An Examination of the Psychology of the Feedback Receiver: The Case of EFL Students

Year 2020, Volume: 6 Issue: 2, 678 - 692, 25.10.2020

M. Zeki Çıraklı , Hasan Sağlamel

https://doi.org/10.31464/jlere.772194

Abstract

The shift to a constructive feedback culture requires a thorough examination of the impact of feedback practices. However, a great many studies conducted on feedback in EFL or ESL contexts focus mainly on the effectiveness of feedback practices with reference to feedback receivers’ achievement or improvement in subsequent writing practices. Thus, the psychological aspects of the feedback provision processes are not adequately investigated. In an effort to address this gap, this study attempts to elicit the perspectives of 8 EFL learners who are taking writing classes in a preparatory programme. Stimulated-recall protocols conducted for three drafts and semi-structured interviews were used to gather data, and Kohut’s terminologies with reference to his self-psychology were used in the interpretation of the data. The study offers some insights into our understanding of the impact of the feedback practices and helps us identify which aspects of feedback practices prove to be “self-regulating” or “traumatic.” Several suggestions for developing efficient strategies to be employed in feedback provision are made in the light of the findings. 

Keywords

Kohut, writing, feedback, EFL learners

Geribildirim Alanların Psikolojisinin İncelenmesi: Yabancı Dil Olarak İngilizce Öğrenen Kişiler Örneği

Abstract

Yapıcı bir geribildirim kültürüne geçiş, geribildirim uygulamalarının etkisinin kapsamlı bir şekilde ele alınmasını gerektirir. Ancak İkinci veya Yabancı Dil Olarak İngilizce bağlamlarında geri bildirim üzerine yapılan çok sayıda çalışma çoğunlukla geri bildirim alan kişilerin geribildirimden sonraki yazma uygulamalarındaki başarılarına veya gelişmelerine yönelik olup bu geri bildirim uygulamalarının verimliliğine odaklanmaktadır. Dolayısıyla, geri bildirim süreçlerinin psikolojik yönleri yeterince araştırılmamıştır. Bu boşluğu gidermek amacıyla yapılan bu çalışma, Yabancı Dil Olarak İngilizce bağlamında bir hazırlık programında yazma dersleri alan 8 öğrencinin geri bildirime olan bakış açılarını ortaya çıkarmaya çalışmaktadır. Veri toplamak için üç taslak üzerinde uygulanan çağrışım tekniği protokolleri ve yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler kullanılmıştır ve verilerin yorumlanmasında Kohut'un kendilik psikolojisi ile ilgili terminolojilerden yararlanılmıştır. Çalışma, geri bildirim uygulamalarının etkisine ilişkin bazı görüşler sunmaktadır ve geri bildirim uygulamalarının hangi yönlerinin “öz-düzenleyici” ya da “travmatik” olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Çalışma, geri bildirim uygulamalarına psikolojik bir perspektif sunmaktadır.

Keywords

geridönüt, yazma, yabancı dil, motivasyon, öğrenci psikolojisi

References

• Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. Modern Language Journal, 78, 465–83.
• Bacal, H. A. (1985). 16 Optimal responsiveness and the therapeutic process. Progress in Self Psychology, 1, 202–227.
• Banai, E., Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2005). “Selfobject” needs in Kohut's self psychology: Links with attachment, self-cohesion, affect regulation, and adjustment. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 22(2), 224-260.
• Brophy, J. (1981). Teacher praise: A functional analysis. Review of Educational Research, 51(1), 5-32.
• Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 267-296.
• Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
• Çıraklı, M. Z. (2018). Theory of postromantic education in the postmodernist era: Maxims. Journal of Narrative and Language Studies, 6(11), 133-136.
• Ferris, D. R. (1995). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple‐draft composition classrooms. TESOL quarterly, 29(1), 33-53.
• Hanjani, A. M., & Li, L. (2014). Exploring L2 writers' collaborative revision interactions and their writing performance. System, 44, 101-114.
• Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative health research, 15(9), 1277-1288.
• Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students' writing. Language. Teaching, 39, 83–101.
• Kohut, H. (1971). The analysis of the self. New York: International University Press.
• Kohut, H. (1977). The restoration of the self. New York: International University Press.
• Kohut, H. (1982). Introspection, empathy, and the semi-circle of mental health. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 63, 395-407.
• Kohut, H. (1984). How does analysis cure? Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Marmarosh, C. L., & Mann, S. (2014). Patients’ selfobject needs in psychodynamic psychotherapy: How they relate to client attachment, symptoms, and the therapy alliance. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 31(3), 297-313
• McDonough, J., & McDonough, S. (2014). Research methods for English language teachers. Routledge.
• McLean, J. (2007). Psychotherapy with a narcissistic patient using Kohut's self psychology model. Psychiatry (Edgmont), 4(10), 40-47.
• Ornstein, P. H., & Ornstein, A. (1996). I. Some general principles of psychoanalytic therapy: A selfpsychological perspective. (pp. 87-101). In L. E. Lifson (Ed.), Understanding therapeutic action: psychodynamic concepts of cure. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
• Pajak, E. F. (1981). Teaching and the psychology of the self. American Journal of Education, 90(1), 1-13.
• Robinson, K. (2011). Out of our minds. London: Capstone Publishing Ltd.
• Ruegg, R. (2018). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on changes in EFL students’ writing self-efficacy. The Language Learning Journal, 46(2), 87-102.
• Russell, J., & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar: A meta-analysis of the research. In J. Norris and L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 133-164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Sağlamel, H. (2018). A comparison of the impact of teacher feedback within and irrespective of the English as a foreign language learners' zone of proximal development (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Institute of Social Sciences, Trabzon,
• Stevick, E. W. (1980). Teaching languages: A way and ways. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.
• Tobin, S. A. (1991). A comparison of psychoanalytic self psychology and Carl Rogers’s person centered therapy. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 31, 9-33.
• Tolpin, M. (1971). On the beginnings of a cohesive self. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 26, 316-352.
• Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language learning, 46(2), 327-369. Valenzuela, H. (2005). Colourful correction. Modern English Teacher 14(2), 42-44.
• Van Beuningen, C. (2010). Corrective feedback in L2 writing: Theoretical perspectives, empirical insights, and future directions. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 1-27.
• Zhang, S. (1995). Reexamining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4(3), 209-222.