Journal articles on the topic 'Corrective feedback'
To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Corrective feedback.
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Corrective feedback.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Muhsin, Arief. "The Effectiveness of Positive Feedback in Teaching Speaking Skill." Lingua Cultura 10, no. 1 (May 31, 2016): 25. http://dx.doi.org/10.21512/lc.v10i1.873.
Full textAbstract:
The research was aimed at finding out the students’ responses and perceptions toward the corrective feedback given in teaching speaking activity. The research applied quantitative methods by sending questionnaires to 70 students. The students’ responses and perceptions for teacher’s corrective feedback indicated that students think their spoken error should be corrected. In addition, the students want their teacher focus more on. They also agree if their friends should correct their error. The most popular corrective feedbacks in teaching speaking are the explicit correction, elicitation, and repetition. They have an effective function in detecting the students’ mispronunciation and low accuracy and fluency. The other corrective feedback like implicit correction, recast, clarification request, and metalinguistic feedback are not favored because the percentage is lower than other corrective feedback. It indicates that not all of corrective feedback is effectively used in speaking.
2
Hartono, Didik. "Corrective Feedbacks and Their Implications on Learners’ Uptakes in Academic Speaking Class." JELE (Journal of English Language and Education) 4, no. 1 (June 2, 2018): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.26486/jele.v4i1.440.
Full textAbstract:
This study attempts to investigate a study on corrective feedbacks and learners’ uptakes in adult EFL classroom. The study was aimed at finding the types of corrective feedbacks were used by the academic speaking lecturer, the types of oral feedbacks were the most effective in the lecturer’s opinion, the types of uptakes followed lecturer’s corrective feedbacks, and the types of oral corrective feedbacks were mostly preferred by the students. The study employed a qualitative research design through a passive-participatory observation of patterns of error treatment in an adult EFL class. The research subjects were the lecturer and twenty seven students of the Academic Speaking Class, the English Department of Faculty of Culture Studies, Brawijaya University, Malang. The findings show that the lecturer applied explicit correction mostly (90%), compared to another five types of corrective feedbacks. Moreover, the lecturer said that explicit correction was the most effective type of corrective feedbacks. Meanwhile, the findings also show that most student applied repetition type of uptake. On the other hand, most of the students answered that their preference of corrective feedback type was repetition corrective feedback.
3
Ellis, Rod. "Oral corrective feedback in language teaching: A historical perspective." Avances en Educación y Humanidades 2, no. 2 (December 2, 2017): 7. http://dx.doi.org/10.21897/25394185.1482.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis paper reviews the role of corrective feedback in language teaching and learning in the last fifty years. It reports research studies on error correction from the view of different learning theories and language methods. This extensive and varied revision is used to revisit Hendrickson´s (1978) five key questions on error correction, thus guiding language teachers to inform their decisions on the treatment of learners´ errors. Finally, it suggests unexplored aspects of error correction like corrective feedback in small group work and in computer-mediated communication.Keywords: SLA, corrective feedback. ResumenEste articulo revisa el rol del la respuesta correctiva dentro de la enseñanza y aprendizaje de idiomas en los últimos cincuenta años. Se reportan estudios sobre la respuesta correctiva desde el punto de vista de diferentes teorias del aprendizaje y metodos de enseñanza. Esta revision extensa y variada sirve para discutir nuevamente las cinco preguntas de Hendrickson (1978) sobre la correccion de errores; de esta manera, guiando a los profesores de idiomas a informar sus decisiones sobre el tratamiento de los errores de los estudiantes. Finalmente, se sugieren aspectos aun no explorados en la correccion de errores como la respuesta correctiva durante los trabajos grupales pequeños y en la comunicación mediada por computadores.Palabras claves: SLA, corrective feedback.
4
Solikhah, Imroatus. "ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN SPEAKING CLASS OF ENGLISH DEPARTMENT." LINGUA: Journal of Language, Literature and Teaching 13, no. 1 (April 3, 2016): 87. http://dx.doi.org/10.30957/lingua.v13i1.14.
Full textAbstract:
The objective of this study is to see kinds of corrective feedbacks used by English lecturer in speaking class. The study used classroom based observation as the design, assigning 30 students and one speaking lecturer in English department University of Bantara (UNIVET) Sukoharjo. Data were collected using observation and interview. The study revealed that teacher’s corrective feedback is one factor that influences the progress of students in learning English. It did not bother the students in building a communication. The evidence showed that that the teacher applied recasts, explicit correction, and clarification requests. Recasts was dominated the type of corrective feedback used by the teacher because it did not make the students confused. Three criteria of effective corrective feedback occurred in correction given by the teacher. He was consistent in treating the errors, gave correction without breaking the flow of the communication, and did not ridicule the students in giving correction.
5
Astia, Meirina. "CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ENGLISH CLASS." IJOLTL: Indonesian Journal of Language Teaching and Linguistics 3, no. 3 (September 14, 2018): 111–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.30957/ijotl-tl.v3i3.502.
Full textAbstract:
The design of this study was classroom based observation research. The focus of this study was corrective feedback made by English teachers in the classroom. This study identified occurrences of the correction during the daily conversation course and the way teachers performed the corrective feedback in the classroom. Data were presented under the descriptive way and analyzed inductively in terms of features and facts of teacher’s teaching process (teacher’s corrective feedback). The study revealed that teacher’s corrective feedback is one factor that influences the progress of students in learning English. It did not bother the students in building a communication. The evidence showed that that the teacher applied recasts, explicit correction, and clarification requests. Recasts was dominated the type of corrective feedback used by the teacher because it did not make the students confused. Three criteria of effective corrective feedback occurred in correction given by the teacher. He was consistent in treating the errors, gave correction without breaking the flow of the communication, and did not ridicule the students in giving correction.
6
Sa'adah, Lailatus, Joko Nurkamto, and Suparno Suparno. "Oral corrective feedback: Exploring the relationship between teacher’s strategy and students’ willingness to communicate." Studies in English Language and Education 5, no. 2 (September 3, 2018): 240–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.24815/siele.v5i2.11532.
Full textAbstract:
This study seeks to investigate the types of oral corrective feedback implemented in class and its effect on students’ willingness to communicate. As many as 35 senior high school students as well as the teacher were involved in the observation stage of this study and shared their perspectives about the relationship between teacher’s feedbacks on the students’ willingness to communicate through interview. The findings show that there are three types of oral corrective feedback given in the class, i.e. explicit correction, metalinguistic, and clarification request feedback. The students insist that the teacher’s oral corrective feedback does not make them reluctant to communicate to their peers or teacher in the class. Therefore, it can be concluded that teacher’s oral corrective feedback strategy does not disturb the interaction between the teacher and students in the class.It can be inferred that oral corrective feedback is necessary to be implemented in the class because it assists their second language learning.
7
Retno Wiyati and Rosa Padzilah Nur. "STUDENTS’ ATTITUDE TOWARDS CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN EFL CLASSROOM." JELA (Journal of English Language Teaching, Literature and Applied Linguistics) 2, no. 2 (February 3, 2021): 26–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.37742/jela.v2i2.33.
