Error feedback in second language speaking: Investigating the impact of modalities of error feedback on intermediate EFL students’ speaking ability

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1, 63 - 80, 27.03.2020

Alireza Khoram Ali Darabi Bazvand Jwamer Sarkawt Sarhad

https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.710205

Cited By: 3

Öz

Over the past few decades, error feedback has received substantial attention in language pedagogy. Despite this, few studies have been carried out on the effect and benefits of various modalities of error feedback on the oral proficiency of the intermediate EFL learners. To this end, an experimental design was adopted and implemented with 80 female high school students who were divided into four groups, namely, the intra-error feedback group (Intra-EF group), the inter-error feedback group (Inter-EF group), the teacher error feedback group (TEF group), and the control group. Treatment sessions for the experimental groups included three sessions for completing the speaking tasks and three sessions for feedback conferences. The participants in all groups completed the same speaking activities under the same process of discussion, but received different modalities of error feedback in feedback sessions. Results of T-test, one-way ANOVA and Scheffe Post Hoc test revealed that different stages of peer error feedback (i.e., intra- and inter-error feedback), as well as teacher error feedback influenced the learners’ speaking ability. Additionally, peer error feedback and teacher error feedback exerted different effects on their speaking ability.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Intra-error feedback; inter-error feedback; teacher feedback; speaking ability

