Unraveling the Impact of Recasts, Working Memory, and Textual Enhancements on EFL Learning: Intensive vs. Extensive Approaches
محورهای موضوعی : Journal of Studies in Learning and Teaching EnglishFarzaneh Bahadori 1 , Mohammad Bavali 2 , Samad Mirza Suzani 3
1 - Department of Foreign Languages, Shiraz branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran.
2 - Department of Foreign Languages, Shiraz branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran.
3 - Department of Foreign Languages, Marvdasht branch, Islamic Azad University, Fars, Iran.
کلید واژه: Intense and extensive educational approaches, verbal revisions versus textual improvements, language proficiency development, memory function,
چکیده مقاله :
One of the challenges in English Language Learning (ELL) research is understanding the impact of different instructional techniques on grammatical and lexical growth. This study addresses this challenge by investigating the effects of extensive versus intensive recasts and textual enhancements (TEs) on Foreign Language (FL) development, while considering the role of working memory capacity and students' perceptions. A quasi-experimental design was implemented, involving four experimental groups and one control condition. The results of one-way ANOVA and mixed between-within group ANOVAs revealed the facilitative effect of recasts on English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learning. Specifically, the intensive recasts group demonstrated significantly higher performance compared to the extensive recasts group, intensive TE group, extensive TE group, as well as the control group, in both tests. The study also examined students' perceptions through interviews, which indicated a notable difference in accurate perception of recasts. Students in the intensive recasts condition exhibited a higher level of accuracy compared to those in the extensive recasts group. Conversely, the extensive recasts group displayed limited error detection. Additionally, a significant correlation between working memory and learners' gain scores was observed in the intensive recasts condition. This suggests that learners with higher storage capacity demonstrated more substantial development in oral tasks, while learners with higher attention domain exhibited greater improvements in written tasks. By shedding light on these findings, this study contributes to our understanding of effective instructional techniques and their impact on EFL development.
One of the challenges in English Language Learning (ELL) research is understanding the impact of different instructional techniques on grammatical and lexical growth. This study addresses this challenge by investigating the effects of extensive versus intensive recasts and textual enhancements (TEs) on Foreign Language (FL) development, while considering the role of working memory capacity and students' perceptions. A quasi-experimental design was implemented, involving four experimental groups and one control condition. The results of one-way ANOVA and mixed between-within group ANOVAs revealed the facilitative effect of recasts on English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learning. Specifically, the intensive recasts group demonstrated significantly higher performance compared to the extensive recasts group, intensive TE group, extensive TE group, as well as the control group, in both tests. The study also examined students' perceptions through interviews, which indicated a notable difference in accurate perception of recasts. Students in the intensive recasts condition exhibited a higher level of accuracy compared to those in the extensive recasts group. Conversely, the extensive recasts group displayed limited error detection. Additionally, a significant correlation between working memory and learners' gain scores was observed in the intensive recasts condition. This suggests that learners with higher storage capacity demonstrated more substantial development in oral tasks, while learners with higher attention domain exhibited greater improvements in written tasks. By shedding light on these findings, this study contributes to our understanding of effective instructional techniques and their impact on EFL development.
Anderson, J. R. (2000). Learning and memory: An integrated approach. Wiley.
Baddeley, A. D. (2007). Working memory, thought, and action. Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(2), 141–172. doi:10.1017/s0272263105050096
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51, 281–318. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00170
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339-368. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060141
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., & Reinders, H. (2009). Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching. Multilingual Matters.
Han, Z., Park, E., & Combs, C. (2008). Textual enhancement of input: Issues and possibilities. Applied Linguistics, 29, 597–618. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amn029
Hasegawa, M., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (2002). An fMRI study of bilingual sentence comprehension and workload. Neuroimage, 15(3), 647-660. https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2001.1008
Hawkes, L., & Nassaji, H. (2016). The role of extensive recasts in error detection and correction by adult ESL students. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6, 19-41. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2016.6.1.2
Hosseini, K. (2019). The effects of recasts on L2 learners' acquisition of English wh-questions: A systematic review. Journal of Second Language Teaching and Research, 6(2), 221-243. doi:10.1080/17501229.2017.1419897
Juffs, A., & Harrington, M. (2011). Aspects of working memory in L2 learning. Language Teaching, 44(2), 137-166. doi:10.1017/S026144481000052X
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (2002). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. In T. A. Polk & C. M. Seifert (Eds.), Cognitive modeling (pp. 131-177). Boston Review.