Full textAbstract:
This research is conducted to find out the teacher’s corrective feedback in an EFL classroom and to find out the students’ attitude after given corrective feedback. This research also tries to unfold the types of the teacher’s corrective feedback to correct the student’s erroneous or mistakes and what students’ attitude after given the correction. This research is conducted in one high school in Bandung. The research employed a descriptive qualitative study embracing the characteristics of a case study research design. In collecting the data, the researcher conducted classroom observation and interview. The observation sessions were conducted three times including the interview session. The participants of this research are one English teacher and twenty-four of a secondary high school student. This research showed that the teacher in EFL classroom provided 5 types of corrective feedback namely recast, explicit correction, clarification request, metalinguistic feedback, and repetition. The findings revealed that the most used corrective feedback is recast and explicit correction is the second most used corrective feedback while metalinguistic feedback is the most less used corrective feedback. Regarding the students’ attitude towards corrective feedback, the interview indicates that there is no negative feedback found in this study. The students indicate positive acceptance towards the different type of feedback used by the teacher. This research also points out the importance of using corrective feedback in teaching English in EFL classrooms with Recast as the most frequently corrective feedback type used by the teacher in the classroom which is parallel with the previous studies.
8
Wicaksono, Wimbo Pambudi. "Types and Frequencies of Written Corrective Feedbacks in Adult ESL Classroom." Indonesian Journal of English Language Studies (IJELS) 3, no. 2 (April 17, 2018): 60–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.24071/ijels.v3i2.1065.
Full textAbstract:
Feedbacks have been seen as an effective way to help language learners acquire second language competence. This study aims to find out how the written corrective feedback (CF) has been used in the adult ESL classroom. In this study, the data were generated through the learners writing. Then the data were put into direct, coded and uncoded type of the written corrective feedback. In addition, those types of feedback were categorized into content and form category to find the scope of the written corrective feedback. As the result, the direct written corrective feedback was mostly used by the teachers. Interestingly, the teachers only used the uncoded written corrective feedback when it refers to the content of the writing. Besides, the dynamic corrective feedbacks that occur several times can be a proof that the teachers not only focus on the form the writing but also the content.Keywords: written corrective feedback, ESL
9
Warni, Asis. "A STUDY OF STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION TOWARDS THE CORRECTIVE FEEDBACKS USED BY THE TEACHER IN CORRECTING THE STUDENTS’ WRITING PROBLEMS." Ensiklopedia Education Review 3, no. 3 (May 19, 2022): 44–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.33559/eer.v3i3.257.
Full textAbstract:
This research aimed to find out the students’ perception towards the corrective feedbacks used by the teacher in correctinng the students’ writing problems. The reseach employed descriptive method. The sample of this research was selected by using random sampling technique. The instruments of data collection was a students’ checklist. The data of the students’ perception towards the corrective feedback stated that 59,09% students said that direct corrective feedback help them to understand what to do to correct their errors. Next, the result shown that 54,55% of the students also mentioned that they can notice and understand their errors about punctuation, spelling, and capitalization through indirect corrective feedback easily. Furthermore, half of them or 50% of the sample students told that indirect corrective feedback encouraged them to write in a better topic and details. In conclusion, the corrective feedbacks improve student’s ability in writing especially descriptive text and the students have positive perceptions about the corrective feedbacks. Keywords: Perception, Corrective Feedback, Writing
10
Putri, Natalia Faradheta, and Giovanni Chun Long Ma. "THE EFFECT OF CORRECTIVE FEEDBACKS ON L2 STUDENTS’ WRITING PERFORMANCE." JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE 4, no. 1 (May 29, 2022): 25–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.30743/jol.v4i1.5103.
Full textAbstract:
In the past years, teachers have been made to assume that corrective feedback benefits students’ writing improvement. Corrective feedback as “any information provides information on the result of behaviour. However, a growing body of research has been reinvestigating the effectiveness of corrective feedback as a result of John Truscott’s claim of its inefficiency. This paper aims to expand the related study on written corrective feedback to find corrective feedback with a significant positive effect on students’ writing performance. This experimental study obtained the data from sixty-six homogeneous L2 students which were equally divided into three groups. The first group was given explicit correction feedback, the second group was given metalinguistic clue feedback, and the last group was the control group. The result showed that the explicit correction was more effective compared to metalinguistic but the fact that the participants tend to perform better even without receiving any correction made the small effect of explicit correction to be questioned.
11
Yahya, M. Ubayu, and Suhartono Suhartono. "THE USE OF WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK TO IMPROVE THE TENTH GRADE STUDENTS’ WRITING SKILL OF DESCRIPTIVE TEXT." ENGLISH EDUCATION: JOURNAL OF ENGLISH TEACHING AND RESEARCH 1, no. 2 (November 9, 2016): 13. http://dx.doi.org/10.29407/jetar.v1i2.479.
Full textAbstract:
Writing is a difficult process of how to share or state some ideas or opinions onto paper. Through text, students’ knowledge could be revealed. The wrong usage or application could be considered as the indicator that learning is taking place; however this kind of condition shouldn’t be allowed to happen continuously. The teacher should acknowledge where the students make the most error to give the appropriate technique. The research problems of this research are (1) What are written corrective feedbacks used by the tenth grade teacher in writing of descriptive text? (2) How do the students response to the written corrective feedbacks which are used by the tenth grade teacher in writing of descriptive text?
In this research, the writer used a descriptive case study to attain the data. The subjects of this research are the English teacher and the tenth grade students at SMK PGRI 1 KEDIRI. The research is done in two days. The writer uses instruments such as interview, field note, questionnaire and students’ written text.
The finding of this research is that (1) the teacher uses direct, indirect and metalinguistic corrective feedback; (2) direct corrective feedback gets 48% definitely like and 38% like, indirect corrective feedback gets 2% definitely like, 8% like and 2% do not like, and metalinguistic corrective feedback gets 2% like.
Based on the findings, it can be concluded that: (1) the teacher used direct corrective feedback to correct almost all the students’ errors on their written text of descriptive text; (2) students preferred direct corrective feedback more than the others. The writer suggested that the teacher should acknowledge the theories of written corrective feedback so the students do not understand direct corrective feedback only but all types of written corrective feedback.
Key Words: Writing, Direct Corrective Feedback, Indirect Corrective Feedback, Metalinguistic Corrective Feedback.
12
Galvez-Capili, Krizia Clarisse, Ma Nina Jesusa Gloria, and Ramil Ilustre. "Corrective Feedback in K-12 English: Characteristics, Purposes, and Examples." International Journal of English Language Studies 4, no. 3 (July 8, 2022): 28–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.32996/ijels.2022.4.3.4.
Full textAbstract:
This paper synthesizes findings from qualitative and quantitative research on corrective feedback in an English as a Second Language (ESL) classroom. This paper revisited the characteristics and purposes of corrective feedback. Searches were conducted using the following research and journal databases: Google Scholar, Academia.edu, Research Gate, and Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The results provide analyses of the four corrective feedbacks, namely, recast, clarification request, metalinguistic feedback, and elicitation. The researchers also provide examples appropriate to each key stage of K-12 schooling in the Philippines. It is emphasized in this paper that learners learn best if they are aware that they are corrected and if the manner of correcting them is not obtrusive.
13
Warni, Asis. "A STUDY OF STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION TOWARDS THE CORRECTIVE FEEDBACKS USED BY THE TEACHER IN CORRECTING THE STUDENTS’ WRITING PROBLEMS." Ensiklopedia Education Review 4, no. 2 (July 15, 2022): 1–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.33559/eer.v4i2.1169.
Full textAbstract:
This research aimed to find out the students’ perception towards the corrective feedbacks used by the teacher in correctinng the students’ writing problems. The reseach employed descriptive method. The sample of this research was selected by using random sampling technique. The instruments of data collection was a students’ checklist. The data of the students’ perception towards the corrective feedback stated that 59,09% students said that direct corrective feedback help them to understand what to do to correct their errors. Next, the result shown that 54,55% of the students also mentioned that they can notice and understand their errors about punctuation, spelling, and capitalization through indirect corrective feedback easily. Furthermore, half of them or 50% of the sample students told that indirect corrective feedback encouraged them to write in a better topic and details. In conclusion, the corrective feedbacks improve student’s ability in writing especially descriptive text and the students have positive perceptions about the corrective feedbacks.
