Corrective Feedback from a Sociocultural Perspective

doi:10.1017/9781108589789.005

4 - Corrective Feedback from a Sociocultural Perspective

from Part I - Theoretical Perspectives on Corrective Feedback

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 February 2021

Hossein Nassaji

Edited by

Hossein Nassaji and

Eva Kartchava

Show author details

Hossein Nassaji: Affiliation:
University of Victoria, British Columbia
Eva Kartchava: Affiliation:
Carleton University, Ottawa

Book contents

Get access

Summary

This chapter examines the role of corrective feedback from a sociocultural perspective. Much of the theoretical argument for feedback and the role of negotiation has been within a cognitive or cognitive-interactionist approach. However, another theoretical framework for understanding the role of feedback comes from the Vygotskian sociocultural theory. This chapter begins with a discussion of this theoretical view, its underlying concepts, and their contributions to our understanding of the role of language, interaction, and the field of error correction. It then reviews corrective feedback research conducted within this framework. The studies reviewed include those that have examined various premises of the sociocultural theory as they relate to corrective feedback and also those that have compared feedback when conceptualized within a cognitive-interactionist perspective and feedback when conceptualized within a sociocultural perspective. The chapter concludes with implications of the issues discussed for effective corrective feedback practices in language classrooms.

Keywords

Sociocultural theory Interaction Zone of proximal development Regulation Mediation Scaffolding Negotiated assistance

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of Corrective Feedback in Second Language Learning and Teaching , pp. 85 - 108

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108589789.005 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aljaafreh, A. & Lantolf, J. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. Modern Language Journal, 78(4), 465–483.CrossRef Google Scholar

Appel, G. & Lantolf, J. (1994). Vygotskian approaches to second language research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar

Bliss, J., Askew, M. & Macrae, S. (1996). Effective teaching and learning: Scaffolding revisited. Oxford Review of Education, 22(1) 37–61.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bruner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. London: Harvard University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Davin, K. & Donato, R. (2013). Student collaboration and teacher-directed classroom dynamic assessment: A complementary pairing. Foreign Language Annals, 46(1), 5–22.Google Scholar

Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In Lantolf, J. & Appel, G. (eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 33–59). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar

Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197–261). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1, 2–18.CrossRef Google Scholar

Engin, M. (2012). Trainer talk: Levels of intervention. ELT journal, 67(1), 11–19.Google Scholar

Erlam, R., Ellis, R. & Batstone, R. (2013). Oral corrective feedback on L2 writing: Two approaches compared. System, 41(2), 257–268.Google Scholar

Lantolf, J. (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Lantolf, J. (2006). Sociocultural theory and L2: State of the art. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(1), 67–109.Google Scholar

Lantolf, J. & Poehner, M. (2007). Dynamic assessment of L2 development: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 1(1), 49–72.Google Scholar

Lantolf, J., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Lantolf, J., & Thorne, S. L. (2007). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. In. van Patten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 201–224). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. & Bhatia, T. (eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Marchenkova, L. (2005). Language, culture, and self: The Bakhtin – Vygotsky encounter. In Hall, J. K., Vitanova, G. & Marchenkova, L. (eds.), Dialogue with Bakhtin on second and foreign language learning (pp. 171–188). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Mitchell, R. & Myles, F. (1998). Second language learning theories (2nd ed.). London: Arnold.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. (2007). Reactive focus on form through negotiation on learners’ written errors. In Fotos, S. & Nassaji, H. (eds.), Form focused instruction and teacher education: Studies in honour of Rod Ellis (pp. 117–129). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. (2011). Correcting students’ written grammatical errors: The effects of negotiated versus nonnegotiated feedback. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 1(3), 315–334.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. (2013). Interactional feedback: Insights from theory and research. In Benati, A., Laval, C. & Arche, M. (eds.), The grammar dimension in instructed second language learning: Theory, research and practice (pp. 103–123). London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. (2015). Interactional feedback dimension in instructed second language learning. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. (2016). Anniversary article: Interactional feedback in second language teaching and learning: A synthesis and analysis of current research. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 535–562.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. (2017). Negotiated oral feedback in response to written errors. In Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications (pp. 114–128). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. & Cumming, A. (2000). What’s in a ZPD? A case study of a young ESL student and teacher interacting through dialogue journals. Language Teaching Research, 4(2), 95–121.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. & Swain, M. (2000). Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2: The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness, 9(1), 34–51.Google Scholar

Ohta, A. (2000). Rethinking interaction in SLA: Developmentally appropriate assistance in the zone of proximal development and the acquisition and L2 grammar. In Lantolf, J. (ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 51–78). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Ohta, A. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language learning, 44(3), 493–527.Google Scholar

Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second language development: Processability theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Pienemann, M. (2005). Discussing processability theory. In Pienemann, M. (ed.), Crosslinguistic aspects of processability theory (pp. 61–83). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Poehner, M. (2008). Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2 development. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Poehner, M. (2009). Group dynamic assessment: Mediation for the L2 classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 43(3), 471–491.Google Scholar

Rahimi, M., Kushki, A. & Nassaji, H. (2015). Diagnostic and developmental potentials of dynamic assessment for L2 writing. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 2(2), 185–208.Google Scholar

Rassaei, E. (2014). Scaffolded feedback, recasts, and L2 development: A sociocultural perspective. Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 417–431.Google Scholar

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Van den Branden, K. (1997). Effects of negotiation on language learners’ output. Language Learning, 47(4), 589–636.Google Scholar

Verity, D. P. (2005). Vygotskian concepts for teacher education. In Lifelong learning: Proceedings of the 4th annual JALT Pan-SIG conference. May 14–15, 2005. Tokyo: Tokyo Keizai University.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). The genesis of higher mental functions. In Wertsch, J. V. (ed.), The concept of activity in soviet psychology (pp. 144–188). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Vygotsky, L. S. (1988). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Vol. I: Problems of general psychology. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar

Wells, G. (2007). Semiotic mediation, dialogue and the construction of knowledge. Human Development, 50(5), 244–274.Google Scholar

Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.