Francesca La Russa

Le feedback correctif écrit, c’est-à-dire l’intervention de l’enseignant en réponse à l’erreur de l’apprenant, est une technique très utilisée dans l'interaction didactique en classe. Si les chercheurs travaillant sur l’acquisition des langues s’accordent généralement à penser que le feedback correctif joue un rôle dans le développement des compétences de l’apprenant, l’identification de la technique corrective écrite la plus appropriée pour favoriser ce développement fait encore aujourd’hui l’objet de nombreuses controverses (Bitchener & Storch, 2016). Parmi la multitude de techniques correctives, le feedback direct – c’est-à-dire la reformulation de la forme erronée par l’enseignant – et le feedback indirect – c’est-à-dire le fait de signaler la forme erronée de manière implicite, sans en donner la correction – sont les plus étudiées dans la littérature francophone, italophone et anglo-saxonne. Si l’efficacité de la correction dépend en partie de la technique adoptée par l’ens...

Written corrective feedback, that is, the intervention of the teacher in response to learners’ errors, is a widely adopted technique in classroom interaction. While researchers working on second language acquisition generally agree that corrective feedback plays a role in the development of learners L2 skills, the identification of the most effective written corrective technique is still a matter of debate (Bitchener & Storch, 2016). Among many techniques, direct feedback - i.e. reformulation of the error by the teacher - and indirect feedback - i.e. pointing out the error implicitly, without giving the correction - are the most studied. While feeback effectiveness depends in part on the technique adopted by the teacher, the way students process it and other contextual, individual and linguistic variables might affect its learning potential. Our work aims to compare the effects of the two aforementioned corrective techniques on the L2 acquisition process and, at the same time, to as...

Due to the difficulty of having access to the internal processes that take place in learners’ minds, studies that take into account the feedback processing phase are relatively rare. However, observing learners’ reactions to feedback, understanding how they use it, or why they don’t, might be helpful to interpret research results on feedback effectiveness. In this paper we present the results of a small-scale study on the interactions that took place among learners of FL Italian while processing direct and indirect feedback on written productions. The outcomes show that a high level of engagement during feedback processing may lead to better results in the uptake and retention of the correction, and that there is not a clear correlation between the type of feedback and the level of engagement. Rather, the latter seems to be affected by other factors, such as individual variables and patterns of interaction.

Although the utility of written feedback is now acknowledged, the identification of the most effective corrective technique still is a matter of debate. In this chapter, we compare the effects of direct and indirect written feedback on the short-term uptake and the long-term retention of the correction in order to investigate which one could be more effective in enhancing language learning. Furthermore, we examine how students process the received correction. For this purpose, a research was led on twelve Italian as foreign language learners. The outcomes show that both direct and indirect feedback are effective in the short-term but less effective in the long-term; indirect feedback is slightly more effective on the short term, while direct feedback slightly promotes the long-term retention of the correction. Moreover, the level of engagement showed by learners while they process the correction might influence the efficacy of feedback itself.

The identification of the most effective corrective technique is a matter of debate and the results of the studies comparing direct feedback (when students are given the correction) and indirect feedback (when they have to find it on their own) are mixed. Apart from this, the effectiveness of feedback might be influenced by the way students process it. Our study compares the effects of these two kinds of feedback on text rewriting and assesses the impact of students’ engagement during feedback processing. It was conducted on twenty-six Italian FL learners at a high school in Bordeaux. Students were divided into three groups (direct feedback, indirect feedback and control group), and they performed two writing tasks. After receiving the corrections, they revised and rewrote their texts. The experimental groups outperformed the control group. An extensive engagement in feedback processing, generally promoted by indirect feedback, led to better results in text rewriting.

This paper focuses on peer written corrective feedback (PWCF), a pedagogic device whose potential appears still underexploited in second language teaching in Italian schools and universities. Specifically, we aim to contribute to the body of research on the benefits of PWCF as a learning activity for the development of metalinguistic reflection in peer-to-peer native/non-native online communication. Using a sample of tandem interactions between US learners of Italian and Italian learners of English, we conducted a qualitative analysis of the explanations of linguistic phenomena provided by native speakers when commenting on errors after giving corrective feedback on their non-native partners’ pieces of L2 writing. The data analysis confirmed that the feedback-discussing tasks pushed native/non-native peers to actively reflect on both source and target language, engaging in metalinguistic discussions and utilizing cross-linguistic knowledge.

Due to the difficulty of having access to the internal processes that take place in learners’ minds, studies that take into account the feedback processing phase are relatively rare. However, observing learners’ reactions to feedback, understanding how they use it, or why they don’t, might be helpful to interpret research results on feedback effectiveness. In this paper we present the results of a small-scale study on the interactions that took place among learners of FL Italian while processing direct and indirect feedback on written productions. The outcomes show that a high level of engagement during feedback processing may lead to better results in the uptake and retention of the correction, and that there is not a clear correlation between the type of feedback and the level of engagement. Rather, the latter seems to be affected by other factors, such as individual variables and patterns of interaction.