<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.4 20241031//EN"
        "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.4/JATS-journalpublishing1-4.dtd">
<article  article-type="research-article"        dtd-version="1.4">
            <front>

                <journal-meta>
                                                                <journal-id>kuje</journal-id>
            <journal-title-group>
                                                                                    <journal-title>Kocaeli Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi</journal-title>
            </journal-title-group>
                                        <issn pub-type="epub">2636-8846</issn>
                                                                                            <publisher>
                    <publisher-name>Kocaeli Üniversitesi</publisher-name>
                </publisher>
                    </journal-meta>
                <article-meta>
                                        <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.33400/kuje.539534</article-id>
                                                                <article-categories>
                                            <subj-group  xml:lang="en">
                                                            <subject>Other Fields of Education</subject>
                                                    </subj-group>
                                            <subj-group  xml:lang="tr">
                                                            <subject>Alan Eğitimleri</subject>
                                                    </subj-group>
                                    </article-categories>
                                                                                                                                                        <title-group>
                                                                                                                        <article-title>Corrective feedback and learner uptake in an EFL classroom</article-title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <trans-title-group xml:lang="tr">
                                    <trans-title>Yabancı dil olarak İngilizce öğretilen bir sınıfta düzeltici geri bildirim ve öğrenci edimsel çıkarımı</trans-title>
                                </trans-title-group>
                                                                                                    </title-group>
            
                                                    <contrib-group content-type="authors">
                                                                        <contrib contrib-type="author">
                                                                    <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">
                                        https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6478-3644</contrib-id>
                                                                <name>
                                    <surname>Tamerer</surname>
                                    <given-names>Rabiye Bahar</given-names>
                                </name>
                                                                    <aff>KOCAELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ</aff>
                                                            </contrib>
                                                                                </contrib-group>
                        
                                        <pub-date pub-type="pub" iso-8601-date="20190530">
                    <day>05</day>
                    <month>30</month>
                    <year>2019</year>
                </pub-date>
                                        <volume>2</volume>
                                        <issue>1</issue>
                                        <fpage>75</fpage>
                                        <lpage>90</lpage>
                        
                        <history>
                                    <date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="20190313">
                        <day>03</day>
                        <month>13</month>
                        <year>2019</year>
                    </date>
                                                    <date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="20190527">
                        <day>05</day>
                        <month>27</month>
                        <year>2019</year>
                    </date>
                            </history>
                                        <permissions>
                    <copyright-statement>Copyright © 2018, Kocaeli Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi</copyright-statement>
                    <copyright-year>2018</copyright-year>
                    <copyright-holder>Kocaeli Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi</copyright-holder>
                </permissions>
            
                                                                                                <abstract><p>This study, aims to find out the instances ofdifferent kinds of corrective feedback and learner uptake that are occurredduring the interactions between the students and the teacher in an EFLclassroom. More specifically, the study tries to find out which correctivefeedback type is occurred more and which corrective feedback type leads to morelearner uptake during classroom interactions. In order to answer thesequestions, an observational study was conducted in an EFL classroom with 10nonnative students whose age were between 17 and 18 and a nonnative teacher whohad one year of experience in teaching. The classroom interactions between thestudents and the teacher were recorded by the researcher during theobservation. After the observation, audio recording was transcribed andanalyzed by using a combination of COLT Part B (Spada and Fröhlich, 1995) andLyster and Ranta’s (1997) error treatment sequence as a framework. The findingsrevealed that there was a strong tendency in the use of recasts (52%) as correctivefeedback during classroom interactions and the corrective feedback type thatled to more learner uptake was clarification request (100%). While the firstresult of the study is similar to, the second result which is about learneruptake, differs from the previous research in the literature (Lyster and Ranta,1997). However, the current study was limited to small sample size, limited agerage, proficiency and time and it is merely observational. Investigatinglearners with different ages, proficiency levels, and larger samples withlonger studies appear to be fruitful for future research.</p></abstract>
                                                                                                                                    <trans-abstract xml:lang="tr">
                            <p>Bu çalışma, yabancı dil olarakİngilizce öğretilen bir sınıfta, öğretmen ile öğrenci arasındaki etkileşimlersırasında meydana gelen farklı türdeki düzeltici geri bildirimleri ve öğrenciedimsel çıkarımlarını tespit etmeyi hedeflemektedir. Daha detaylı belirtmekgerekirse, çalışma sınıf içi etkileşim sırasında hangi düzeltici geri bildirimtürünün daha fazla ortaya çıktığını ve hangi düzeltici geri bildirim türünün ençok öğrenci edimsel çıkarımına yol açtığını bulmaya çalışmaktadır. Bu sorularıcevaplamak adına, ana dilleri İngilizce olmayan ve 17-18 yaş aralında 10öğrenci ve ana dili İngilizce olmayan ve bir yıllık öğretim tecrübesi olan biröğretmen ile yabancı dil olarak İngilizce öğretimi yapılan bir sınıftagözlemsel bir çalışma yapılmıştır. Gözlem sırasında öğrenciler ve öğretmenarasındaki etkileşim araştırmacı tarafından kayıt altına alınmıştır. Gözlemsonrasında, video kaydı kâğıda dökülmüş ve COLT Bölüm B (Spada and Fröhlich,1995) ve Lyster ve Ranta’nın (1997) hata değerlendirme sıralamasınınkombinasyonu baz alınarak analiz edilmiştir. Sonuçlar, sınıf içi etkileşimlersırasında düzeltici geri bildirim olarak yeniden biçimlendirmenin (recast –%52) kullanımında yüksek bir eğilim olduğunu ve en çok öğrenci edimselçıkarımına yol açan düzeltici geri bildirim türünün açıklama talebi(clarification request - %100) olduğunu göstermiştir. Araştırmanın ilk sonucudaha önceki çalışmalarla benzerlik gösterirken, öğrenci edimsel çıkarımı ileilgili olan ikinci sonuç literatürdeki önceki çalışmalardan farklılıkgöstermiştir (Lyster and Ranta, 1997). Yine de, bu çalışma küçük örneklembüyüklüğü, belirli yaş aralığı ve belirli yeterlilik seviyesi ve zamanbakımından sınırlıdır ve sadece gözlemsel bir çalışmadır. Farklı yaş grubu veyeterlilik düzeyindeki öğrencileri, daha uzun süreli ve örneklemi büyükgruplarla incelemek gelecekte yapılacak olan çalışmalar için faydalı olabilir.</p></trans-abstract>
                                                            