LaBrozzi, R. M. (2016). The effects of textual enhancement type on L2 form recognition and reading comprehension in Spanish. Language Teaching Research, 20(1), 75-91. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814549774
Lee, H.-S., & Huang, J. (2008). Textual enhancement of input: Issues and possibilities. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 79-98. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.11.004
Lee, S. K. (2007). Effects of textual enhancement and topic familiarity on Korean EFL students’ reading comprehension and learning of passive form. Language Learning, 57(1), 87-118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00400.x
Leeser, M. J. (2007). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 11(3), 321–342. doi:10.1177/1362168807079377
Lightbown, P. (2008). Transfer appropriate processing as a model for classroom second language acquisition. In Z. Han (Ed.), Understanding second language process (pp. 27–44). Multilingual Matters.
Loewen, S., & Philp, J. (2006). Recasts in the adult English L2 classroom: Characteristics, explicitness, and effectiveness. The Modern Language Journal, 90(4), 536-556. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00456.x
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(3), 399-432. doi:10.1017/S0272263104263021
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (2013). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66.
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 265–302. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990520
Mackey, A. (2007). Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies. Oxford University Press.
Mackey, A. (2012). Input, interaction, and corrective feedback in L2 learning. Oxford University Press.
Mackey, A. (2016). Feedback, noticing and second language development. Applied Linguistics, 37(6), 791–807. doi:10.1093/applin/amu062
Mackey, A., & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 407-452). Oxford University Press.
Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive interactional feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 471-497. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100004029
Meguro, Y. (2019). Textual enhancement, grammar learning, reading comprehension, and tag questions. Language Teaching Research, 23(1), 58-77. doi: 1362168817714277
Nassaji, H. (2007). Elicitation and reformulation and their relationship with learner repair in dyadic interaction. Language Learning, 57, 511-548. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00429.x
Nassaji, H. (2009). Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning, 59, 411-452. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00511.x
Nassaji, H. (2017). The effectiveness of extensive versus intensive recasts for learning L2 grammar. The Modern Language Journal, 101(2), 353-368. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12378
Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching grammar in second language classrooms: Integrating form-focused instruction in communicative context. Routledge.
Nguyen, M. T. T., Pham, H. T., & Pham, T. M. (2017). The effects of input enhancement and recasts on the development of second language pragmatic competence. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 11(1), 45-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2016.1248717
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2001). Does type of instruction make a difference? Substantive findings from a meta‐analytic review. Language Learning, 51, 157-213.
Ortega, L. (2005). Understanding second language acquisition. Hodder Arnold.
Oxford test of English. (2021). English level test. Oxford.
Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS survival manual. Mc Graw-hill education.
Rassaei, E. (2013). Corrective feedback, learners' perceptions, and second language development. System, 41(2), 472-483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.04.006
Rassaei, E. (2015). Effects of textual enhancement and input enrichment on L2 development. TESOL Journal, 6(2), 281-301. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.157
Rassaei, E. (2020). The separate and combined effects of recasts and textual enhancement as two focus on form techniques on L2 development. System, 89, 102-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.102193
Rebuschat, P. (2013). Implicit and explicit learning of languages. John Benjamins Publishing.
Reinders, H., & Ellis, R. (2009). The effects of two types of input on intake and the acquisition of implicit and explicit knowledge. In R. Ellis, S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam, J. Philp, & R. Reinders (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (pp. 282- 302). Multilingual Matters.
Révész, A. (2012). Working memory and the observed effectiveness of recasts on different L2 outcome measures. Language Learning, 62(1), 93-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00672.x
Roehr, K. (2008). Linguistic and metalinguistic categories in second language learning. Cognitive Linguistics, 19, 67–106.
Segalowitz, N. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. Routledge.
Segalowitz, N., & Hulstijn, J. H. (2005). Automaticity in bilingualism and second language learning. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. De Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 371–388). Oxford University Press.
Sheen, Y. (2008). Recasts, language anxiety, modified output, and L2 learning. Language Learning, 58, 835–874. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00473.x
Sheen, Y. (2018). Recasts in second language learning: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 68(4), 868–907. doi:10.1111/lang.12296
Simard, D. (2009). Differential effects of textual enhancement formats on intake. System, 37(1), 124-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.08.008
Spada, N. (2015). SLA research and L2 pedagogy: Misapplications and questions of relevance. Language Teaching, 48(1), 69-81. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444814000285
Vallat-Azouvi, C., Pradat-Diehl, P., & Azouvi, P. (2012). The Working Memory Questionnaire: A scale to assess everyday life problems related to deficits of working memory in brain injured patients. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 22(4), 634-649. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2012.667246
VanPatten, B. (2004). Input processing in adult second language acquisition. In VanPatten, B. (Ed.), Processing instruction: theory, research, and commentary (pp. 5–31). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Waters, G. S., & Caplan, D. (2013). The measurement of verbal working memory capacity and its relation to reading comprehension. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 49(1), 51–79. doi:10.1080/713755607
Wong, W., & VanPatten, B. (2003). The evidence is IN: Drills are OUT. Foreign Language Annals, 36(3), 403–423. doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.2003.tb01933.
