STUDENT TEACHERS’ BELIEFS ABOUT CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK

Yıl 2020, Sayı: 41, 416 - 430, 29.12.2020

Ali Rezalou

https://doi.org/10.33418/ataunikkefd.795512

Cited By: 1

Öz

This research study compared the student teachers’ beliefs about corrective feedback in the EFL learning context in the 2018-2019 academic year, spring semester. The participants (n=180, male=67, female=113) in the EFL learning context completed a 20-item questionnaire dealing with various aspects of feedback. Descriptive statistics were used to identify the frequency of participants’ responses with different degrees to different aspects indicated by each item and responses were surprisingly interesting. To determine the effects of gender and grade level factors on choosing items independent sample t-test and one-way ANOVA conducted. The results suggest that student teachers’ beliefs about corrective feedback are not mainly influenced by their genders and grade levels. The results demonstrated student teachers perceived explicit and implicit correction, form-focused correction, and clarification requests positively. It was also indicated that self-correction was preferable to teacher correction and peer-correction. Also, oral was preferred to written corrective feedback. As for the timing, it was found that student teachers preferred delayed corrective feedback to immediate corrective feedback. Recasts were perceived as the second commonly used corrective feedback technique by student teachers. The major conclusion that emerged from this study was that EFL student teachers’ beliefs about corrective feedback and error treatment, in particular, maybe influence their initial teaching practices

Anahtar Kelimeler

Students teachers’ beliefs, corrective feedback,, EFL,

STUDENT TEACHERS’ BELIEFS ABOUT CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK

Öz

Bu çalışma öğretmen adaylarının 2018-2019 akademik yılında düzeltici geribildirim hakkındaki fikirlerini karşılaştırmıştır. İngilizce Öğretmenliği programında öğrenim gören katılımcılar (n=180, erkek=67, kadın=113), geribildirimin çeşitli yönlerini ele alan 20 maddelik bir anketi cevaplamışlardır. Katılımcıların, her bir maddeye verdiği yanıtlar betimsel istatistikler kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Cinsiyet ve sınıf düzeyi faktörlerinin madde seçimine etkisini belirlemek için ise bağımsız örnekler t-testi ve tek yönlü ANOVA kullanılmıştır. Sonuçlar, öğretmen adaylarının düzeltici geribildirim hakkındaki fikirlerinin cinsiyetlerinden ve sınıf seviyelerinden etkilenmediğini göstermektedir. Sonuçlar öğretmen adaylarının açık ve örtük, form odaklı ve açıklama istekli düzeltmeleri olumlu olarak algıladığını da göstermiştir. Kendi kendine düzeltmenin öğretmen düzeltmesine ve akran düzeltmesine tercih edildiği de bir diğer önemli sonuç olmuştur. Ayrıca sözlü düzeltici geri bildirim, yazılı düzeltici geri bildirime tercih edilmiştir. Geribildirimler zamanlama açısından incelendiğinde, öğretmen adaylarının gecikmeli düzeltici geribildirimi anında düzeltici geribildirime tercih ettikleri görülmüştür. Çalışma kapsamında ayrıca yeniden düzeltme, öğretmen adayları tarafından yaygın olarak kullanılan ikinci düzeltici geribildirim tekniği olarak bulunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Öğretmen adaylarının fikirleri, düzeltici geribildirim, ELT

