraction ModelMetacognitionFeedback TargetEducationCognitionPsycholinguisticsPerceptionCognitive InteractionLanguage LearningLanguage ProficiencySecond Language AcquisitionInteractive LearningLanguage AcquisitionLanguage StudiesForeign Language AcquisitionHuman LearningCognitive ScienceLearning SciencesDesignTask-based Language TeachingLearning AnalyticsForeign Language LearningCorrective FeedbackLearning TheoryHuman-computer InteractionForeign LanguageAdaptive LearningAffect Perception
Theoretical claims about the benefits of corrective feedback have been largely premised on learners’ noticing of feedback (e.g., Gass & Mackey, 2006; Long, 1996; Schmidt, 1990, 1995; Swain, 1995), and findings have demonstrated that both the feedback target (Mackey, Gass, & McDonough, 2000) and the mode of provision (Lai & Zhao, 2006) can affect learners’ accurate perception of feedback. The current study extended this research by investigating learners’ perception and use of feedback provided in task-based interaction in both computer-mediated (CMC) and face-to-face (FTF) modes. Utilizing stimulated recall, the study examined if 24 intermediate-level learners of Spanish as a foreign language accurately noticed feedback as feedback, if they noticed the feedback target, and if the environment in which they interacted (CMC vs. FTF) made a difference in their accuracy. The study also investigated if modality affected opportunities for modified output immediately following feedback and if learners used those opportunities differently according to mode. Results demonstrated that, overall, learners did notice feedback as feedback in both modes. Contrary to expectations, there were no statistical differences between modes in feedback perception accuracy. Significant differences were found, however, in learners’ opportunities for and use of feedback depending on the interaction environment and the type of error being addressed.
| Year | Citations | |
|---|---|---|
Page 1
Page 1