Uptake in Incidental Focus on Form in Meaning‐Focused ESL Lessons
Abstract
Uptake is a term used to describe learners’ responses to the provision of feedback after either an erroneous utterance or a query about a linguistic item within the context of meaning‐focused Language activities. Some researchers argue that uptake may contribute to second Language acquisition by facilitating noticing and pushing learners to produce more accurate linguistic forms. This study investigated the occurrence of uptake in 32 hr of meaning‐focused lessons in 12 English as a second Language classes in Auckland, New Zealand. It also examined which characteristics of incidental focus on form predicted uptake and successful uptake. The results indicated that uptake occurred in these classes and that characteristics such as complexity, timing, and type of feedback influenced both the production of uptake and the successfulness of it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Ellis et al. (2001a, 2001b) and Loewen (2004) found that recasts were the most common type of corrective feedback, and successful uptake of the feedback occurred roughly 75% of the time.
“Results indicated that recasts were the most common type of corrective feedback, and successful uptake of the feedback occurred roughly 75% of the time.”
From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Loewen 2004
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 23 · Cited by 270
- Authors
- Loewen, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Auckland (NZ)
- Corresponding author
- Loewen, Shawn
- ORCID
- Loewen, Shawn
- Venue
- Language Learning
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-02-12
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 153-188
- ISSN
- 0023-8333 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9922
- OpenAlex
- W1511275899
- Cited by
- 270
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 74.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Language Learning (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Analysis
- Keywords
- uptake, English as a second language, feedback, noticing, second language acquisition, form-focused instruction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
