| This dissertation built upon face to face comparison studies of corrective feedback (e.g., Carroll, 2001; Carroll & Swain, 1993; Ellis, Loewen & Erlam, 2006; Hino, 2006) to investigate the impact of two different approaches to corrective feedback administered during written synchronous computer-mediated communication (SCMC) on the development of adult learners' L2 knowledge and production accuracy: corrective feedback that reformulates the error in the form of recasts and corrective feedback that supplies the learner with metalinguistic information about the nature of the error. Four research questions guided this study: (1) Which type of corrective feedback when delivered via written SCMC is more effective for immediate gains in L2 knowledge? (2) Which type of corrective feedback when delivered via written SCMC is more effective for gains in L2 knowledge over time? (3) Which type of corrective feedback when delivered via written SCMC is more effective for immediate gains in L2 production accuracy? (4) Which type of corrective feedback when delivered via written SCMC is more effective for gains in L2 production accuracy over time? High intermediate to advanced adult Swedish university learners of English (n=23) from an intact class were randomly assigned to one of three conditions (two feedback conditions and one control) and were randomly paired with English native speakers. During task-based interaction via text-chat, the Swedish learners received focused corrective feedback on omission of the zero article with noncount nouns of generic reference (e.g. employment, global warming, culture). Pretests, posttests and delayed posttests of knowledge (acceptability judgments) and production accuracy (short-answer questions) measured learning outcomes. Results showed a significant advantage for metalinguistic information on the immediate development of target form knowledge with noncount nouns of generic reference that had been introduced during the intervention. |
