1. Masatoshi Sato Universidad Andrés Bello TBLT, November 19, 2011
Effects and effectiveness of TBLT and strategy training: Transforming learners into corrective feedback providers
Masatoshi Sato
Universidad Andrés Bello
TBLT, November 19, 2011
Nice title.

2. Project Overview Goals Classroom intervention Two dimensions
To help adult foreign language learners use their grammatical knowledge during spontaneous production and improve their oral accuracy and fluency
Classroom intervention
Aimed to create collaborative interaction between learners
Taught learners how to provide corrective feedback to each other
Two dimensions
Examination 1: Effects of the intervention on interactional patterns
Examination 2: Effectiveness of the intervention on L2 development
What I did to tackle these issues was to manipulate the way in which learners interact with each other in classrooms because I thought peer interaction provides contextualized practice
These three examinations will be separately presented, each containing its literature review, methodology, result, and discussion. Then, I will synthesize these three dimensions of the study, which will be followed by some concluding statements.

3. TBLT and Learner factors
L2 processing and cognitive orientations (CF research)
Foreign language learners tend to pay more attention to language form than second language learners do (amount of uptake)
Japanese immersion in the States > French immersion in Canada (Lyster & Mori, 2006)
English learners in Korea & in NZ > French learners in Canada (Sheen, 2004)
Explicit knowledge that foreign language learners possess may affect their processing (i.e., noticing) (Sato, 2011)
Meaning-oriented learners vs. Form-oriented learners
Need for tasks that are adjusted to learners’ cognitive orientations
In SLA research, there is growing discussion ….

4. TBLT and learner factors
TBLT and cognitive orientations
Meaning-oriented learners
Learners: Young learners in immersion (e.g., Swain & Lapkin, 1995; 2002)
L2 problem: Grammatical accuracy
Tasks: Dictogloss tasks, writing tasks
Goal: Shift meaning-oriented learners’ attention to form
Form-oriented learners
Learners: college-level EFL learners (e.g., Fotos, 1994; Fotos & Ellis, 1999)
L2 problem: Fluent production using grammatical knowledge
Tasks: Consciousness-raising tasks
Goal: Rectify grammar-translation methods and find a better way to acquire new grammatical structures
For form-oriented learners to improve their speaking skills, they may need meaning-oriented tasks in which their attention to form is maintained but not facilitated
This idea can be applied to TYPES of tasks.
Thus, in the present study, meaning-oriented tasks were used to improve learners’ spontaneous L2 production and they were trained to give corrective feedback as a strategy.

5. TBLT and Strategy Training
Learners can be taught strategies such as corrective feedback (interactional patterns)
Bajarano et al. (1997): How to clarify when communication breakdowns occur (i.e., prompts)
Naughton (2006): How to provide correct versions of grammatical errors during peer interaction (i.e., recasts)
Learners improve their L2 performance when taught a strategy (L2 development)
Cohen et al. (1998): Deep breathing, positive self-talk vocabulary size
Dörnyei (1995): Topic avoidance, using pauses Speech rates
No studies have examined CF training on improvement of spontaneous production (accuracy and fluency)

6. methodology

7. Contexts and Participants
University students in Japan (N = 167: Biology, Human Development, Economics/Business)
Good grammatical knowledge yet poor speakers
Typical learning pattern of foreign language learning (especially in Asian contexts)
Classroom context
4 second-year required English classes
Communicative classes
Once a week for 1.5 hrs
Duration: 60 min/week X 10 weeks (10 hours)

8. Design
PI + CF instruction
PI instruction

9. Intervention (Peer Interaction)
Fluency-focused activity
Paired information-exchange
Authentic materials (e.g., movies)
Change partners multiple times
Information increases but the delivery time remains the same
Attention is drawn to meaning
Learners develop confidence each round
Learners engage in repeated practice: proceduralization

10. Intervention (Corrective Feedback)
Modelling
Practice
Use-in-context

11. Modelling Prompts and recasts
Prompts: “When you hear an error, let your partner know that without giving the correct form.”
Metalinguistic feedback (“You need a past tense”)
Clarification request (“Excuse me?”)
Recasts: “When you hear an error, give the correct answer to your partner.”
Role-play by the teachers: First three weeks
Following modification moves (modified output) were evenly distributed (i.e., either MO or Ø)

12. Practice Learners practiced providing CF Procedures: 10 weeks
Groups of three (Speaker, Feedback Provider, Observer)
Scenario and Error List
Create original stories to hide the error sentences
Observer reports back to the group which errors were given CF and missed
10 scenarios: One target/day
PI-only group was given a similar role-play activity and their attention was drawn to the same grammatical features on the error lists

13. Use-in-Context
During the peer interaction activity that all the experimental groups were given (i.e., fluency-focused activity), the CF groups were encouraged to use the CF technique

14. The effect of the intervention

15. Research Questions
Does the intervention affect interactional patterns over time?

16. Testing Task: Decision making tasks (peer interaction)
Timing: Week 1, Week 6, & Week 10
Frequency of CF
Statistical analysis: Repeated-measures of ANOVA

17. Results Prompt: Week 10 > Week 6 > Week 1
Recast: Week 10 > Week 6 > Week 1
In Week 10: Prompt & Recast > Peer-only

18. The effectiveness of the intervention

19. Research Questions
Does corrective feedback embedded in task- based interaction improve L2 accuracy and fluency?
Does task-based interaction alone improve L2 accuracy and fluency?

20. Testing Task: Picture description tasks (Weeks 1 & 10)
Grammatical accuracy
Scoring: Overall accuracy (% of correct clauses)
Fluency
Scoring: Speech rates (words per minute)
Statistical analysis: ANCOVAs

21. Results Accuracy CF groups improved over time
CF groups outperformed both PI-only and Control at posttest
No significant difference between PI-prompt and PI-recast

22. Results Fluency Those groups outperformed Control at posttest
CF groups and PI-only improved over time
Those groups outperformed Control at posttest

23. discussion

24. Peer CF as a Strategy (Effect)
CF is a teachable strategy
Learners do not talk about language forms unless they receive feedback from their classmates OR the task itself is designed so (e.g., consciousness-raising tasks)
Recasts were easier to give: Doesn’t conflict with teacher CF findings (e.g., Lyster & Ranta, 1997; Ellis et al., 2001)

25. Peer CF and L2 development (Effectiveness)
CF training contributed to accuracy development
Task-based interaction + CF training contributed to fluency development
Peer CF didn’t contribute to fluency development?
CF embedded in communicative tasks facilitated grammatical development while maintaining fluency development
No grammatical development in PI-only group
Task-based interaction alone was insufficient for accuracy development
just like teachers‘ CF, peer CF offered external support that helped learners to improve their monitoring and gave a chance to engage in practice.

26. Conclusion
In many foreign language classrooms, learners do not have the opportunity to engage in contextualized practice
Task-based interaction provides transfer-appropriate practice
In these contexts, teacher CF is often difficult to implement
Transforming learners into CF providers is an effective pedagogical option
However, for many FL learners, developing spontaneous production skills is more important than engaging in cognitive comparison (= form-orientation)
The extent to which learners attention should be drawn to form depends on learning contexts (FL? Immersion?)

27. Thank you! masatoshi.sato@mail.mcgill.ca
Sato, M., & Ballinger, S. (in press). Raising language awareness in peer interaction: A cross-context, cross-method examination. Language Awareness 20(3-4).
Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (in press). Corrective feedback and peer interaction for accuracy and fluency development: Monitoring, practice, and proceduralization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 34(4).