Kaynakça

• Afitska, O. (2012). Role of focus-on-form instruction, corrective feedback and uptake in second language classrooms: Some insights from recent second language acquisition research. The Language Learning Journal, 43(1), 1-17.
• Berg, E. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response on ESL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 215-241.
• Brookfield, S. D., & Preskill, S. (1999). Discussion as a way of teaching. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.
• Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by principles. White Plains: Pearson Education.
• Brown, H. D. (2014). The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta analysis. Language Teaching Research, 29, 27-32.
• Chastain, K. (1988). Developing second language skills: Theory and practice. Florida: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Incorporation.
• Chehr Azad, M., H., Farrokhi, F., & Zohrabi, M. (2018). The effect of corrective feedback on Iranian EFL learners’ spoken repair fluency and its relationship with spoken complexity and accuracy. International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies, 6(1), 38-47.
• Chen, S., & Nassaji, H. (2018). Focus on form and corrective feedback research at the University of Victoria, Canada. Language Teaching, 51( 2), 278-283.
• Chu, R. (2011). Effects of teacher’s corrective feedback on accuracy in the oral English of English-majors college students. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(5), 454- 459.
• Dong, Z. (2012). Beliefs and practices: A case study on oral corrective feedback in the teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language (TCFL) classroom (Unpublished master’s thesis). Arizona State University, AZ, USA.
• Doughty, C., & Williams, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114- 138). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Edge, J. (1989). Mistakes and correction. Harlow: Longman.
• Egi, T. (2010). Uptake, modified output, and learner perceptions of recasts: Learner responses as language awareness. Modern Language Journal, 94, 1-21.
• Ellis, R. (2007). The differential effects of corrective feedback on two grammatical structures. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (pp.339-360). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1, 3-18.
• Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51, 281–318.
• Ellis. R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339–358.
• Gass, S. M., Mackey, A., & Pica, T. (1998). The role of input and interaction in second language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 299–307.
• Gass, S. M., & Varonis, E. M. (1994). Input, interaction, and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 283–302.
• Gumbaridze, J. (2013). Error correction in EFL speaking classrooms. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 1660-1663.
• Gurzynski-Weiss, L. & Revesz, A. (2012). Tasks, teacher feedback, and learner modified output in naturally occurring classroom interaction. Language Learning, 62, 851-879.
• Harmer, J. (2007). How to teach English. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited: Longman.
• Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers (2nd Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Kai, Z., & Tongshun, W. (2015). A review of studies on corrective feedback in interaction. Journal of Ocean University of China, 2, 116-121.
• Lee, M. K. (2015). Peer feedback in second language writing: Investigating junior secondary students' perspectives on inter-feedback and intra-feedback. System, 55, 1- 10.
• Lee, A. H., & Lyster, R. (2016). Effects of different types of corrective feedback on receptive skills in a second language: A speech perception training study. Language Learning, 66, 1–25.
• Leki, I. (1991). The preference of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24, 203-218.
• Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309-365.
• Li, S. (2014). Oral corrective feedback. ELT Journal, 68(2), 196-198.
• Lin, H. H. (2009). Patterns of corrective feedback and learner uptake in ESL low, intermediate, and advanced level speaking classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Alliant International University, San Diego, CA, USA
• Loewen, S. (2015). Introduction to instructed second language acquisition. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Loewen, S., & Nabei, T. (2007). Measuring the effects of oral corrective feedback on L2 knowledge. In
• A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 361–376). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Long, M. (1996). 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.
• Long, M. H. (2007). Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Lyster, R. (1998). Recasts, repetition, and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 51-81.
• Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37–66.
• Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (2013). Counterpoint piece: The case for variety in corrective feedback research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(1), 167- 184.
• Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 265–302.
• Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46, 1-40.
• Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction, and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 557–587.
• Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 27, 405-430.
• Margolis, D. P. (2007). Impacts of oral error feedback in Korean university EFL classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI, USA.
• McDonough, K. (2005). Identifying the impact of negative feedback and learners’ responses on ESL question development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 79-103.
• Min, H. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33, 293-308.
• Nassaji, H. (2009). Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning, 59, 411-452.
• Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language Learning, 51, 719–758.
• Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417-528.
• Oliver, R. (1995). Negative feedback in child NS–NNS conversation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 459-481.
• Oliver, R., & Mackey, A. (2003). Interactional context and feedback in child ESL classrooms. Modern Language Journal, 87, 519-533.
• Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 573-595.
• Plonsky, L., & Brown, D. (2016). Domain definition and search techniques in meta-analyses of L2 research (Or why 18 meta-analysis of feedback have different results). Second Language Research, 31, 267-278.
• Plonsky, L., & Gass, S. (2011). Quantitative research methods, study quality, and outcomes: The case of interaction research. Language Learning, 61, 325–366.
• Radecki, P., & Swales, J. (1988). ESL student reaction to written comments on their written work. System, 16, 355-365.
• Rahimi, A., & Vahid Dastjerdi, H. (2012). Impact of immediate and delayed error correction on EFL learners’ oral production: CAF. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 45–54.
• Ranta, L., & Lyster, R. (2007). A cognitive approach to improving immersion students’ oral language abilities: The awareness-practice-feedback sequence. In R. M. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 141– 160). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Rassaei, E. (2013). Corrective feedback, learners’ perceptions, and L2 development. System, 41, 472–483.
• Rassaei, E., & Moinzadeh, A. (2014). Recasts, metalinguistic feedback, and learners’ perceptions: A case of Persian EFL learners. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 8 (1), 39-55.
• Russell, J., & 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: Benjamins.
• Saito, K., & Hanzawa, K. (2015). Developing second language oral ability in foreign language classrooms: The role of the length and focus of instruction and individual differences. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(4), 813-840.
• Sato, M. (2011). Constitution of form-orientation: Contributions of context and explicit knowledge to learning from recasts. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14, 1- 28.
• Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency development: monitoring, practice and proceduralization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 591-626.
• Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 206–226.
• Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1–63). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai Press.
• Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32).New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8, 263–300.
• Sheen, Y. (2008). Recasts, language anxiety, modified output, and L2 learning. Language Learning, 58,835-874.
• Sheen, Y. (2010). Differential effects of oral and written corrective Feedback in the ESL classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32, 203– 234.
• Sheen, Y. (2011). Corrective feedback, individual differences and second language learning. New York: Springer.
• Sheen, Y., & Ellis, R. (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (Vol. 2, pp. 593-610). New York: Routledge.
• Simard, D., & Jean, G. (2011). An exploration of L2 teachers’ use of pedagogical interventions devised to draw L2 learners’ attention to form. Language Learning, 61, 759–785.
• Straub, R. (1997). Students’ reactions to teacher comments: An exploratory study. Research in the Teaching of English, 31, 91-119.
• Su, T., & Tian, J. (2016).Research on corrective feedback in ESL/EFL classrooms. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(2), 439-444,
• Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principles and Practice in the Study of Language: Studies in Honour of H.G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press
• Tedick, D., & de Gortari, B. (1998). Research on error correction and implications for classroom teaching. The ACIE newsletter, 1(3), 1-8.
• Tsang, W. K. (2004). Feedback and uptake in teacher-student interaction: An analysis of 18 English lessons in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. RELC Journal, 35(2), 187-209.
• Wang, Z. Q. (2014). Developing accuracy and fluency in spoken English of Chinese EFL learners. English Language Teaching, 7 (2), 110-118.
• Yoshida, R. (2010). How do teachers and learners perceive correction feedback in the Japanese language classroom? Modern Language Journal, 94(2), 293-314.