14
M Albelihi, Hani Hamad. "Written corrective feedback: A comparative study of the preferences and beliefs of EFL teachers and learners in Saudi Arabia." F1000Research 11 (April 22, 2022): 452. http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.108680.1.
Full textAbstract:
Background: Corrective feedback plays the role of enabling both teachers and learners to gauge their performance and reflect on their development. It can vary in nature, amount, and focus; nevertheless, its centrality to the classroom cannot be ignored. At the same time, what makes it effective is the way it is communicated. The role of Written Corrective Feedback (WCF) is vital as both a corrective measure and durability for future reference. Foreign language classrooms are an active foreground for feedback practices, given that the bulk of correction is multifaceted and multimodal. However, teachers are left to their devices to formulate best practices in the absence of defined classroom feedback mechanisms. The purposes of this study are (i) to evaluate Saudi English as a foreign language (EFL) instructors’ real practices in supporting their students with corrective feedback; and (ii) to check the students’ beliefs about the feedback they receive from their instructors. Methods: Using the writing output of 92 EFL learners from Qassim University, Saudi Arabia, and the nature of WCF provided to them by three university instructors who were free to choose their feedback strategies in two phases of writing and correction, followed by learners’ cumulative response to the two, the study concludes that a number of difficulties surrounding the scope of feedback need to be researched. Results: The study found that the most used type of WCF is direct in regard to grammatical errors, vocabulary, syntax, and content evaluation. However, the Saudi EFL learners prefer direct corrective feedback for grammatical errors but indirect coded feedback for content correcting their writing assignments. Conclusions: The study encourages EFL teachers to focus on the different types of WCF when reverting to their learners. Furthermore, students’ preference for feedback should be the cornerstone teachers begin with while giving the WCF.
15
Fortunasari, Fortunasari, Nunung Fajaryani, Bunga Ayu Wulandari, and Khairunnisa Khairunnisa. "Written Corrective Feedback for Students’ Research Proposal in English: What Do Students and Lecturers Prefer and Why?" Indonesian Research Journal in Education |IRJE| 5, no. 2 (December 1, 2021): 404–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.22437/irje.v5i2.13064.
Full textAbstract:
The purposes of this study were to describe types of written corrective feedback applied by the lecturers on students’ research proposal and to find out the favorable types of written corrective feedback for the students of English study program at a public university in Jambi. This research used a questionnaire to collect the data from students and lecturers. The results of this research revealed that there were three types of written corrective feedback that were often used by the lecturers. They were direct corrective feedback, grammatical description, and electronic corrective feedback from metalinguistic feedback. Additionally, there were four types that sometimes were used by the lecturers. They were indirect corrective feedback, error codes by metalinguistic feedback, unfocused and focused feedback. The last type was reformulation. It was rarely used by the lecturers. The results also showed that direct, electronic, and unfocused corrective feedbacks were very favorable for students while a brief grammatical description (metalinguistic), focused feedback, error codes (metalinguistic), and reformulation feedback were somewhat favorable. The last type was indirect corrective feedback which was very unfavorable for the students. Implications and recommendations are discussed.
16
Nagode, Gabrijela Petra, Karmen Pižorn, and Mojca Juriševič. "The Role of Written Corrective Feedback in Developing Writing in L2." ELOPE: English Language Overseas Perspectives and Enquiries 11, no. 2 (May 8, 2014): 89–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.4312/elope.11.2.89-98.
Full textAbstract:
Feedback plays an important role in developing L2 writing in young learners. The article provides a brief overview of the history of giving feedback and of some contemporary views within this field. Special attention is paid to cognitive perspectives, such as the influence of written corrective feedback on shortterm memory, the influence of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback on error correction, the influence of written corrective feedback on a particular category of error, the influence of direct and indirect written corrective feedback and combinations of various types of written corrective feedback, and the influence of educational background and L2 learning background on the effectiveness of written corrective feedback in terms of sociocultural perspectives. The main aim of the article is to present readers (especially teachers) with the variety of aspects of giving written corrective feedback in developing L2 writing and thus in enabling young learners to develop their L2 writing skills more effectively.
17
Kalsum and Maghdalena. "Teacher's Written Corrective Feedback on Student's Translation Improvement." EDUVELOP 3, no. 1 (October 3, 2019): 35–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.31605/eduvelop.v3i1.382.
Full textAbstract:
This research aims to investigate the teacher's written corrective feedback toward the students’ translation improvement. It is focused on the student's translation on lexical and grammatical mistakes in translating the source text into the target text. Translation is an activity that aims to facilitate the communication process by interpreting the information received in one language into another language. However, the mistakes while translating cannot be avoid by the translator or the students. The students are commonly done mistakes lexically and grammatically. To overcome the mistakes, the teacher will be a facilitator in correcting the student's translation. Implementing of written corrective feedback is provided teacher to correcting the student's mistakes by writing their comments, correction of errors, etc on the student's writing translation. Based on the analysis, the result indicates that the students make mistakes in translating, the students are most commonly made some mistakes in lexical and grammatical errors.
18
Chaudhary, Anjum. "The Efficacy of Continuous Corrective Feedback on Writings of Saudi EFL Students." Arab World English Journal 13, no. 4 (December 15, 2022): 386–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol13no4.25.
Full textAbstract:
The present study aims to investigate the perceptions of EFL students on Corrective Feedback (C F) and to assess the efficacy of continuous explicit Corrective Feedback on the writings of the preparatory year female students of Umm Al Qura University in Saudi Arabia. The sample consisted of eleven students from an entire class who volunteered for the study. To reach the study’s objectives, an online survey was conducted to gain insight into how EFL students felt about receiving CF. Also, class observations and semi-structured interviews were exercised to get in-depth information on CF. Furthermore, to estimate the efficacy of continuous explicit Corrective Feedback, pre-Corrective Feedback, and post-Corrective Feedback performances in writing tasks were compared. In addition, the T-test value was also calculated using SSPS software. The findings demonstrated that students see CF favorably, and a comparison of their performances before and after receiving explicit CF demonstrated the feedback’s beneficial effects. The study seems significant to practicing teachers and learners as the study takes a practical and principled approach. Also, it brings up to date with current thinking and perception on error correction in language learning.
19
Nurhasanah, Siti, Apandi Apandi, and Linda Linda. "Investigating Teachers' Corrective Feedback in Writing." Academic Journal Perspective : Education, Language, and Literature 9, no. 2 (January 7, 2022): 88. http://dx.doi.org/10.33603/perspective.v9i2.5966.
Full textAbstract:
In the English classroom writing as a communicating ideas considered to be most challenging. Students usually found many difficulty to expressing ideas or choosing the words which they will write. However, it is not the case if the teacher guided well their students with corrective feedback. The teacher as the fasilitator has important role in the fasilitating learning by guiding students and eliciting response from them. This study examined the teachers corrective feedback in respoding to students english writing in one of public senior high school in Indramayu. In this research, the data were obtained from a teacher of one of senior high school in Indramayu . This research were being analyzed descriptive qualitative method and therefore the data were being collected through documentation and interview questions. The framework undertaken is being proposed by Ellis, thus the interview question was being adapted from Thorsteinsen. The findings was found that there were three categories of feedbacks specifically, direct corrective feedback, unfocused corrective feedback and metalinguistics corrective feedback. Meanwhile, the reasons that the teacher provide different feedback startegies, teachers corrective feedbacks is the key to make students conscious of making mistake on writing assignments.
