MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021294328 · doi:10.3138/cmlr.66.6.787

Corrective Feedback and L2 Vocabulary Development: Prompts and Recasts in the Adult ESL Classroom

2010· article· en· W2021294328 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSecond Language Acquisition and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVocabularyCorrective feedbackOperationalizationTest (biology)PsychologyVocabulary developmentTerm (time)Control (management)Second languageComputer scienceLinguisticsMathematics educationArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the effects of corrective feedback in the form of prompts and recasts on second language vocabulary development. The study employed pre-test/post-test/delayed post-test design. Intermediate adult ESL learners (N = 23) in a community college located in the southwestern United States were categorized into three groups: prompts, recasts, and control. The treatment consisted of a four-step vocabulary activity during which either prompts, recasts, or no feedback was provided. The outcomes were tested using measures based on a three-dimensional L2 vocabulary development model. The findings appear to indicate that prompts and recasts were equally beneficial in the short term and that prompts were slightly more advantageous in the longer term. However, the prompts group was the only one that demonstrated significant increases over time on all three dimensions of vocabulary development as they were operationalized for this study.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.737
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it