The Effect of Peer Corrective Recast in CALL as a Language Teaching Methodology on Teaching Grammar to Intermediate Iranian English Foreign Language Students
International Journal of Applied Linguistics and Translation
Volume 4, Issue 1, March 2018, Pages: 9-17
Received: Feb. 15, 2018; Accepted: Mar. 19, 2018; Published: Apr. 10, 2018
Views 1052      Downloads 81
Mostafa Rahimi Rad, Department of English Languges, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran
Article Tools
Follow on us
The use of internet as a teaching tool is predominant all around the world and teachers try to devise it in order to accelerate and facilitate language learning for their students. However in Iran, few studies have concentrated on this type of methodology and it is rarely practiced among English language instructors. Thus this study aimed at investigating the effect of CALL methods on teaching English grammar in general and passive voice in particular to Intermediate EFL students. For this purpose the researcher took advantage of weblogs as a CALL program. The students who were being taught by the researcher were given a pretest at the beginning of the course and then a subject to write about each week on their weblog. They were advised to use more passive voice than active in their essays. Consequently their performance was evaluated in 2 ways: one group by their peers through recast and the other group by the teacher, via traditional methods to see which method was more effective in teaching grammar, peer corrective recast or instructor’s corrective hints. The text book used by the instructor during this experimental course was Top Notch. The number of errors could determine the results of pretest and posttest. Then frequency, mean and Standard Deviation were used for providing the results and statistics. Finally, a T-test was devised in order to verify the difference between means of both groups. This study found that corrective recast had statistically no clear impact on grammar acquisition of the Iranian EFL learners.
CALL, EFL, Recast
To cite this article
Mostafa Rahimi Rad, The Effect of Peer Corrective Recast in CALL as a Language Teaching Methodology on Teaching Grammar to Intermediate Iranian English Foreign Language Students, International Journal of Applied Linguistics and Translation. Vol. 4, No. 1, 2018, pp. 9-17. doi: 10.11648/j.ijalt.20180401.12
Copyright © 2018 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License ( which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Bartholomae, D. (1980). The Study of Error. College Composition and Communication, 31, 253-69.
Chandler, J. (2003). The Efficacy of Various Kinds of Error Feedback for Improvement in the Accuracy and Fluency of L2 Student Writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 267–296.
Chastain D. T. (1990). Developing Second Language. From Theory to Practice. IL, Chicago: Ran McNally.
Ferris, D. R. (1995). Can Advanced ESL Students Be Taught to Correct Their Most Serious and Frequent Errors? CATESOL Journal, 8, 41–62.
Ferris, D. R. (2002). Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing. MI: University of Michigan Press.
Ferris, D. R. (2003). The ‘‘Grammar Correction’’ Debate In L2 Writing: Where Are We, and Where Do We Go from Here? (And What Do We Do in The Meantime). Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 49–62.
Ferris, D. R., & Hedgcock, J. S. (1998). Teaching ESL Composition: Purpose, Process, and Practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error Feedback in L2 Writing Classes: How Explicit Does It Need to Be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 161–184.
Ferris, D. R., Chaney, S. J., Komura, K., Roberts, B. J. & McKee, S (2000). Perspectives, Problems, and Practices in Treating Written Error. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 38–60.
Ferris, D. R., & Helt, M. (2000). Was Truscott Right? New Evidence on the Effects of Error Correction in L2 Writing Classes. Paper Presented at Proceedings of the American Association of Applied Linguistics, San Diego, CA.
Fox, J. (1984). Computer-Assisted Vocabulary Learning. ELT Journal, 38, 27-33.
Frantzen, D. (1995). The Effects of Grammar Supplementation on Writing Accuracy in an Intermediate Spanish Content Course. Modern LanguageJournal, 79 (4), 329-344.
Hardisty, D., & Windeatt, S. (1989). The Internet (Resource Books for Teachers). USA: Oxford University Press.
Hillocks, G., Jr. (1998). Teaching Writing as Reflective Practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on Form: Student Engagement with Teacher Feedback. System, 31 (2), 217-230.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1998). Learning Together and Alone: Cooperative, Competetive, and ndividualistic Learning (5 ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Johnson, M. K. (1988). Functional Forms of Human Memory. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kepner, C. (1991). An Experiment in the Relationship of Types of Written Feedback to The Development of Second Language Writing Skills. TheModern Language Journal, 75 (3), 305–312.
Kroll, B. (2001). What Does Time Buy?ESL Student Performance on Home versus Class Compositions. In: Kroll, B. (Ed.), Second Language Writing Research Insights for the Composition. UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 140-154.
Lalande, J. F. (1982). Reducing Composition Errors: An experiment. Modern Language Journal, 66, 140–149.
Lee, I. (1997). ESL Learners’ Performance in Error Correction in Writing: Some Implications for College-Level Teaching. System, 25, 465–477.
Leki, I. (1990). Twenty Five Years of Contrastive Rhetoric: Text Analysis and Writing Pedagogies. TESOL Quarterly, 25 (2), 123-143.
Leki, I. (1998). Coping Strategies of ESL Students in Writing Tasks across the Curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 2 (2), 235-260.
Li, x., & Cao, R. (2006). Integrating Computer-Mediated Communication into an EAP Course. Research Article (4), 589−600.
Lightbown, P. &Spada, N. (1999). How Languages Are Learned. UK: Oxford University Press.
Murphy, T., & Jacobs, G. M. (2000). Encouraging Critical Collaborative Autonomy. JALT, 22, 228-244.
Polio, C., Fleck, N., &Leder, N. (1998). ‘‘If Only I Had More Time’’: ESL Learners’ Changes in Linguistic Accuracy on Essay Revisions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 43–68.
Powell, B. (1998). The Use of Computer Assisted Language Learning. Forum for Modem Language Studies, 2, 184-194.
Richards, J. (1985). The Context of Language Teaching. London: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (3 ed.). London: Pearson Education.
Robb, T., Ross, S., &Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of Feedback on Error and Its Effect on EFL Writing Quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83–93.
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using Peer Feedback in the ESL Writing Class. ELT Journal, 59, 23-30.
Smeke, H. (1984). The Effects of the Red Pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17 (2) 195- 202.
Truscott, J. (1999). The Case for "The Case Against Grammar Correction in L2 Writing Classes": A Response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8 (2), 111-122.
Williams, J. C. (2003). Providing Feedback on ESL Students Written Assignments. TESL Journal, 3, 111-123.
Zhang, S. (1995). Reexamining the Affective Advantage of Peer Feedback in the ESL Writing Class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 209-22.
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
Tel: (001)347-983-5186