Kaynakça

• Ammar, A. and Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(4), 543-574. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0272263106060268
• Agudo, J. (2014). “Beliefs in learning to teach: EFL student teachers’ beliefs about corrective feedback.” In English as a foreign language teacher education. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill | Rodopi. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401210485_013
• Baleghizadeh, S. and S. Rezaef (2010). Pre-service teacher cognition on corrective feedback: A case study, Journal of Technology & Education 4 (4): 321-327.
• Barcelos, A. M. F. and Kalaja, P. (2011). Introduction to beliefs about SLA revisited. System, 39(3), 281-289. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. system.2011.07.001.
• Basturkmen H. (2012). Review of research into the correspondence between language teachers’ stated beliefs and practices. System, 40(2), 282-295. http://dx.doi.org/10.106/j.system. 2012.05.001
• Bernat, E. and Lloyd, R. (2007). Exploring the gender effect on EFL learners` beliefs about language learning. Australian Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 7, 79-91.
• Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching 36 (2): 81-109.
• Brown, A. (2009). Students and teachers’ perceptions of effective foreign language teaching: A comparison of ideals. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 46-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1540-4781.2009.00827.x
• Burgess, J. and S. Etherington (2002). Focus on grammatical form: explicit or implicit, System 30: 433-458.
• Carroll, S. and Swain, M. (1993). Explicit and implicit negative feedback: An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 357-386. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0272263100012158
• Cathcart, R. L. and Olsen, J. E. W. B. (1976). Teachers’ and students’ preferences for correction of classroom conversation errors. In J. F. Fanselow & R. H. Crymes (Eds.), On TESOL ’76 (pp. 41-53). Washington, DC: TESOL.
• Chenoweth, N. A., Day, R.R., Chun, A.E. and Luppescu, S. (1983). Attitudes and preferences of ESL students to error correction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6(1), 79-87. http://dx.doi. org/10.1017/s0272263100000310
• Doughty, C. (2001). Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 206-57). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Dörnyei, Z. and Ryan, S. (2015). The psychology of the language learner revisited. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Ellis, R. (2006). Researching the effects of form-focused instruction on L2 acquisition. AILA Review, 19, 18-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/aila.19.04ell
• Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development, L2 Journal 1 (1): 3-18.
• Ellis, R., Loewen, S. and Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339-368.
• Guénette, D. (2007) Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues in studies of feedback on writing, Journal of Second Language Writing 16: 40-53.
• Horwitz, E. K. (1987). Surveying student beliefs about language teaming. In A. L. Wenden & J. Robin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 119-132). London, England: Prentice-Hall.
• Horwitz, E. K. (1988). The beliefs about language learning of beginning university foreign language students. Modern Language Journal, 72(3), 283-294. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1988. Tb04190.x
• Horwitz, E. K. (1990). Attending to the affective domain in the foreign language classroom. In S. Magnan (Ed.), shifting the instructional focus to the learner (pp. 15-33). Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages, Middlebury, VT.
• Jean, G. and Simard. D. (2011). Grammar learning in English and French L2: Students’and teachers’ beliefs and perceptions. Foreign Language Annals, 44(3), 467-494. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1944-9720.2011.01143.x
• Kalaja, P. and Barcelos, A. M. F. (2003). Beliefs about SLA: New research approaches. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4751-0
• Karavas-Doukas, E. (1996) Using attitude scales to investigate teachers’ attitudes to the communicative approach, ELT Journal 50 (3): 187–198.
• Lee, E. J. (2013). Corrective feedback preferences and learner repair among advanced ESL students. System, 41, 217-230.
• Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309-365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561
• 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), 271-283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0883-0355(03)00005-3
• Loewen, S. and R. Erlam (2006). Corrective feedback in the chatroom: An experimental study, Computer Assisted Language Learning 19 (1): 1–14.
• Loewen, S. and T. Nabei (2007). Measuring the effects of oral corrective feedback on L2 knowledge. In Mackey, A. (ed) Conversational Interaction in Second Language Acquisition: A Collection of Empirical Studies, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 361-377.
• Loewen, S., Li, S., Fei, F., Thompson, A., Nakatsukasa, K., Ahn, S. and Chen, X. (2009). Second language learners’ beliefs about grammar instruction and error correction. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 91-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00830.x
• Long, M. H. (1997). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
• Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts on form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(3), 399-432. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0272263104263021
• Lyster, R. and Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37-61. http://dx.doi. org/10.1017/s0272263197001034
• Lyster, R., P. M. Lightbown and N. Spada (1999). A response to Truscott’s ‘What’s wrong with oral grammar correction’?, Canadian Modern Language Review 55 (4): 457-467.
• Lyster, R. and Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 265-302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0272263109990520
• Mackey, A. and Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: a meta-analysis and research synthesis. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 407-452). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi. org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0551
• Mohamed Hassan Mohamed, R. (2011). Les croyances des enseignants et des apprenants adultes quant à la rétroaction corrective à l’oral et la pratique réelle en classe de français langue étrangère en Égypte. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Montreal.
• Nassaji, H. and Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching grammar in second language classrooms: Integrating Form- Focused Instruction in communicative context. London, England: Routledge.
• Nunan, D. (1989). Hidden agendas: The role of the learner in programme implementation. In R. Johnson (eE.), The second language curriculum (pp. 176-186). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139524520.013
• Oladejo, J. (1993). Error correction in ESL: Learners` preferences. TESL Canada Journal, 10(2), 71- 89. http://dx.doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v10i2.619
• Panova, I. and Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36(4), 573-595. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3588241
• Peacock, M. (2001). Pre-service ESL teachers’ beliefs about second language learning: A longitudinal study, System 29 (2): 177-195.
• Rassaei, E. (2013). Corrective feedback, learners’ perceptions, and second language development. System, 41, 472-483.
• Rassaei, E. and Moinzadeh, A. (2012). Effects of recasts and metalinguistic corrective feedback on the acquisition of implicit and explicit L2 knowledge. The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 144-156.
• Rifkin, B. (2000). Revising beliefs about foreign language learning. Foreign Language Annals, 33(4), 394-420. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2000.tb00621.x
• Russell, J. and Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for second language acquisition: A meta-analysis of the research. In J. Norris & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 131-164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1075/lllt.13.09val.
• 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1996.tb01247.x
• Schulz, R. A. (2001). Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA — Columbia. The Modern Language Journal, 85(2), 244-258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0026-7902.00107
• Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8, 263-300. http://dx.doi. org/10.1191/1362168804lr146oa
• Sheen, Y. (2006). Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner uptake. Language Teaching Research, 10(4), 361-392. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/1362168806lr203oa
• Simon, E. and Taverniers, M. (2011). Advanced EFL learners` beliefs about language learning and teaching: A comparison between grammar, pronunciation, and vocabulary. English Studies, 92(8), 896-922. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0013838X.2011.604578
• Slimani, A. (1991). Evaluation of classroom interaction. In C. Anderson & A. Berretta (Eds.), Evaluating second language education (pp. 197-220). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139524575.009
• Stergiopoulou, E. (2012). Comparing experienced and inexperienced foreign language teachers’ beliefs about language learning and teaching, Research on Steiner Education 3 (1): 103-113.
• Tercanlıoğlu, L. (2005). Pre-service EFL teachers’ beliefs about foreign language learning and how they relate to gender. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 5(3.1), 145- 162.
• Wenden, A. (1999). An introduction to metacognitive knowledge and beliefs in language learning: Beyond the basics. System, 27, 435-441. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0346-251x (99)00043-3
• Yang, J. S. and Kim, T. Y. (2011). Sociocultural analysis of second language learner beliefs: a qualitative case study of two study-abroad ESL learners. System, 39(3), 325-334. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.system.2011.07.005
• Yoshida, R. (2008). Teachers’ choice and learners’ preference for corrective-feedback types. Language Awareness, 17(1), 78-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.2167/la429.0 Zhang, L. J. and Rahimi, M. (2014). EFL learners’ anxiety level and their beliefs about corrective feedback in oral communication classes. System, 42, 429-439.