20
Skenderi, Lindita. "Students’ Perceptions of Corrective Feedback in EFL Classrooms in Higher Education." European Journal of Education and Pedagogy 3, no. 3 (June 21, 2022): 264–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2022.3.3.372.
Full textAbstract:
Feedback in general represents an essential aspect of the teaching and learning process. As such, it is also seen as closely connected to students’ academic achievement and development. This study examines students’ perceptions of three types of corrective feedback, such as explicit correction, elicitation, and recasts. Additionally, it aims to show the correlation between the academic achievement of students and corrective feedback. A self-designed questionnaire was used to collect data from a random sample of 37 students who attend Business English as a foreign language course. Analysis of the data showed that there is no correlation between corrective students’ perceptions of corrective feedback and their academic achievements. The study showed that students who get corrective feedback don’t feel embarrassed when being corrected, they also like it when they are corrected and see corrective feedback as help in improving their weak areas in language. Despite the lack of a correlation between students’ perceptions of corrective feedback and their academic achievement, this study recommends teachers use corrective feedback with students because students see it as a positive tool in language learning.
21
Mulyani, Sri, Nurfajri Ningsih, and Nurul Insiqamah Setyaningrum. "STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS TOWARDS ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN A SPEAKING CLASS." ETERNAL (English, Teaching, Learning, and Research Journal) 8, no. 1 (June 30, 2022): 174–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.24252/eternal.v81.2022.a12.
Full textAbstract:
This research aimed to find out students’ perceptions towards oral corrective feedback in a speaking class and the types of oral corrective feedback used by the lecturer. This study applied qualitative research design. Thirteen students had contributed to this research as the respondents. The data were collected by using open ended questionnaire and interview. The collected data were analyzed by applying thematic analysis. This study found students’ perceptions that covered three main themes, namely (1) the benefits of oral corrective feedback include increasing students’ knowledge, being a helpful way to improve students’ speaking ability, and giving positive impacts on students’ learning; (2) the drawbacks of oral corrective feedback include causing nervousness, causing unappreciated feeling, and causing embarrassed and traumatic feeling; and (3) students’ expectations of oral corrective feedback include motivating, encouraging and constructive oral corrective feedback, and appropriate timing in giving oral corrective feedback. In addition, this research also showed that the types of corrective feedback used by the lecturer in the speaking class were recast, elicitation, and explicit correction.
22
van Beuningen, Catherine, N. H. de Jong, and Folkert Kuiken. "The Effect of Direct and Indirect Corrective Feedback on L2 Learners’ Written Accuracy." ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 156 (2008): 279–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.2143/itl.156.0.2034439.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Among scholars there is disagreement on the benefits of corrective feedback on second language learners’ written output. While some researchers advocate the usefulness of corrective feedback, Truscott claims that all error correction is unnecessary, ineffective, and even harmful, in that it diverts time and energy away from more productive aspects of writing instruction. Until now, research outcomes cannot settle this debate since only short-term effectiveness of corrective feedback could be demonstrated. Due to methodological shortcomings, results from studies that investigated long-term effects of error correction on accuracy improvement are inconclusive. By trying to overcome some of these design related drawbacks (i.e. the lack of a proper control group and time-on task differences between treatment groups), the present study intends to make a contribution to the ongoing error correction debate. The effectiveness of direct and indirect corrective feedback was compared to the effect of two control treatments: a treatment that offered students an extra opportunity to practice their writing skills, and a treatment in which students self-corrected their errors without any available feedback. Results show that corrective feedback can be effective in improving students’ accuracy: while short-term effects were found for both direct and indirect corrective feedback, only direct feedback proved to have a significant long-term effect. Neither of the control treatments had a significant effect on students’ accuracy.
23
van Beuningen, Catherine, N. H. de Jong, and Folkert Kuiken. "The Effect of Direct and Indirect Corrective Feedback on L2 Learners’ Written Accuracy." ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 156 (2008): 279–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/itl.156.24beu.
Full textAbstract:
Among scholars there is disagreement on the benefits of corrective feedback on second language learners’ written output. While some researchers advocate the usefulness of corrective feedback, Truscott claims that all error correction is unnecessary, ineffective, and even harmful, in that it diverts time and energy away from more productive aspects of writing instruction. Until now, research outcomes cannot settle this debate since only short-term effectiveness of corrective feedback could be demonstrated. Due to methodological shortcomings, results from studies that investigated long-term effects of error correction on accuracy improvement are inconclusive.By trying to overcome some of these design related drawbacks (i.e. the lack of a proper control group and time-on task differences between treatment groups), the present study intends to make a contribution to the ongoing error correction debate. The effectiveness of direct and indirect corrective feedback was compared to the effect of two control treatments: a treatment that offered students an extra opportunity to practice their writing skills, and a treatment in which students self-corrected their errors without any available feedback. Results show that corrective feedback can be effective in improving students’ accuracy: while short-term effects were found for both direct and indirect corrective feedback, only direct feedback proved to have a significant long-term effect. Neither of the control treatments had a significant effect on students’ accuracy.
24
Kasim Al-Azzawi, Mohamed B., and Angela O. Zaya Al-Barwari. "A Study Of Types Of Oral Corrective Feedback Strategies Used By Efl Teachers At Secondary Schools In Duhok City / Kurdistan Region Of Iraq." Academic Journal of Nawroz University 9, no. 3 (July 17, 2020): 129. http://dx.doi.org/10.25007/ajnu.v9n3a770.
Full textAbstract:
This study aims to investigate types of oral corrective feedback strategies used by EFL teachers at secondary schools in Duhok city/Kurdistan region of Iraq. It also explores teachers’ attitudes towards the use of oral corrective feedback inside classrooms based on the three variables of gender, years of teaching experience, and the type of school (public or private). For these purposes, a classroom observation checklist was designed based on Panova and Lyster’s (2002) model of study in order to confirm the types of oral corrective feedback strategies used by the teachers, to highlight learners’ errors, and to examine the learners’ response to these strategies. Besides, a closed-ended questionnaire was distributed to the teachers to explore their attitudes about the effective use of oral corrective feedback. Fifty EFL teachers from twenty-five public and private secondary schools in Duhok were asked permission to attend their classes and observe the ways they correct their learners' errors. The data obtained from classroom observations and teachers’ responses to the questionnaire were identified, analysed quantitatively. The findings revealed that EFL teachers used different types of oral corrective feedback to learners’ errors. However, the most preferred correction strategy type used by them for correcting learners’ pronunciation errors was ‘recast’, and for grammatical errors was ‘metalinguistic explanation’. As for lexical errors, the strategy used most was ‘translation’. In terms of ‘learners’ uptake’, most of the corrective feedback provided resulted in ‘Repair’. Moreover, the study found out that EFL teachers have positive attitudes towards the use of oral corrective feedback. There were also no significant differences in their responses based on the three variables of gender, years of teaching experience and the type of school.
25
Rahma, Endah Anisa, Siti Sarah Fitriani, and Rina Syafitri. "Students’ Perception to the Use of Indirect Corrective Feedback in Writing Recount Text." International Journal of Education, Language, and Religion 2, no. 1 (May 25, 2020): 25. http://dx.doi.org/10.35308/ijelr.v2i1.2222.
