Exploring the Use of Oral Corrective Feedback in Turkish EFL Classrooms: The Case at a State University

Özlem Fakazlı

Abstract


     This classroom research study investigates how a non-native teacher of English provided corrective feedback to Turkish EFL learners. More specifically, the study aims to identify language errors produced by the students, corrective feedback types employed by the teacher, and students’ uptake rate following the provided feedback. The needed data were collected through audio-recording, transcribed, and analyzed in detail for the type of learner errors, type of teacher feedback, and rate of learner uptake. Results revealed that grammatical errors were found to be the most produced error type, and lexical errors were found to be least produced error type. The study came to another conclusion that recast was the most frequently preferred, and clarification request was the least frequently preferred corrective feedback type by the teacher. It was also found that all feedback types led to successful correction of erroneous utterances of the students with 100% learner uptake rate.


Keywords


Classroom research; error correction ;oral corrective feedback.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ahangari, S., & Amirzadeh,S. (2011). Exploring the teachers’ use of spoken corrective feedback in teaching Iranian EFL learners at different levels of proficiency. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1859- 1868.

Ajideh, P., & FareedAghdam, E. (2012). English language teachers’ corrective feedback types in relation to the learners’ profi-ciency levels and their error types. Journal of Academic and Applied Studies, 2(8) & 2(9), 37-51.

Brown, D. B. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York: Pearson.

Büyükbay, S. (2007). The effectiveness of repetition as corrective feedback type. Unpublished MA Thesis, Bilkent University, Ankara.

Carroll, S., & 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.

Celce- Murcia, M. (2001). Teaching English as a second or foreign language. New York : Newburry House.

Choi, S., & Li, S. (2012). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in a child ESOL classroom. RELC Journal, 43(3), 331-351.

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.

Coskun, A.(2010). A classroom research study on oral error correction. Humanizing Language Teaching Magazine, 12(3).

Creswell, J.W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.

Doughty, C. (1994). Finetuning of feedback by competent speakers to language learners. In J. Alatis (Ed.), Strategic interaction and language acquisition: Theory, practice, and research. GURT 1993 (pp. 96-108). Washington: Georgetown University Press.

Ellis, R. (1993). Second language acquisition and the structural syllabus. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 91-113.

Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, N. C. (2005). At the interface: How explicit knowledge affects implicit language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305–352.

Ellis, R., Loewen, S. & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339-368.

Fotos, S.S. (1994). Integrating grammar instruction and communicative language use through grammar consciousness-raising tasks. TESOL Quarterly, 28 (2), 323-351.

Krashen, S. (1981a). Second language acquisition and language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford :Pergamon Press.

Krashen, S. (1985). The input Hypothesis: Issues and implications. Beverly Hills, CA: Laredo.

Kennedy, S. (2010). Corrective feedback for learners of varied proficiency levels: A teacher’s choices. TESL Canada Journal, 27(2), 31-49.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principals in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lee, E.J. (2013). Corrective feedback preferences and learner repair among advanced ESL students. System, 41(2), 217-230.

Lightbown, P. M, & Spada, N. (1990). Focus on form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on L2. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 429-448.

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, 271-283.

Long, M. H. (1985). Input and second language acquisition theory. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 377-393). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Long, M.H. (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.

Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66.

Mackey, A., & Philip, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 338-356.

Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language Learning, 51, 719-758.

Oliver, R., & Mackey, A. (2003). Interactional context and feedback in child ESL classrooms. The Modern Language Journal, 87 (4), 519-533.

Öztürk, G. (2016). An investigation on the use of oral corrective feedback in Turkish EFL classrooms. Journal of Language and Linguistics Studies, 12(2), 22-37.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schachter, J. (1991). Corrective feedback in historical perspective. Second Language Research, 7, 80-102.

Schmidt, R (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129-158.

Suzuki,M. (2005). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in adult ESL classrooms. Teachers College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 1-21.

Swain, M.(1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its devel-opment. In S. M. Gass, & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp.235-253). London: Newbury House.

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.

Terrell, T. D. (1977). A natural approach to second language acquisition and learning. The Modern Language Journal, 61(7), 325-337.

Terrell, T. D. (1982). The natural approach to language teaching: An update. The Modern Language Journal,66, 121- 132.

White, L. (1991). Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some effects of positive and negative evidence in the class-room. L2 Research, 7, 133-161.

Yoshida, R. (2010). Teachers’ choice and learners’ preference of corrective feedback types. Language Awareness, 17(1), 78-93.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.2971

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.



Creative Commons License  
 Kastamonu Eğitim'de yayınlanan tüm içerik ve makaleler "Creative Commons Alıntı 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı" ile lisanslanmıştır.