Theoretical perspectives support corrective feedback while contentious issues remain about uptake, instruction, and CF's purpose¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr3·q2
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? The review presents theoretical perspectives in support of CF and addresses contentious issues about learner uptake, the role of instruction, and whether CF initiates new knowledge or consolidates acquired knowledge. → Roy Lyster 2013
Evidence¶
Roy Lyster 2013¶
Roy Lyster, Kazuya Saito, and Masatoshi Sato. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, Volume 46, Issue 1. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000365
q2 · i? · review · r3
The review's theoretical section presents perspectives supporting CF and explicitly frames three contentious issues: "the role of learner uptake", the role of instruction, and whether CF's purpose is "to initiate the acquisition of new knowledge or to consolidate already acquired knowledge".
"Next, theoretical perspectives in support of CF are presented and some contentious issues addressed related to the role of learner uptake, the role of instruction, and the overall purpose of CF: to initiate the acquisition of new knowledge or to consolidate already acquired knowledge."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The frequency of oral corrective feedback differs across instructional contexts — related
- Corrective feedback on second-language errors has a significant effect on L2 development that is maintained on delayed tests — related
- Corrective feedback facilitates L2 grammatical development, with explicit feedback stronger immediately and implicit feedback better maintained over time — related
- Metalinguistic written CF was equivalent, not superior, to non-metalinguistic direct CF, contrasting with previous studies whose metalinguistic CF also contained correct forms. — related
- Laboratory and classroom studies assess the effects of recasts and different CF types differentially — related
- Learners prefer receiving corrective feedback more than teachers feel they should provide it — related
- Feedback Most Effective At Task And Process Levels — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
theoretical-perspectives-cf-uptake-instruction-purpose |
title |
Theoretical perspectives support corrective feedback while contentious issues remain about uptake, instruction, and CF's purpose |
description |
Theoretical perspectives support corrective feedback while contentious issues remain about uptake, instruction, and CF's purpose |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2013 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-15 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — roy-lyster-2013 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.