Full textAbstract:
Providing written corrective feedback is a necessity to help language learner improve accuracy. This research aims to seek out students’ response toward the use of Indirect Corrective Feedback to reduce error on students’ recount text. Tenth graders of SMAN 1 Meulaboh were the sample of this study and observed during the correction. Data from the close-ended questionnaire was analyzed qualitatively andwere calculated using percentage system. The result showed that most students agreed about the implementation of Indirect Corrective Feedback and they believe that this error correction strategy helps them to reduce errors in writing recount text. The result confirm that the students responded positively toward the use of Indirect Corrective Feedback.
26
Sa'adah, Lailatus. "Oral Corrective Feedback: Exploring The Relationship Between Teacher’s Strategy and Student's Willingness to Communicate." JSSH (Jurnal Sains Sosial dan Humaniora) 2, no. 2 (March 8, 2019): 251. http://dx.doi.org/10.30595/jssh.v2i2.2953.
Full textAbstract:
Corrective feedback has become a big issue in second language acquisition. Its effectiveness when implemented in the class is still the subject of debate. Moreover, its impact on second language learners’ performance is also a topic of discussion. Recently, there has been a growing interest in the role of corrective feedback as a research topic in EFL context. Most researches showed that corrective feedback has a positive effect on EFL learners. Although there has been a growing research concern on the effectiveness of oral corrective feedback, its impact and its application in EFL classroom setting, limited studies examined the relationship between teachers’ corrective feedback and students’ willingness to communicate. Therefore, this case study explores how oral corrective feedback is implemented in the class and its effect on the students’ willingness to communicate. For this purpose, interviews and observations were used to collect data from a teacher and tenth grade students of senior high school in the academic year 2016/2017. The findings showed that there are three types of oral corrective feedback found in the class: explicit correction feedback, metalinguistic feedback, and clarification request feedback. Moreover, the students frequently make phonological errors and semantic errors while speaking. In regard to the students’ uptake, acknowledgement, repetition, off-target, and peer-repair are mostly found from the teacher and students interaction. The students also insist that the teacher’s oral corrective feedback does not disturb teacher and students classroom interaction.
27
Li, Shaofeng. "Oral corrective feedback." ELT Journal 68, no. 2 (December 13, 2013): 196–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/cct076.
Full text
28
Bandarchian Rashti, Nesa, and Maryam Danaye Tous. "Does Learners’ Proficiency Level Affect Oral Corrective Feedback Preferences?" International Journal of Linguistics 8, no. 4 (August 20, 2016): 150. http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v8i4.9766.
Full textAbstract:
<p>For decades now, there has been a good deal of research on factors affecting students’ oral corrective feedback preferences. Although it has been proven that learners’ characteristics such as their verbal intelligence and attitude toward error correction are highly effective in students’ preferred type of oral corrective feedback, the claims regarding the impact of learners’ proficiency level on their choice of oral corrective feedback have yet to be fully substantiated. In order to take this line of research one step forward, it is important to examine the potential effect of students’ level of proficiency in error correction literature. To this end, this paper aims to shed light on lower and higher level learners’ opinion about corrective feedback issues in an EFL context.</p>
29
van Beuningen, C. G., N. H. de Jong, and Folkert Kuiken. "Het Effect Van Correctieve Feedback Op Schrijfproducten Van Vmbo-T Leerlingen." T2-verwerving: Onderzoek ontmoet onderwijsparktijk 80 (January 1, 2008): 63–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/ttwia.80.07beu.
Full textAbstract:
The question if second language learners can benefit from corrective feedback has been a fiercely debated topic in the academic field for over a decade. Until now, research outcomes cannot settle this discussion since only short-term effectiveness of corrective feedback could be demonstrated. Due to methodological shortcomings, results from studies that investigated long-term effects of error correction on accuracy improvement are inconclusive. By trying to overcome some of these design related drawbacks, the present study intends to make a contribution to the ongoing error correction debate. The effectiveness of direct and indirect corrective feedback was compared to the effect of two control treatments: a treatment that offered students an extra opportunity to practice their writing skills, and a treatment in which students self-corrected their errors without any available feedback. Results show that corrective feedback can be effective in improving students' accuracy.
30
Kyara, Elizabeth, and Gastor Mapunda. "An Appraisal of How Tanzanian Secondary School Teachers of English Use Oral Corrective Feedback Strategies in ELT." Journal of Linguistics and Language in Education 16, no. 2 (December 31, 2022): 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.56279/jlle.v16i2.1.
Full textAbstract:
This paper examines teachers’ classroom practices in providing oral corrective feedback to students in English language lessons, focusing on the procedures that teachers use in handling students’ spoken errors. Using Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory, the study looked into how teachers utilize different oral corrective feedback strategies in their lessons. Data collection was done through classroom observation and interviews conducted in two public secondary schools in Dar es Salaam City. The participants were teachers and students. Thirteen English language lessons were observed, recorded, transcribed, and analysed; and six English language teachers were interviewed. The results suggest that the teachers apply at least six techniques in handling students’ spoken errors, namely explicit correction, clarification requests, recasts, metalinguistic feedback, repetition, and corrective comments. Explicit correction was the most frequently used strategy, while corrective comments was the least frequently used. Lastly, the learners’ level of language proficiency dictated the teachers’ choice of the OCF strategy. Keywords: English language teaching, Tanzanian secondary schools, errors, corrective feedback
31
Bonyadi, Alireza. "On the Differential Effects of Individual and Collaborative Written Corrective Feedback on the Accuracy of Iranian Female EFL Learners’ Writing." International Journal of English and Cultural Studies 1, no. 2 (November 27, 2018): 33. http://dx.doi.org/10.11114/ijecs.v1i2.3657.
Full textAbstract:
This paper aimed at examining the differential effects of individual and collaborative written corrective feedbacks on EFL learners’ writing accuracy. To this end, 60 female English language learners were selected from among 80 students of intermediate EFL learners in private language institute in Urmia (West Azerbayjan, IRI). The participants were randomly divided into two groups namely, ‘individual feedback group’ and ‘collaborative feedback group’. Two different correction procedures were provided for both groups. For the first group, the assignment papers of the participants was gathered by the instructor in order to be provided with explicit written corrective feedback for their writings in terms of grammar and mechanics, while for the second group, six participants wrote on a topic and each composition was corrected by four EFL learners. Finally, a post-test on writing was conducted for both groups, and a t-test analysis was used to compare the mean scores of both groups. The findings of the study revealed that there was a significant difference between the individual and collaborative corrective feedback groups in terms of their writing accuracy.
32
Sahyoni, Sahyoni. "CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK AND CLASSROOM INTERACTION AT SMA 1 PAYAKUMBUH SUMATERA BARAT." Ta'dib 21, no. 1 (December 27, 2018): 9. http://dx.doi.org/10.31958/jt.v21i1.1027.
Full textAbstract:
The main focus of this research is to investigate corrective feedback made by the English teacher during classroom interaction. The study was qualitative research. The data in this study were the utterances that spoken by teacher and student during the classroom activity. The data were collected through a record where the writer himself recorded the utterances during teaching learning process a ninety-minute in duration. In this study, the teacher is an English teacher who teaches at grade XI SMA Payakumbuh. The data were analyzed by qualitative approach, writer explained corrective feedback types that happened in classroom interaction. There are six types of corrective feedback occurred in the classroom interaction at SMA 1 Payakumbuh namely: recast, repetition, clarification request, explicit correction, elicitation, and paralinguistic correction. Recast, clarification request and elicitation are the most corrective feedback applied by teacher in the classroom interaction.
33
Nhac, Huong Thanh. "Effect of Teachers’ Corrective Feedback on Learners’ Oral Accuracy in English Speaking Lessons." International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research 20, no. 10 (October 30, 2021): 313–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.10.17.
