Students are human beings; they, like all of us, make mistakes. In the language classroom, these mistakes may be written, spoken, and even thought. How, if, when, under what conditions and to what degree these errors are treated is of current concern in research regarding language acquisition. In their meta-analysis of interactional feedback, Mackey and Goo (2007) report that the utilization of feedback is beneficial and find evidence that feedback within the context of a focus on form environment is also facilitative of acquisition, echoing Norris and Ortega's (2000) positive findings regarding focus on form research. Thus, the role of feedback has found a somewhat limited, very informative and equally persuasive niche in current theory building and research. There is lack of research specifically addressing the role and effects of forms of feedback, other than recasts, namely prompts, in the second language classroom where the focus in on language use as a means of communication rather than the objectification of it. This context employs focus on form, a brief pedagogical intervention that momentarily shifts the focus of the class from meaning to linguistic form (See Long, 1991). Because prompts withhold correct forms (Lyster, 2004; Lyster & Saito, 2010), encourage students to simultaneously notice and self-correct (Lyster & Ranta, 1997), and push modified, student-generated output (de Bot, 1996; Lyster & Izquierdo, 2009; Lyster & Saito, 2010; Swain & Lapkin, 1995), they may be theoretically more appropriate for a focus on form context. This study examines this role in its function and efficacy comparing an implicit prompt, the clarification request, with an explicit prompt, metalinguistic feedback on students' spoken errors in the use of a very complex target structure, the subjunctive in nominal clauses in Spanish. Efficacy of the feedback is measured through successful student uptake, that is, whether or not students are able to self-repair as a result of the intervention and then through development operationalized as mean gains in a pre-test/post-test design. Statistical significance is shown for uptake with metalinguistic feedback only, however no development is shown as a result of any feedback due to the target structure's acquisition complexity.

This dissertation reports on an investigation of corrective feedback provided by instructors to learners in sixteen online asynchronous and synchronous interactions. The overarching objective of this study was to examine the provision of corrective feedback in computer-mediated communication (CMC) environments. This study also sought to examine the frequency of corrective feedback types and the relationship between learner error and corrective feedback provision. Finally, this study investigated what types of corrective feedback led to repaired learner responses.Over the course of one university semester, the instructors and students in four second-semester Spanish courses participated in bulletin board and chat room discussions and a detailed analysis of the transcripts revealed that instructors do provide learners with corrective feedback in online asynchronous and synchronous environments. The results also reveal that corrective feedback is more prevalent in the asynchronous environment than in the synchronous environment. A total of six corrective feedback typesexplicit correction, recasts, metalinguistic feedback, clarification request, elicitation, and repetitionwere found in these environments. All corrective feedback types were present in the asynchronous environment while repetition was not observed in the synchronous environment. The results indicate instructors overall preference for explicit correction in the asynchronous environment and preference for recasts in the synchronous environment. In the synchronous environment, different types of learner errors are followed by different types of corrective feedback. Recasts most often follow grammatical and lexical errors, while an opportunity to negotiate form is most often provided for multiple errors.

This study investigated the different types of errors that EFL learners produce in chat logs and also analyzed the different types of corrective feedback given by the teacher. An eye tracker was employed to study the eye movements of the participants to see how they notice the corrective feedback. This investigation can assist teachers to act better in online classrooms and helps them understand which type of corrective feedback is most likely to result in uptake based on noticing. The results showed that the most common errors in chat logs were related to grammar. It was also found that both recasts and metalinguistic feedback were noticed most of the time during the chat sessions although only a few of them led to uptake in post task session.

This mixed methods research study centers on learner-learner interactions; thus, contributing to the on-going investigation within negotiation and interaction, computer-mediated-communication and its role in second language learning. The specific aim was to investigate corrective feedback types, incidences, and the relationship between error and feedback type among peers within online synchronous environments in EFL classes in Slovenia, Europe. Interactional characteristics of corrective feedback with learners having a documented special need (SN) also were explored using qualitative analyses. The study encompassed 208 students that were randomly placed into 104 dyads within intact classes of Grades 7, 8, 10, and 11. There were 32 dyads in Grade 7, 16 dyads in Grade 8, 24 dyads in Grade 10, and 32 dyads in Grade 11. Three participants had a documented special need. Quantitative analysis did not reveal statistical significant difference in the incidence of corrective feedb feedback and grade level, the relationship among the type of corrective feedback and grade level, or the relationship between learner error and type of corrective feedback across grade levels. Corrective feedback types were similar to those studied in traditional classroom research (i.e., explicit corrections, recasts, negotiation of form). However, descriptive statistics and qualitative analyses revealed conversational techniques that are specific to text-based online discourses providing insight into interactional characteristics among interactants within a discourse environment that differs both from speech and written texts. Consequently, an additional corrective feedback type emerged from the data, coded as feedback request. The most frequent corrective feedback type provided was explicit corrections. Frequency data revealed that corrective feedback tended to decrease as the grade level increased. Data with SN learners indicated distinctive discourse techniques.Overall, low incidences of corrective feedback and error types might have been affected by the learner's developmental levels, social readiness, and/or psychological readiness (Oliver, 1998), as well as the learner's individual conversational styles and socio-cultural factors. Consequently, further research is warranted in examining these factors. In addition, longitudinal studies are warranted in examining whether online negotiated work lead towards L2 acquisition. Finally, the role of phantom corrective moves when coding qualitative online text data also need to be examined further.