The Effect of Explicit Feedback in Oral Performance in Use of Past Tense

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2, 35 - 42, 27.11.2019

Kübra Şendoğan Mukaddes Çoban Dilay İşık Kirişci Simay Uluscu Mustafa Polat

https://doi.org/10.33710/sduijes.593790

Öz

The correction of grammar was said not to be
facilitating in the language learning process by some researchers, including
Krashen (1982, 1985) because it might affect learners negatively. However, the
feedback has been studied in terms of its influence on language acquisition,
and many studies point the positive effect of feedback on language learning
(Ellis, Loewen, & Erlam, 2006; Khanlarzadeh & Nemati, 2016; Russel
& Spada, 2006). Concordantly, this study examined the effect of corrective
feedback on performance in speaking tasks targeting the use of simple past
tense. Since many studies on corrective feedback (CF) focused on feedback on
writing, especially in regard to grammatical errors, the present study aimed to
contribute to the existing prose with the focus of oral performance and
speaking. The participants were first-year students at a private university in
Istanbul. Since intact classrooms were used to create samples, a
quasi-experimental design was applied. A pre-test was applied to identify their
current competence of the target topic in terms of oral production. The control
and experimental groups were assigned randomly. The experimental group received
explicit feedback, while the control group was not exposed to any kind of
feedback. Verbal feedback was provided with regard to grammatical error
correction. Pre-test and post-test results of control and experimental groups
which were examined indicated that the experimental group receiving feedback
for six weeks outperformed the control group. Based on this finding, corrective
feedback can be considered as a facilitating tool for speaking activities with
a grammar focus.

Anahtar Kelimeler

corrective feedback, oral performance, explicit feed, past simple

Kaynakça

• Ajabshir, Z. F. (2014). The effect of implicit and explicit types of feedback on learners’ pragmatic development. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 463-471.
• Bitchener, J. & Knoch, U. (2009). The relative effectiveness of different types of direct written corrective feedback. System, 37, 322-329. Daneshvar, E., & Rahimi, A. (2014). Written corrective feedback and teaching grammar. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,136, 217-221.
• Ellis, R. (2006). Researching the effects of form-focused instruction on L2 acquisition. In K. Bardovi-Harlig & Z. Dornyei (Eds.), Themes in SLA research. 18-41.
• Ellis, R. , Loewen, S. & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339-368.
• Farrokhi, F., & Chehrazad, M. H. (2012). The Effects of Planned Focus on Form on Iranian EFL Learners’ Oral Accuracy. World Journal of Education, 2(1), 70-81.doi:10.5430/wje.v2n1p70
• Gitsaki, C., & Althabaiti, N. (2010). EFL teachers' use of corrective feedback and its effect on learners' uptake. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 7(1), 197-219.
• Jabbari, A. A., & Fazilatfar, A. M. (2012). The Role of Error Types and Feedback in Iranian EFL Classrooms. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2(1), 135-148.doi:10.5539/ijel.v2n1p135
• Khanlarzadeh, M., & Nemati, M. (2016). The effect of written corrective feedback on grammatical accuracy of EFL students: An improvement over previous unfocused designs. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 4(2), 55-68.
• Kim, J. H. (2004). Issues of corrective feedback in second language acquisition. Working Papers in Applied Linguistics & TESOL, 4(2), 1-24.
• Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practices in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon Press.
• Krashen, S.D. (1985). The input hypothesis: issues and implications. New York: Longman.
• Long, M. H. (1996). The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie and T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition. 413-468.
• Lyster, R., Saito, K. & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in L2 classrooms. Language Teaching, 46(1), 1-40.
• Öztürk, G. (2016). An investigation on the use of oral corrective feedback in Turkish EFL classrooms. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 12(2), 22-37. Russell, J. & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar. In J. M. Norris, and L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching. 133-164.
• Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129-158.
• Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8(3), 263-300. Swain, M. (1995) Three functions of output in second language learning. In Cook, G. and Seidelhofer, B. (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H.G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.