Full textAbstract:
Corrective feedback plays a vital role in contributing to the success of English language teaching and learning at all levels owing to its essential functions in developing learners’ English capacity. However, the ongoing debate on how effective corrective feedback is still remains controversial among educational scholars. This empirical study examined the effects of teachers’ corrective feedback on learners’ English oral accuracy at a higher education institution. The study used a before-and-after approach with the involvement of 47 law major sophomores at lower intermediate level who were divided into control and experimental groups. Specifically, the experimental group included two batches, including 16 participants companions receiving the explicit correction and metalinguistic feedback, and 15 learners provided with recast and clarification requests. In addition, there were 16 participants in the control group who were given no form of corrective feedback during English speaking lessons. The results indicate that the efficacy of corrective feedback is clearly acknowledged thanks to the contrastive analysis of the outcome in the learners' performance on the post-tests. In particular, the results of the explicit corrective feedback slightly outweighed the results of the control group receiving implicit feedback in terms of improving learners’ accurate usage of grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation. The findings emphasise the importance of teachers’ corrective feedback in helping students improve their English competency.
34
Nhac, Thanh-Huong. "Oral Corrective Feedback Preferences in English Lessons: Learners’ and Teachers’ Perspectives." European Journal of Educational Research 11, no. 3 (July 15, 2022): 1643–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.3.1643.
Full textAbstract:
<p style="text-align: justify;">The paramount objective of English language teaching and learning is to achieve language competence in communicative purposes with the minimal learners’ errors. To attain that goal, corrective feedback plays an important role due to its efficiency in developing learners’ English capacity. However, the correlation between language students’ and teachers’ views on the issues of corrective feedback including its types, methods and timing has received inadequate attention from educational scholars. This study, therefore, aimed to examine teachers’ and learners’ perceptions of corrective feedback at a higher education institution. The research employed the mixed method with the participation of 425 law-majored sophomores. Specifically, the statistics involved the survey questionnaires, follow-up interviews with students as well as the interview with thirteen teachers of English. The results indicated overall matches between learners’ and teachers’ high remarks on the necessity of oral corrective feedback in the students’ English acquisition. Notably, they both highly valued the use of metalinguistic feedback, prompt feedback for grammatical and lexical errors while explicit correction and recast were preferred for phonological errors. In terms of feedback timing, students were perceived not to be negatively affected by immediate correction, yet expressed their preferences for the delayed corrective feedback, which was compatible with teachers’ views. Such findings set practical pedagogical implications for language educators in the language teaching and learning process.</p>
35
Langit-Dursin, Richel. "Incidental Corrective Feedback by Classroom Teachers and Uptake by Bilingual Elementary Students in Teacher-Learner Interactions." Indonesian JELT: Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching 11, no. 1 (May 31, 2016): 47–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.25170/ijelt.v11i1.1489.
Full textAbstract:
The study investigated (1) the relationship between corrective feedback types and errors by bilingual elementary students in speaking; (2) corrective feedback type that leads to high uptake; (3) uptake commonly made by bilingual elementary students in response to incidental corrective feedback; and (4) perspectives of elementary classroom teachers and bilingual young learners on the provision, frequency, and timing of corrective feedback. The qualitative and quantitative research involved classroom teachers from grades 1 to 5 and bilingual elementary students. A total of 20 classroom teachers and 362 elementary students able to speak English, Bahasa Indonesia, and Chinese from a school implementing an international curriculum participated in the research. The study revealed that (1) different corrective feedback types, namely recast, explicit correction, clarification request, metalinguistic feedback, repetition, and elicitation were not specifically linked with phonological, grammatical, and lexical errors in speaking; (2) recast led to high uptake in the form of incorporation but not student-generated repair; (3) repetition was the most common type of uptake by bilingual elementary students; and (4) classroom teachers and elementary students wanted teachers to correct errors and give delayed error correction but have different perspectives on the frequency of doing it. For classroom teachers, learners’ errors have to be corrected all the time but for students, errors have to be corrected sometimes. Peer application of corrective feedback and repeated error by another student are new kinds of uptake based on the results of the classroom-based research.
36
Fitriana, Rinda. "STUDENTS’ PREFERENCES TOWARD CORRECTIVE FEEDBACKS ON STUDENTS’ ORAL PRODUCTION." Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching 1, no. 1 (September 30, 2016): 46. http://dx.doi.org/10.24903/sj.v1i1.17.
Full textAbstract:
<p class="abstrak">This study aimed on revealing students’ preference on types of corrective feedback given by their English teacher as well as their reason. The study was conducted in a vocational school in Samarinda. Data collection was done by means of observation, interview and questionnaire. The observation was done for three meetings each in two different level of English proficiency classes (high and low) and ten students from the observed classes were interviewed. Moreover, the questionnaires were administered to 196 out of 385 students from all classes of twelfth grade. Furthermore, the result of this study revealed that the students preferred to have Explicit, Meta-Linguistic Clue and Elicitation corrective feedback. However, there was mismatch between students’ preference on the expected type corrective feedback (Explicit) and the teacher’s corrective feedback (Recast). The students’ preference on explicit corrective feedback was based on the reason that it provided answer and explanation on the correct version of the corrected oral production. The students’ preference on Meta-linguistic Clue and Elicitation corrective feedback were because these feedbacks activated their knowledge and generated students’ thinking to discover the correct version.</p>
37
Castro, Maria Corazon Saturnina A. "ERRORS AND CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN WRITING: IMPLICATIONS TO OUR CLASSROOM PRACTICES." LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching 20, no. 2 (October 20, 2017): 158–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.24071/llt.v20i2.743.
Full textAbstract:
Error correction is one of the most contentious and misunderstood issues in both foreign and second language teaching. Despite varying positions on the effectiveness of error correction or the lack of it, corrective feedback remains an institution in the writing classes. Given this context, this action research endeavors to survey prevalent attitudes of teachers and students toward corrective feedback and examine their implications to classroom practices. This paper poses the major problem: How do teachers perspectives on corrective feedback match the students views and expectations about error treatment in their writing? Professors of the University of the Philippines who teach composition classes and over a hundred students enrolled in their classes were surveyed. Results showed that there are differing perceptions of teachers and students regarding corrective feedback. These oppositions must be addressed as they have implications to current pedagogical practices which include constructing and establishing appropriate lesson goals, using alternative corrective strategies, teaching grammar points in class even in the tertiary level, and further understanding the learning process.DOI: doi.org/10.24071/llt.2017.200210
38
Apriani, Vidia, Ikhsanudin Ikhsanudin, and Clarry Sada. "LECTURER PRACTICES ON CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ENHANCING STUDENTS’ WRITING ACCURACY (A Descriptive Study to the 3rd Semester Students Of English Study Program At IKIP PGRI Pontianak)." JOEEL: Journal of English Education and Literature 2, no. 1 (March 26, 2021): 47–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.38114/joeel.v2i1.115.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract: Corrective Feedback has been the center of attention among language researchers and education experts. The purpose of this study is to find out the types of Corrective Feedback that the lecturer used to correcting the students’ writing errors. This study was designed in qualitative form. In this study, the participants were two English lecturers and the third-year semester students. These participants were interviewed about their preference of corrective feedback and how they applied corrective feedback in the teaching of writing in their class. In order to obtain the data, the researcher used interview and document analysis. To enrich the findings in this study, the researcher collected the answer sheets from 26 students in two interval periods. The results of the study revealed that grammar was the most corrected elements in writing, with the percentage of 49.25%, followed by vocabulary by 22.39% and organization and mechanic by 19.40% and 8.96%. These figures were consistent with the interview results where the lecturers stated that grammar is their focus for corrective feedback. This study also revealed that corrective feedback is something that the students expected from their lecturers.
