By exploring previous research, this systematic literature review aims to shed light on the effectiveness of oral corrective feedback practices by teachers to students on oral proficiency with the focus on recasts and prompts. This systematic literature review also intends to shed light on the effectiveness of recasts and prompts compared with each other. This study reports on the results of 13 experimental or quasi-experimental studies that measured the effectiveness of prompts and recasts on language acquisition and the effectiveness of prompts and recasts compared with each other. In those studies, outcome measures such as grammaticality judgement tasks, oral production tasks, and written production tasks were utilized. The target structures of the included studies were different morpho-syntactical and phonological structures. The accounted findings of this study show that recasts are effective at increasing students’ oral proficiency in seven of thirteen studies and not effective in six of 13 studies. The reported results also demonstrate that prompts are effective at improving students’ oral proficiency in eight of ten studies and ineffective in two of ten studies. In eight of ten studies in which the effectiveness of prompts and recasts are compared with each other, prompts are more effective than recasts. However, recasts are more effective than prompts in two of ten studies. The reported findings indicate that the effectiveness of corrective feedback in general on language acquisition is uncertain and that prompts might be effective. In addition, the accounted results suggest that the effectiveness of recasts on improving students’ oral proficiency is doubtful. Moreover, the reported findings of this study also suggest the higher degree of efficacy of prompts over recasts.