            
                                                            <kwd-group>
                                                    <kwd>Corrective feedback</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Learner uptake</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  EFL classroom</kwd>
                                            </kwd-group>
                                                        
                                                                            <kwd-group xml:lang="tr">
                                                    <kwd>Düzeltici geri bildirim</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Öğrenci edimsel çıkarımı</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Yabancı dil olarak İngilizce sınıfı</kwd>
                                            </kwd-group>
                                                                                                            </article-meta>
    </front>
    <back>
                            <ref-list>
                                    <ref id="ref1">
                        <label>1</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Annett, J. (1969). Feedback and human behavior. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref2">
                        <label>2</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1(1).</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref3">
                        <label>3</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Ellis, R., Loewen, S., &amp; Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in second language acquisition, 28(2), 339.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref4">
                        <label>4</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Esmaeili, F., &amp; Behnam, B. (2014). A study of corrective feedback and learner&#039;s uptake in classroom interactions. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 3(4), 204-212.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref5">
                        <label>5</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Fakazlı, Ö. (2018). Exploring the Use of Oral Corrective Feedback in Turkish EFL Classrooms: The Case at a State University. Kastamonu Education Journal, 26(6), 2177-2187.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref6">
                        <label>6</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Fan, N. (2019). An Investigation of Oral Corrective Feedback in an ESL Listening and Speaking Class. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 10(1), 197-203.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref7">
                        <label>7</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Fanselow, J. F. (1977). The treatment of error in oral work. Foreign language annals, 10(5), 583-593.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref8">
                        <label>8</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Gass, S. (1997). Input, interaction, and the development of second languages. Mahwah, NI: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref9">
                        <label>9</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Gass, S. M., &amp; Mackey, A. (2007). Input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition. Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction, 175-199.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref10">
                        <label>10</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Kasper, G. (1985). Repair in foreign language teaching. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7(02), 200-215.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref11">
                        <label>11</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practices in second language acquisition. Oxford, England: Pergamon.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref12">
                        <label>12</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Krashen, S. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and complications. London, England: Longman.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref13">
                        <label>13</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Larsen-Freeman, D. and Long, M.H. (1991).  An introduction to second language acquisition research. Harlow: Longman.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref14">
                        <label>14</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309-365.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref15">
                        <label>15</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lightbown, P. M., &amp; Spada, N. (1990). Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching. Studies in second language acquisition, 12(04), 429-448.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref16">
                        <label>16</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Loewen, S., &amp; Philp, J. (2006). Recasts in the adult English L2 classroom: Characteristics, explicitness, and effectiveness. The Modern Language Journal, 90(4), 536-556.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref17">
                        <label>17</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective, 2(1), 39-52.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref18">
                        <label>18</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie and T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego: Academic Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref19">
                        <label>19</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lyster, R., &amp; Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in second language acquisition, 19(01), 37-66.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref20">
                        <label>20</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lyster, R., &amp; Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(02), 265-302.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref21">
                        <label>21</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lyster, R., Saito, K., &amp; Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language teaching, 46(1), 1-40.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref22">
                        <label>22</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction, and second language development. Studies in second language acquisition, 21(4), 557-587.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref23">
                        <label>23</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Mackey, A., &amp; Gass, S. M. (2015). Second language research: Methodology and design. Routledge.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref24">
                        <label>24</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Mackey, A., &amp; Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref25">
                        <label>25</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Öztürk, G. (2016). An investigation on the use of oral corrective feedback in Turkish EFL classrooms. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 12(2), 22-37.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref26">
                        <label>26</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Russell, J., &amp; Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar. Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching, 133-164.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref27">
                        <label>27</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Sheen, Y., &amp; Ellis, R. (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching. Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, 2, 593-610.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref28">
                        <label>28</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass &amp; C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref29">
                        <label>29</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Spada, N., &amp; Fröhlich, M. (1995). COLT--Communicative Orientation of Language Teaching Observation Scheme: Coding Conventions and Applications. National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref30">
                        <label>30</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook &amp; B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref31">
                        <label>31</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Swain, M. (2005). The Output Hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook on research in second language learning and teaching (pp. 471–483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref32">
                        <label>32</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">White, L. (1989). Universal grammar and second language acquisition (Vol. 1). John Benjamins Publishing.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                            </ref-list>
                    </back>
    </article>
