CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 615EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningLinguistics and Language AnalysisStudent Assessment and Feedback

Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings

Sheen, YoungHee·2004·Language Teaching Research
DOI 10.1191/1362168804lr146oa
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper reports similarities and differences in teachers’ corrective feedback and learners’ uptake across instructional settings. Four communicative classroom settings - French Immersion, Canada ESL, New Zealand ESL and Korean EFL - were examined using Lyster and Ranta’s taxonomy of teachers’ corrective feedback moves and learner uptake. The results indicate that recasts were the most frequent feedback type in all four contexts but were much more frequent in the Korean EFL and New Zealand ESL classrooms (83% and 68%, respectively) than in the Canadian Immersion and ESL classrooms (55% for both). Also, the rates for both uptake and repair following recasts were greater in the New Zealand and Korean settings than in the Canadian contexts. The findings of this study suggest that the extent to which recasts lead to learner uptake and repair may be greater in contexts where the focus of the recasts is more salient, as with reduced/partial recasts, and where students are oriented to attending to linguistic form rather than meaning. The study underscores the importance of considering the influence of context on corrective feedback and learner uptake.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1191/1362168804lr146oa

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Recasts can be quite explicit depending on discourse context, instructional setting, learner orientation, and formal characteristics such as linguistic targets, length, and number of changes.

    “depending on discourse context, instructional setting, and learner orientation as well as formal characteristics such as linguistic targets, length, and number of changes, recasts can also be quite explicit”

    From ORAL FEEDBACK IN CLASSROOM SLA: A Meta-Analysis (2010) · cites this paper as Sheen, 2004

  • Sheen (2004) found that uptake rates in the Canadian context (Lyster & Ranta, French immersion: 54.8%; Panova & Lyster, Canadian ESL: 46.6%) were significantly lower than in New Zealand (80.4%) and Korea (82.3%).

    “She found that uptake rates in the Canadian context (Lyster & Ranta, French immersion: 54.8%; Panova & Lyster, Canadian ESL: 46.6%) were significantly lower than in New Zealand (80.4%) and Korea (82.3%).”

    From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Sheen 2004

  • Sheen (2004) found that students in Korean and New Zealand contexts responded significantly more to recasts (82.5% and 72.9%, respectively) than did ESL (39.8%) and immersion (30.7%) students in Canada.

    “A similar tendency was found for the relationship between uptake and recasts: students in Korean and New Zealand contexts responded significantly more to recasts (82.5% and 72.9%, respectively) than did ESL (39.8%) and immersion (30.7%) students in Canada.”

    From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Sheen 2004

  • The instructional context affects the frequency with which different focus on form options occur and also the extent to which they result in uptake with repair.

    “The instructional context affects the frequency with which different focus on form options occur and also the extent to which they result in uptake with repair (Sheen, 2004) [3].”

    From Focus on form: A critical review (2016) · cites this paper as Sheen, 2004

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sheen, Y.
Affiliations
Columbia University (US)
Corresponding author
Sheen, YoungHee
Venue
Language Teaching Research
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2004-07
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
263-300
ISSN
  • 1362-1688 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0954
DOI
10.1191/1362168804lr146oa
OpenAlex
W2014073462
Cited by
615
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 75 · 2020: 49 · 2019: 65 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 52 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 36
FWCI
67.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Language Teaching Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
Keywords
corrective feedback, learner uptake, recasts, repair, French immersion, communicative language teaching, pedagogical context, 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