Turkish Teachers’ and Students’ Preferences of Error Correction in Different Levels of Proficiency
Abstract
Errors are an inevitable part of learning. Students make errors during learning process and these errors show that students are actually testing their hypothesis about language. Therefore, how errors are corrected and teachers’ awareness about the issue is important. Students’ preferences, their level of language proficiency, object of the course are some factors that affect treatment of errors. This study aims to shed light on teachers’ and learners’ preferences on error correction in different levels of proficiency. The participants were 242 learners and five English teachers. Five sessions in beginner and low-intermediate classes were voice recorded. American Language Course Placement test was used to measure proficiency level of the students (see Table 1). A questionnaire was adopted to learn about students’ preferences on error correction and to learn about the preferences of instructors, semi-structured interviews were conducted. The results of the study show controversy regarding what teachers believe and do in practice. In the records, it was seen that teachers make use of similar correction techniques but the interview results indicated teachers believe different techniques should be used for learners with different proficiency levels. Regarding proficiency level, it was observed that students with different proficiency levels preferred different correction techniques.
Keywords
Error correction,preferences,different levels of proficiency
References
- Allwright, D., & Bailey, K. M. (1991). Focus on the language classroom: An introduction to classroom research for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Allwright, R.L. (1975). Problems in the Study of the Language Teachers’ Treatment of Learner Error.
- Bailey, K. M., & Nunan, D. (1996). Voices from the classroom: Qualitative research in second language education.
- Brown, D. (2001). Teaching by principles. London: Longman.
- Burt, M. & Kiparsky, C. (1975). Global and Local Mistakes in J. Schumann & N. Stenson (Eds.) New Frontiers in Second Language Learning.Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
- Cathcart,R.L.,& Olsen J.W.B. (1976). Teachers’ and Students’ Preferences for Correction of Classroom Conversation Errors. In J.F. Fanselow & R.H. Crymes (Eds.), On TESOL 1976, pp.41-45. Washington, D.C:TESOL.
- Chaudron, C. (1983). A descriptive model of discourse in the corrective treatment of learners’ errors. Robinett & Schacter (Eds.), Second language learning: Contrastive analysis, error analysis, and related aspects, (pp. 428-445). The University of Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.
- Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classroom: Research on teaching and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Chaudron, C. (1986). Teachers’ Priorities in Correcting Learners’ Errors in French Immersion Classes. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to Learn: Conversation in Second Language Acquisition (pp.64-84). Rowley, M.A: Newbury House.
- Chenoweth,N.A. Day, R.R , Chun,A.E., & Luppescu, S. (1983). Attitudes and Preferences of ESL Students to Error Correction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6, pp 79-87 doi:10.1017/S0272263100000310.