DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF PROMPTS AND RECASTS IN FORM-FOCUSED INSTRUCTION

By R. Lyster. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2004

804 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Language and Linguistics, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1ead076e07373570dd9e1ceea02a5b535bf9cf60

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Language and Linguistics

In Literature and Literary Theory

Citations in the corpus

Prompts and recasts: Differential effects on second language morphosyntax (2008, methodology): “Given that prompts cannot be used to elicit forms students do not know already (Lyster, 2004), an instruction component in which the PD rule was explained and practiced was deemed necessary.”
Raising language awareness in peer interaction: a cross-context, cross-methodology examination (2012, background): “…is CF that can disconfirm (or confirm) the learners’ linguistic hypotheses, which, at the same time, raises their language awareness and thus allows them to re-examine their hypotheses (Ammar & Spada, 2006; Lyster, 2004; Lyster & Izquierdo, 2009; McDonough, 2005; Ohta, 2001; Sato & Lyster, 2007).”
Teachers' Choice and Learners' Preference of Corrective Feedback Types (2008, background): “Lyster (2004) found that the provision of CF, such as clarification requests or elicitations in communicatively oriented SL classrooms of an immersion programme, were more effective for the learners' improvement in written tasks compared to recasts.”
LEARNERS' USES OF TWO TYPES OF WRITTEN FEEDBACK ON A L2 WRITING REVISION TASK (2007, background): “…uptake of feedback ~e+g+, Sheen, 2004!, it seems plausible that learners who know their writing has been reformulated might be oriented toward looking for corrections+ With both error corrections and reformulations or recasts, learners are provided with the necessary repairs ~Lyster, 2004!”
Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms (2012, background): “For example, in the classroom studies by Ammar & Spada (2006), Lyster (2004), Saito & Lyster (2012a), and Yang & Lyster (2010), the CF and no-CF groups alike were all exposed to the same instructional activities, which included focused production tasks that provided practice opportunities in all…”
Critical Feedback on Written Corrective Feedback Research. (2010, background): “These researchers refer to oral corrective feedback studies in SLA (e.g. Doughty & Varela, 1998; Han, 2002; Lyster, 2004) which have reported positive effects of oral corrective feedback as a result of intensively targeting a single linguistic feature.”
Recasts, Language Anxiety, Modified Output, and L2 Learning (2008, background): “His claim that recasts do not promote noticing and thus do not facilitate acquisition is substantiated by recent classroom studies (Ammar & Spada, 2006; Lyster, 2004) that show recasts to be less effective than other types of corrective feedback or do not show any learning (Ellis, 2007; Ellis, Loewe”
COUNTERPOINT PIECE: THE CASE FOR VARIETY IN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK RESEARCH (2013, methodology): “…was this line of research that Lyster pursued, predicting that different types CF would have differential effects on learning insofar as different types of repair (e.g., self-repair after prompts vs. repetition after recasts) entail different processing mechanisms (see Lyster, 1998 , 2002 , 2004 ).”
Comparing Focus on Form and Focus on Forms in Second-Language Vocabulary Learning. (2006, background): “© 2006 The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 63, 1 (September/septembre) Nation (2001) suggests that a balanced language course should consist of four major strands: comprehensible meaning-focused input, form-focused instruction, meaning-focused output, and fl”
The Routledge handbook of English language teaching (2018, background): “In short, exploring and understanding the conceptual motivations in language usages may help make language learning more interesting and effective (see Langacker, 2008).”
ONE SIZE FITS ALL?: Recasts, Prompts, and L2 Learning (2006, background): “…finding that emerges from the previously mentioned empirical research is that prompts can more positively affect learners’ accuracy than recasts ~Havranek, 1999; Lyster, 2004!+ Thus, the question that arises from these apparently contradictory findings is not whether recasts are effective, but…”