39
Andarab, Mehdi Solhi. "The Effect of Spatial Intelligence-based Metalinguistic Written Corrective Feedback on EFL Learners’ Development in Writing." Journal of Curriculum and Teaching 8, no. 1 (February 22, 2019): 40. http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/jct.v8n1p40.
Full textAbstract:
Correcting and providing feedback to the written work of the learners has always been one of the hotly-debatedissues over the last decades. While a group of scholars argue in favor of the effectiveness of the written corrective(CF) feedback, others question the utility and usefulness of the CF on writing of the learners. Even there seem to befewer consensuses on the typology of the CF. Metalinguistic written corrective feedback (CF) (e.g., briefgrammatical descriptions and error codes) is a type of written feedback, through which teacher gives metalinguisticclue to the nature of the errors (Ellis, 2009). In this study, a different type of metalinguistic feedback, conceptualizedas spatial intelligence-based (SIB) metalinguistic written CF_ using the colorful stationery to write, highlight, locate,or underline the linguistic errors of the learners while giving feedback_ was used while providing feedback to thelearner’s work. In order to investigate the effectiveness of SIB metalinguistic written CF on English as a foreignlanguage (EFL) learners’ development in writing, 47 intermediate learners were randomly assigned into two groups.The learners in the first group received SIB metalinguistic written CF for their errors in writing, while the ones in thesecond group only obtained metalinguistic written CF for their errors. An independent samples t-test applied on thescores achieved from a posttest showed a significant difference in scores of the first group and that of theexperimental group. Results indicated that the accuracy (mechanics) and style of the writing of the first group ofstudents who received SIB correction for their linguistic errors exceled that of the second group students whosereceived written correction was only metalinguistic. However, there was no significant difference between thegroups in the content, and organization of their writing.
40
Seçkin, Can, and Daloğlu Ayşegül. "A classroom research study on use of oral corrective feedback at an EFL university." i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching 12, no. 1 (2022): 39. http://dx.doi.org/10.26634/jelt.12.1.18365.
Full textAbstract:
This study aims to investigate which types of errors lead to which types of corrective feedback and their distribution in university preparatory school speaking classes. Discourse analytic principles were used to analyze the learners' errors and types of oral corrective feedback in communicatively oriented speaking classes. The frequency and distribution of error types and corrective feedback are examined. Three instructors teaching English speaking courses at B1 level of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages in different classes participated in the study. The data, consisting of six videotaped lessons, were transcribed for coding and analysis according to the system proposed by Lyster and Ranta (1997). First, four error types and seven types of corrective feedback were coded and then, the relationship between the feedback type and error type was examined. The results showed that the most commonly used feedback type is recast. This is followed by a translation and explicit correction. Metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, clarification requests, and repetitions are not common feedback types. Looking at the relationship between the type of corrective feedback and the type of error, grammatical errors were the most common type, but were corrected the least. On the other hand, lexical errors were the least frequent but were the most frequently corrected error type.
41
Harianto, Harianto, Ratna Dewi, and Radiah Hamid. "The Teachers’ Corrective Feedbacks on the Students’ Grammatical Errors in their Written Descriptive Text and Their Response." IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature 10, no. 1 (June 10, 2022): 466–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.24256/ideas.v10i1.2694.
Full textAbstract:
This study aimed to find out (1) The teachers’ feedbacks on the students’ grammatical errors in the students’ descriptive text; (2) The students’ responses towards the teachers’ grammatical feedbacks in their descriptive text. The research design is Descriptive Qualitative Research conducted at SMP 1 Ma’rang Pangkep. The subject of research was three English teachers and thirty students who were selected by Purposive Sampling Technique. The instrument of data collected were teachers’ corrective feedback and the student’s response from the descriptive text. The result of the research showed that corrective feedback on the students’ grammatical errors in descriptive texts was more dominant in syntax errors, in this case mis formation errors. These errors occurred because of student’s mother tongue interference. The students still confused to choose the right word in a sentence because of the lack of knowledge or poor vocabularies and its used. Besides that, some students tried to translate the words one by one from Indonesian language into English without paying attention to the English structure rules. Students’ response by imitating the teacher's corrective feedback. Because they were aware that the parts which were given feedback were incorrect and they agreed with the correction suggested by the teacher. Thus, they directly imitated the corrections and did not change any other parts. And a few students ignore.
42
Kennedy, Sara. "Corrective Feedback for Learners of Varied Proficiency Levels: A Teacher’s Choices." TESL Canada Journal 27, no. 2 (May 19, 2010): 31. http://dx.doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v27i2.1054.
Full textAbstract:
This study investigates how one English-as-a-second-language (ESL) teacher provided corrective feedback to 15 child ESL learners that the teacher had divided into two groups based on proficiency level. Classroom data in transcripts from the CHILDES database were analyzed for type of learner errors, type of teacher feedback, and rate of learner uptake (attempts at correction) and repair (correction). Results showed differences in the types of errors produced by each proficiency group and in the type of feedback the teacher provided to each proficiency group, demonstrating provision of finely tuned corrective feedback based on learners’ individual differences.
43
Budianto, Suhartawan, Teguh Sulistyo, Oktavia Widiastuti, Dwi Fita Heriyawati, and Saiful Marhaban. "Written corrective feedback across different levels of EFL students’ academic writing proficiency: Outcomes and implications." Studies in English Language and Education 7, no. 2 (September 3, 2020): 472–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.24815/siele.v7i2.16569.
Full textAbstract:
This current research aimed at finding out the impact of different feedback modes, that is indirect corrective feedback and direct corrective feedback, on the writing proficiency of EFL students at the university level. Direct and indirect corrective feedbacks were provided by covering global and local aspects of writing together. This study reported on a 14-week study with 63 students majoring in the English Education Department of an outstanding university in Surabaya, Indonesia. The pre-test was given to 35 students that belonged to a high proficiency level group, whereas 28 students belonged to the low proficiency level. The proficiency level was used to examine whether the corrective feedback was effective for certain levels of learners’ proficiency. An experimental design was run to examine whether there was a noteworthy different impact of direct corrective feedback (DCF) and indirect corrective feedback (ICF) on descriptive essays produced by EFL students. Two groups of participants, DCF group and ICF group, wrote eight topics in which each was treated using different feedback. The results revealed that the DCF is more powerful than ICF and contributes significantly to improve students’ EFL writing, regardless of the students’ level of proficiency (high or low). The outcomes of DCF and ICF in the EFL writing process that do not depend on proficiency level indicates that the use of DCF and ICF is not influenced by proficiency level. In other words, direct corrective feedback is advantageous for both low and high proficiency learners in EFL writing process.
44
Essa Aloud, Reem. "Saudi Female EFL Teachers’ Cognition and Practices Regarding Online Corrective Feedback in Speaking Class." Arab World English Journal, no. 8 (July 25, 2022): 56–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/call8.4.
Full textAbstract:
The study of teachers’ cognition and classroom practices about online corrective feedback in English language teaching is a recent trend in research. However, there is a paucity of studies on teachers’ practices and cognition of online corrective feedback in speaking class. Therefore, this study attempts to bridge this research gap by investigating Saudi female English language teachers’ cognition and practices related to corrective feedback in an online speaking setting. The main question of this study is What are Saudi female EFL teachers’ practices and tacit beliefs about online corrective feedback? The participants of the study were five Saudi female teachers. This study applied a qualitative case study approach dealing with in-depth data collection instruments, including online class observations followed by face-to-face semi-structured and stimulated recall interviews, which interacted with each other through a practical argument process. The results revealed how the teachers’ online corrective feedback beliefs shaped their practices. The observational data revealed that all five teachers corrected most of their students’ errors using various online corrective feedback strategies. The observational data revealed that most teachers used output-prompting strategies more commonly than input-providing strategies, reflecting teachers’ interest in prompting self-correction discovery and reducing the students’ need for assistance. This study thus provides a deeper insight into the complexity of teachers’ cognitions and practices regarding online corrective feedback. Implications of the findings of this study in teacher education are highlighted, and recommendations for further research are suggested.
