A cross-cultural comparison in pedagogical beliefs about oral corrective feedback: the case of English language teachers in China versus the U.S.

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Laura Mahalingappa ◽  
Nihat Polat ◽  
Rui Wang
2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Kartchava ◽  
Elizabeth Gatbonton ◽  
Ahlem Ammar ◽  
Pavel Trofimovich

This study investigated the relationship between pre-service English-as-a-second-language (ESL) teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and their actual teaching practices. To determine the nature of this relationship, 99 teachers-in-training with little or no teaching experience were asked to complete a questionnaire seeking information about their teaching beliefs, particularly about oral corrective feedback (i.e. teachers’ responses to students’ language errors). The teachers’ responses were subjected to an exploratory factor analysis which revealed several dimensions underlying their beliefs. To examine how these beliefs affect classroom performance, 10 of the teachers were first asked to indicate how they would correct language errors illustrated in hypothetical (videotaped) classroom scenarios and were then observed teaching an authentic ESL class. The classes were video-recorded and 30-minute teacher-fronted communicative segments from the lessons were analysed for the number and type of errors learners made and the teachers addressed. Results indicate a multifarious relationship between stated beliefs and actual teaching practices in that while the teachers corrected fewer errors than they believed they would, they preferred the same corrective techniques in both hypothetical and actual teaching situations. Most notably, the study suggests that the complexities of the language classroom and the pre-service teachers’ lack of experience at integrating theoretical knowledge and practical skills, lead them to behave overall as native-speaking interlocutors, not as language teachers. Implications for teacher training are discussed.


Feedback has been an important topic of discussion in language learning. Although research on written corrective feedback is available, there is little research on the specific strategies employed by teachers in order to provide feedback on their students’ essay writing. This paper reports part of a larger research. One of the objectives of this study was to explore corrective feedback strategies employed by the English as a second language (ESL) teachers and English language expert raters when assessing their students’ written essays. This study used qualitative case study which involved 12 participants. Data were collected through interviewing nine English language teachers and three English language expert raters to obtain their pedagogic practices in providing written corrective feedback. The strategies identified are based on Ellis’s typology of strategies for providing written corrective feedback. The findings showed that the preferred written corrective feedback strategy used by the teachers and raters was Metalinguistic Corrective Feedback with Direct Corrective Feedback and Focused Corrective Feedback used by only a few of them. This study has pedagogical implications in that it explains the ESL teachers/expert raters’ pedagogical attitude and practices towards error correction and their preferred written corrective feedback strategies in dealing with error correction.


2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sawa Senzaki ◽  
Laura A. DeBroux ◽  
Daniela Navaes ◽  
Diogo Cavalcanti ◽  
Kathleen Stetter

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daichi Sugawara ◽  
Yuta Chishima ◽  
Takahiro Kubo ◽  
Raja Intan Arifah Binti Raja Shah ◽  
Evone Yee Mun Phoo ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 310-322
Author(s):  
Leila Tajik ◽  
Ameneh Ramezani

Abstract Despite the importance attached in the literature to the use of hedges, the study of hedging has been shown to target, mainly, the written corpora of various types and so remains neglected in naturally occurring speech. Moreover, the existing discussion predominantly encompass cross-cultural variation in the use of hedging devices and gender as a variable has largely been overlooked. This study was conducted to shed more light on the differences between 4 Iranian male and female English instructors’use of hedging and its different realizations in their actual speech. One teaching session of each instructor was videotaped and the instructors were asked to view their video and to recollect their reasons for resorting to different activities for teaching. Their recollections were recorded and transcribed. Based on Hyland’s classification of hedges, the frequency and realization of hedging in male and female corpus were identified. Results showed considerable differences in the overall distribution of hedges as well as certain types of hedging linguistic devices throughout the male and female corpus.


1998 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 755-761 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc J. Dollinger ◽  
Wade Danis

398 graduate and undergraduate business students from the USA, Japan, and Hong Kong were administered Kirton's (1976) Adaption-Innovation Inventory of decision style. Analysis of variance showed that mean group scores differed significantly with the U.S. respondents showing a preference for the Innovator style and the Chinese respondents the Adaptor style. Contrary to our hypotheses, the Japanese respondents did not show a clear preference for either style. We hypothesize that the differences among groups may be a function of cultural values and discuss the implications of our findings for managing cross-cultural teams.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document