Below is a relevant fragment of my Master's thesis. The focus is on written feedback, but oral feedback is mentioned, too. Based on that, I would say that giving the student a reformulated sentence is unlikely to be effective. A better strategy would be to give them cues as to what is wrong and let them do the self-repair.
[The effectiveness of written corrective feedback] is subject to controversy. A recent example is a meta-analysis
performed by Truscott (2007), who obtained results that suggest
that traditional forms of written corrective feedback (WCF) do not have
any positive effect on students’ ability to write accurately. This does not
mean, however, that feedback cannot have benefits.
Hartshorn et al. (2010) tested the empirical effects of a novel form of WCF, that they called dynamic written corrective feedback and found it to be effective. This form of feedback has four distinguishing properties:
- Meaningful. The learner must know what kind of error they made,
and how it can be corrected. Meaningful feedback may not give the
complete correct answer, but gives enough information so that the
learner can correct the error herself.
- Timely and constant. The feedback should be provided as soon
as possible, and its form and scope should not change, so as not to
confuse the learner.
- Manageable. The feedback cannot be overwhelming. It needs to be
provided in manageable chunks, and information overload should be
Some of these features are related to the scaffolding functions [...]: manageability has to do with reducing degrees of freedom, and meaningfulness – with proper marking of critical features.
The above findings are consistent with the meta-analysis by Lyster &
Saito (2010), who found that in oral contexts the most effective is prompt
feedback, which does not provide an alternative formulation of the incorrect
utterance, but provides cues that let the learner self-repair.
- Hartshorn, K. James, Norman W. Evans, Paul F. Merrill, Richard R.
Sudweeks, Diane Strong-Krause & Neil J. Anderson. 2010. Effects of
dynamic corrective feedback on ESL writing accuracy. TESOL Quarterly
- Lyster, Roy & Kazuya Saito. 2010. Oral feedback in classroom SLA. Studies
in Second Language Acquisition 32(02). 265–302.
- Truscott, John. 2007. The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to
write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing 16(4). 255–272.