Scribd
Upload
94 views

Corrective Discourse Model Developed by Lyster and Ranta (1997)

The document summarizes Lyster and Ranta's (1997) corrective discourse model and feedback types for language teaching. The model identifies six feedback types teachers use to address students' errors: explicit correction, recasts, clarification requests, metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, and repetition. It also discusses factors like the relationship between error types and feedback, whether students incorporate corrections, and the focus on fluency versus accuracy.

Uploaded by

Zoltn Buka
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
94 views

Corrective Discourse Model Developed by Lyster and Ranta (1997)

The document summarizes Lyster and Ranta's (1997) corrective discourse model and feedback types for language teaching. The model identifies six feedback types teachers use to address students' errors: explicit correction, recasts, clarification requests, metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, and repetition. It also discusses factors like the relationship between error types and feedback, whether students incorporate corrections, and the focus on fluency versus accuracy.

Uploaded by

Zoltn Buka
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Corrective discourse model developed by Lyster and Ranta (1997)

Uptake: “a student’s utterance that immediately follows the teacher’s feedback and that constitutes
a reaction in some way to the teacher’s intention to draw attention to some aspect of the student’s
initial utterance”

Feedback types - Lyster and Ranta (1997)

- explicit correction: the explicit provision of the correct form


o As the teacher provides the correct form, he or she clearly indicates that what the
student had said was incorrect.
o e.g.
S: So we write pacific [paʃifik] (Error – phonological)
T: Say [pasifik], not [paʃifik] (Feedback – explicit)
- recast:
o the teacher’s reformulation of all or part of a student’s utterance, without the error
o e.g.
S: You should go see doctor. (Error – grammatical)
T: the doctor. (Feedback – recast)
o generally the most deployed type
- clarification requests
o in the form of question such as “Pardon?” and “I’m sorry?” or attempts to reveal the
intended form of the error with the rising tone.
o e.g.
S: result [result] of something (Error – phonological)
T: What did you say? (Feedback – clarification)
- metalinguistic feedback
o comments, information, or questions related to the well-formedness of the student’s
utterance, without explicitly providing the correct form.
o e.g.
S: She without. (Error – grammatical)
T: without… what is the verb? (Feedback – metalinguistic)
- elicitation:
o techniques that teachers use to directly elicit the correct form from the student (e.g.
strategic pauses)
o e.g.
S: Because I enjoy city life [laip] (Error – phonological)
T: City… (Feedback – elicitation)
o generally more effective at producing uptake.
- repetition
o the teacher’s repetition, in isolation, of the student’s erroneous utterance (most
cases: teachers adjust their intonation to highlight the error)
o e.g.
S: A garden [kuden] is full of flowers (Error – phonological)
T: [kuden]? (Feedback – repetition)
Questions to think about:

- Is there a correlation between the type of the error (grammatical, phonetical etc.) and the
type of the corrective feedback given by the teacher?
- Uptake:
o Did the students use it correctly afterwards?
o Full repair or only partial? Off the target (corrected something other than it was
intended)?
o Repetition (when correct answer was provided by the teacher)
self-repair (when the teacher does not already provide the correct form),
or peer-repair?
- Important factor: fluency or accuracy work?
- According to different studies, students often desire corrective feedback – did the students
seemingly require that in our case?

References

Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in
communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66.

Margolis, D. P. (2010). Handling Oral Error Feedback in Language Classrooms. Minnesota and
Wisconsin Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. Retrieved from the University of
Minnesota Digital Conservancy, http://purl.umn.edu/109923.

Suzuki, M. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in adult ESL classrooms. Columbia
University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 4 (2), 1-21.

You might also like