L
Leila Ranta
Researcher at University of Alberta
Publications - 12
Citations - 2549
Leila Ranta is an academic researcher from University of Alberta. The author has contributed to research in topics: Comprehension approach & Grammar. The author has an hindex of 6, co-authored 10 publications receiving 2405 citations. Previous affiliations of Leila Ranta include Concordia University.
Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Corrective feedback and learner uptake
Roy Lyster,Leila Ranta +1 more
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a study of corrective feedback and learner uptake in four immersion classrooms at the primary level and find an overwhelming tendency for teachers to use recasts in spite of the latter's ineffectiveness at eliciting student-generated repair.
Journal ArticleDOI
Input Enhancement and L2 Question Formation.
Book ChapterDOI
Practice in a Second Language: A cognitive approach to improving immersion students' oral language abilities: The Awareness-Practice-Feedback sequence
Leila Ranta,Roy Lyster +1 more
TL;DR: The value of using cognitive skill-learning theory (Anderson, 1983) as a framework for sequencing instructional activities aimed at improving the formal accuracy of the otherwise fluent speech of immersion students is highlighted.
Journal ArticleDOI
Counterpoint piece: the case for variety in corrective feedback research
Roy Lyster,Leila Ranta +1 more
TL;DR: The authors argue that SLA researchers should stop comparing recast learning to other types of corrective feedback because they are inherently different kinds of phenomena, and that the recast-learning relationship has been "settled".
Journal ArticleDOI
How Much Exposure to English Do International Graduate Students Really Get?: Measuring Language Use in a Naturalistic Setting
Leila Ranta,Amy Meckelborg +1 more
TL;DR: This article reported the findings from a longitudinal study of the quantity and quality of exposure experienced by 17 Chinese graduate students at a Canadian university over a six-month period, and explored possible reasons for participants' relatively low amount of oral interaction in English in this naturalistic setting.