Many studies have examined the effectiveness of certain types of error treatment methods, there has been little research conducted to examine the effect of different types of corrective feedback on EFL learners’ grammar accuracy and awareness through eliciting repeated performances. The present research was designed to investigate the effect of implicit and explicit corrective feedback on EFL learners’ awareness of and accuracy in English grammar. So, discussion the idea of errors and corrective feedback is a controversial issue and research in this area has a long history. One of the main reasons is that these two terms are ambiguous and have been defined in different ways. Another reason is that findings of the research on the effect of corrective feedback on the learning process have been conflicting, mainly due to the widely varying learner populations, types of writing and feedback types provided and various research designs used (Hyland, 2006). Over the last few years, the role played by corrective feedback in language acquisition has become a highly important issue. From an interactionist view, corrective feedback is an important means of establishing the significance of reader responses in shaping meanings and it is seen as an important developmental tool moving learners through multiple drafts towards the capability for effective self-expression (Probst, 1989).

 

It has long been assumed by teachers of a second or foreign language and by researchers working in the area of corrective feedback that corrective feedback provision by the teachers helps students to acquire correct linguistic forms and structures. As a result, they have been concerned with discovering the most effective ways of providing corrective feedback so that students improve the accuracy of their (written performance). Although so much research done in the field confirms the positive effects of corrective feedback, many other studies claim that the research designs were not rich.

The study aims to explain the  role of implicit and explicit corrective feedback in L2 learners and the grammatical reliability and the familiarity of many grammatical structure of English language .the study was illustrate  the different methods if it positive or negative and the error’s correction through implicit and explicit in learn the structure of English Language .both implicit and explicit corrective feedback help learners to develop their awareness in the field of English grammar, on the other hand explicit is more useful than implicit one and that lead to increases the grammar accuracy .     
Amjed Bashar GS 53434
Mohamed elsiddig GS55519
Samar Ahmed GS54444
Mohammad Shwada 
GS 55354
Abdall NMajeed

Second language acquisition is a complicated assignment where everybody can observe lots of difficulties simultaneous with error treatment from various approaches and methods in Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research, the history of interaction in meaning-focused instructions gained significant importance in learning a second language (L2). The hypothesis claims when L2 learners interact with each other or with native speakers, they try to use a series of interactional techniques and adjustments to make the communication comprehensible and to negotiate the meaning.

Input-providing and output-prompting strategies have a significant difference on the observational uptake rates and the rates of uptake at input-providing and mostly at output-prompting. The trainers push language learners in order to make them retain language forms that have been learned and saved in long-term memory. In addition, the necessity of producing output after output-prompting strategy obliges learners to produce more uptake and in fact be more sensitive to their own production. Such a requirement is less in place in the case of input-providing negotiation strategies. It seems quite plausible to assume that uptake moves on the part of learners in prompts look more to be an obligatory one, whereas in input-providing ones, such moves tend to be more optional and the learner is less compelled to take this move or could simply ignore it. When comparing input-providing strategy with no feedback group, we find that input providing group outperformed no feedback group in grammar learning, even though the impact of input-providing was less than output-prompting strategy.

Input-providing and output-prompting  are very helpful strategies in improving grammatical accuracy of the L2 learners that instruct trainers and teachers how to use focus on form options in teaching process and encourage them to draw more attention to output-prompting ones along with other focus on form interventions to lead their students to enhance linguistically competence.
Ali Alattwani
GS54752