45
Babajani Azizi, Danial, Nourollah Gharanjik, and Mahmood Dehqan. "The Effects of Mobile-mediated Explicit and Implicit Feedback onThe Effects of Mobile-mediated Explicit and Implicit Feedback on EFL Learners’ Use of English Prepositions EFL Learners’ Use of English Prepositions." Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition 8, no. 2 (July 29, 2022): 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.31261/tapsla.11943.
Full textAbstract:
Making mistakes is a natural part of learning process requiring correction; accordingly, corrective feedback is indispensable. On this ground, the present study compared the effects of mobile-mediated explicit and implicit corrective feedback on Iranian EFL learners’ use of English prepositions of manner and movement. To this end, the participants including 60 learners were randomly assigned to three groups of 20 individuals on WhatsApp application. These three groups included two experimental and one control groups. The treatment groups sat for a pre-test, received instruction on the errors under study, and practiced correcting them in response to the corrective feedback condition. Next, participants took immediate post-test and delayed post-test. The statistical analysis revealed that although the control group was more proficient than its experimental counterparts on the pre-test, their performance did not improve on immediate and delayed post-tests. However, both of the experimental groups significantly improved on immediate post-test and retained their gains on the delayed post-test. The pedagogical implication is provided for both teachers and learners.
46
Maawa, Paul Kharlo L., and Ruth Ortega-Dela Cruz. "REMEDIAL AND CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING STUDENTS’ ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY." International Journal of Language Education 1, no. 1 (March 5, 2019): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v1i1.7794.
Full textAbstract:
The study used descriptive research design to evaluate the use of remedial and corrective feedback strategies in improving students’ English language proficiency. Purposive sampling of English teachers and secondary students were surveyed and interviewed to address the research objectives. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data gathered using researcher-made instrument. Findings show that peer support program and handling students’ behaviour problems were the most commonly used remedial strategies by the English teachers whereas, explicit correction, clarification request, recast, elicitation and paralinguistic signal were the commonly used corrective feedback strategies in teaching English. Cross-examination in the students’ grades indicates positive effect of remedial and corrective feedback strategies in improving the English language proficiency of the students. The teachers know well how to use corrective feedback strategies although some might not be aware that they are using it. Corrective feedback should also come first since it can be incorporated in the remedial teaching strategy while the teacher is conducting remedial classes. This will further enhance their teaching while providing concrete ways to help improve the students’ English language proficiency.
47
Véliz, Leonardo. "Corrective Feedback in Second Language Classrooms." Literatura y Lingüística, no. 19 (August 14, 2018): 283. http://dx.doi.org/10.29344/0717621x.19.1587.
Full textAbstract:
In this paper I attempt to analyse and survey the role of corrective feedback –more specifically recasts– in the interaction between teachers and L2 students in a classroom. Thus, I explore the effects of recasts on students’ self-correction in order to finally come to the conclusion whether or not students are able to notice this type of underlying correction and, therefore, reformulate their ill-formed utterances. Besides, I also undertake a comprehensive survey of the literature on the topic. Two different groups of students from the English Teaching Trainig Programme at Universidad Católica Raúl Silva Henrríquez are studied. Five students taking English courses at an intermediate level and five taking advanced English courses.Intermediate and advanced students have been categorised on the basis of their number of English language courses they have taken. Intermediate students have taken four, whereas advanced have taken seven. In this paper the point at issue is whether harmful and ineffective or essential and rather effective, and whether recasts are noticeable for students to ‘read between lines’ and figure out the underlying correction. I take the stand that recasts are only effective when using them with advanced students as they are more cognitively advancedand, therefore, able to make inferences and interpret the implicit message to reformulate their mistakes. The results as well as the tests on the whole, clearly demonstrate that recasts as a corrective technique happen to be a bit more effective with advanced students than with intermediate students, though the difference is not striking.
48
Halim, Tanzina, Rizwana Wahid, and Shanjida Halim. "EFL students' attitudes toward corrective feedback: a study conducted at undergraduate level." Saudi Journal of Language Studies 1, no. 1 (May 3, 2021): 40–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/sjls-03-2021-0004.
Full textAbstract:
PurposeThe purpose of this study is mainly to find out the EFL learners' attitude towards corrective feedback. This paper also investigates types of learners who prefer the online or offline corrective feedback, and how feedback should be tailored to the needs of the learners.Design/methodology/approachThe study was conducted on sixty female participants who were students of levels 7 and 8 of the B. A. program (English) at King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia. They were administered a questionnaire comprising eight questions about corrective feedback from teachers individually and independently so that they could identify their own choices without any influence from other participants. The items in the questionnaire were closed items.FindingsIt was found that both types of feedbacks are essential to enhance learners' linguistic accuracy. Learners have shown their positive attitude towards teachers' corrective feedback because they consider it a motivating learning tool. Not only that the learners have expressed the view that corrective feedback is very useful in enhancing the learning process for EFL learners. On the other hand, some of the learners are not serious about going through corrective feedback given by teachers because sometimes they are unable to differentiate between what helps or hampers progress towards language learning. However, they preferred both online (immediate/automated) feedback and offline (delayed) feedback. In general, the results state that the learners have expressed the view that corrective feedback is very useful in enhancing the learning process for EFL learners.Research limitations/implicationsThis study has some limitations. The first one is the sample size. Only students from levels 7 and 8 (undergraduates) were taken into consideration. The second limitation is that the researchers focused on only one university in Saudi Arabia. The third limitation is that no male students participated in this study. The results might be different if the male students participated as well.Originality/valueOne vital point in employing CF in the language classrooms is timing. Considering the timing of corrective feedback, teachers face the problem of whether CF should be immediate (online) or delayed (offline).
49
Falah Alzubi, Ali Abbas, Mohd Nazim, and Khaled Nasser Ali Al-Mwzaiji. "Learning Through Correction: Oral Corrective Feedback in Online EFL Interactions." World Journal of English Language 12, no. 8 (October 31, 2022): 382. http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v12n8p382.
Full textAbstract:
Feedback has been vital and essential in all educational settings and English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classroom interaction draws no distinction. It contributes to students' language learning and achievement. It, when involves learners during classroom interactions, becomes oral corrective feedback and has been viewed as a dynamic practice for EFL teachers to correct their learners’ mistakes on the spot. This study investigated teachers' oral corrective feedback practices in an online EFL classroom interactions context. Furthermore, it correlated teachers' responses with the type of oral corrective feedback, gender, and years of experience. To achieve the study objectives, the descriptive-correlational method was used. A questionnaire and a semi-structured interview were applied to a sample of 61 EFL teachers. The results of the questionnaire revealed that EFL teachers consistently practiced oral corrective feedback in online classroom interactions. Also, no significant differences were shown in the study sample's responses based on the type of oral corrective feedback, implicit or explicit, gender, and years of teaching experience. Considering the study findings, some implications and recommendations are suggested.
50
Han, ZhaoHong. "Fine-tuning Corrective Feedback." Foreign Language Annals 34, no. 6 (November 2001): 582–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2001.tb02105.x.
Full text