PEN Academic Publishing   |  ISSN: 1308 - 9501

Original article | International Journal of Educational Researchers 2019, Vol. 10(4) 37-47

Oral Corrective Feedback Preferences of University Students in English Communication Classes

Hulya Unsal Sakiroglu

pp. 37 - 47   |  Manu. Number: MANU-1909-11-0001

Published online: December 31, 2019  |   Number of Views: 49  |  Number of Download: 191


Abstract

The ultimate goal of teaching foreign language is to achieve an elevated level of language competence via providing maximum language exposure and minimum learner mistakes. To fulfill the goal, many strategies have been developed. One of the strategies is the provision of feedback during the formal speaking courses. Nevertheless, format of the oral corrective feedback in English as a foreign language (EFL) classes has been one of the controversial issues among both researchers and teaching staff including methods of correction, timing of correction and target errors. Moreover, learner attitudes toward correction are deemed to be an important component. In this study, the aim is to investigate how and when the error correction should take place in EFL communicative classes based on students’ perspectives. A total of 65 students pursuing to English Language and Literature Department and French-English-Turkish Interpretation Department at Kafkas University who were pre-intermediate and intermediate levels were interviewed using a self-report questionnaire, 14 of which were discarded due to irrelevant and redundant replies. The results revealed that 90% of the learners would like to be corrected when they had errors during the process of speaking English. Majority of the students indicated the preference to be corrected after finishing turn with nice and friendly manners. The results indicated that teachers should be aware of student attitudes toward oral corrective feedback.

Keywords: corrective feedback, oral correction, feedback preferences, speaking skills


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Sakiroglu, H.U. (2019). Oral Corrective Feedback Preferences of University Students in English Communication Classes . International Journal of Educational Researchers , 10(4), 37-47.

Harvard
Sakiroglu, H. (2019). Oral Corrective Feedback Preferences of University Students in English Communication Classes . International Journal of Educational Researchers , 10(4), pp. 37-47.

Chicago 16th edition
Sakiroglu, Hulya Unsal (2019). "Oral Corrective Feedback Preferences of University Students in English Communication Classes ". International Journal of Educational Researchers 10 (4):37-47.

References
  1. Agudo, M., & de Dios, J. (2013). An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 15(2), 265–278. [Google Scholar]
  2. Allwright, D., Allwright, R., & Bailey, K. M. (1991). Focus on the language classroom: An introduction to classroom research for language teachers. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  3. Alsolami, R. (2019). Effect of Oral Corrective Feedback on Language Skills. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 9(6), 672-677. [Google Scholar]
  4. Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all?: Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in second language acquisition, 28(4), 543–574. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bao, R. (2019). Oral corrective feedback in L2 Chinese classes: Teachers’ beliefs versus their practices. System, 82, 140-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.04.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  6. Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. Routledge.  [Google Scholar]
  7. Brown, A. V. (2009). Students' and teachers' perceptions of effective foreign language teaching: A comparison of ideals. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 46-60. [Google Scholar]
  8. Brown, J. W. (2009). Multiple cognitive control effects of error likelihood and conflict. Psychological Research, 73(6), 744-750. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-008-0198-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  9. Ellis, R. (2008). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT journal, 63(2), 97–107. [Google Scholar]
  10. Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective Feedback and Teacher Development. 1, 17. [Google Scholar]
  11. Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner Uptake in Communicative ESL Lessons. Language Learning, 51(2), 281-318. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00156 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  12. Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in second language acquisition, 28(2), 339–368. [Google Scholar]
  13. Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of advanced nursing, 62(1), 107-115.  [Google Scholar]
  14. Hendrickson, J. M. (1978). Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research, and practice. Modern Language Journal, 387–398. [Google Scholar]
  15. Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues. Cambridge university press. [Google Scholar]
  16. Jean, G., & Simard, D. (2011). Grammar learning in English and French L2: Students’ and teachers’ beliefs and perceptions. Foreign Language Annals, 44(4), 465–492. [Google Scholar]
  17. Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2005). Error correction: Students’ versus teachers’ perceptions. Language awareness, 14(2-3), 112-127. [Google Scholar]
  18. Lee, E. J. (2013). Corrective feedback preferences and learner repair among advanced ESL students. System, 41(2). [Google Scholar]
  19. Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1990). Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in second language acquisition, 12(4), 429-448. [Google Scholar]
  20. Lochtman, K. (2002). Oral corrective feedback in the foreign language classroom: How it affects interaction in analytic foreign language teaching. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3-4), 271–283. [Google Scholar]
  21. Lyster, R. (2004). Dıfferentıal effects of prompts and recasts ın form-focused ınstructıon. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(3), 399-432. [Google Scholar]
  22. Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in second language acquisition, 32(2), 265–302. [Google Scholar]
  23. Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46(01), 1-40. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000365 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  24. Mardin, Ş.  (1997) Siyasal ve Sosyal Bilimler, İletişim yayınları, 4. Baskı, İstanbul. [Google Scholar]
  25. Mousavi, K., Alavinia, P., & Gholami, J. (2018). Input Providing vs. Output-Prompting Negotiation Strategies in Learning Grammar among Young EFL Learners. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 497–512. [Google Scholar]
  26. Oladejo, J. A. (1993). Error correction in ESL: Learner's preferences. TESL Canada Journal, 71-89. [Google Scholar]
  27. Pawlak, M. (2004). Describing and researching interactive processes in the foreign language classroom. Wydaw. PWSZ. [Google Scholar]
  28. Pawlak, M. (2010). Chapter twenty-eıght learners’perspectıve on the role of error correctıon ın the foreıgn language classroom: the ımportance of space, technıque. Exploring Space: Spatial Notions in Cultural, Literary and Language Studies; Volume 2, 2, 316. [Google Scholar]
  29. Pawlak, M. (2013). Error correction in the foreign language classroom: Reconsidering the issues. Springer Science & Business Media. [Google Scholar]
  30. Rahimi, M., & Zhang, L. J. (2015). Exploring non-native English-speaking teachers’ cognitions about corrective feedback in teaching English oral communication. System, 55, 111-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.09.006 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  31. Rolin-Ianziti, J. (2010). The organization of delayed second language correction. Language Teaching Research, 14(2), 183–206. [Google Scholar]
  32. Sanavi, R. V., & Nemati, M. (2014). The effect of six different corrective feedback strategies on Iranian english language learners’ IELTS writing task 2. SAGE Open, 4(2), 2158244014538271. [Google Scholar]
  33. Schulz, R. A. (1996). Focus on Form in the Foreign Language Classroom: Students’ and Teachers’ Views on Error Correction and the Role of Grammar. Foreign Language Annals, 29(3), 343-364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1996.tb01247.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  34. Sheen, Y. (2010). Differential effects of oral and written corrective feedback in the ESL classroom. Studies in second language acquisition, 32(2), 203-234. [Google Scholar]
  35. Sobhani, M., & Tayebipour, F. (2015). The effects of oral vs. written corrective feedback on Iranian EFL learners’ essay writing. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(8), 1601-1611. [Google Scholar]
  36. Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical assessment, research & evaluation, 7(17), 137-146. [Google Scholar]
  37. Van Lier, L. (1988). The classroom and the language learner: Ethnography and second-language classroom research. Longman London. [Google Scholar]
  38. Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of second language writing, 15(3), 179–200. [Google Scholar]
  39. Zohrabi, K., & Ehsani, F. (2014). The Role of Implicit & Explicit Corrective Feedback in Persian-speaking EFL Learners’ Awareness of and Accuracy in English Grammar. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 2018-2024. [Google Scholar]