scholarly journals Spoken Error Correction Practices and Beliefs of EFL University Teachers in Saudi Arabia

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-75
Author(s):  
Hira Hanif

Despite the wealth of knowledge in the field of oral corrective feedback, empirical evidence is still scarce regarding the EFL teachers’ OCF perceptions and practices in Saudi Arabian context. This study therefore, sought to gain an understanding of teachers’ use of oral corrective feedback (OCF) in the Saudi Arabian EFL context. The following two questions guided the study: 1) According to teachers, what are the methods/strategies by which they provide oral corrective feedback (OCF) in the Saudi Arabian EFL context? 2) Is the teachers’ oral corrective behaviour in this context informed by the research?  For this purpose, a short questionnaire was designed and distributed among EFL instructors in Saudi Arabia. The research paper suggests that the OCF practices of EFL teachers in Saudi are mostly inline with the research.

Author(s):  
Fateme Saeb

Perceptions and perspectives about corrective feedback (CF) have recently attracted some attention in the CF literature. Few studies, however, have delved into students’ and teachers’ CF perceptions and preferences and compared them. This study is an attempt to explore Iranian EFL teachers’ and students’ perceptions and preferences for different amounts and types of oral corrective feedback. Two parallel questionnaires were used to gather quantitative and qualitative data from twenty eight teachers and eighty six of their students. Results revealed significant differences between teachers’ and students’ perceptions about the amounts and types of CF and also about different types of errors to be corrected. Contrary to their teachers, students in this study were found to be seeking large amounts of explicit corrective feedback provided by the teacher.  As for the pedagogical implications, ‘meta-correction’ is suggested as a solution to the problem of conflicting CF perceptions of students and teachers and to improve and enhance error correction practices within Iranian EFL context. 


Author(s):  
Abeer Al-Ghazo

<p>The aim of the present study was to explore the Jordanian EFL teachers' error correction strategies for the classroom oral proficiency at secondary level. For the purpose of obtaining information needed to achieve the    objectives of the study, the researchers used the Teacher's Preference Elicitation Questionnaire.  This Questionnaire was adapted from Michael (2007) to elicit the types of oral corrective feedback that teachers prefer to use to correct their students' oral errors, grammatical and pronunciation errors.  The questionnaire was administered to40 teachers. The findings revealed that the teachers used all types of oral corrective feedback with a grand mean of (3.29) .Meta linguistic feedback , recast, elicitation, instructions and questioning (Peer-correction) were reported to be the most  used strategies of oral corrective feedback.</p>


2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yusuf Demir ◽  
Kemal Sinan Özmen

Commonly defined as L2 teachers’ responses to learners’ erroneous utterances, oral correctivefeedback (OCF) is an interactional classroom phenomenon which frequently occurs in foreignlanguage classes and has gained growing momentum in SLA research in recent years.However, how OCF preferences of English teachers vary in terms of their native-nonnativespeaker status remains as an uncharted territory of inquiry specifically in an expanding-circlecontext. This study aims to reveal the differences between in-class OCF practices of native andnon-native English-speaking teachers (NESTs & NNESTs) in Turkish EFL context and toexplore the cross-cultural influences that might affect these practices. To these ends, structuredclassroom observations and interviews were conducted with seven NESTs and seven NNESTs.The findings of the observations showed that the NESTs’ and NNESTs’ in-class OCF practicesdiffered considerably in terms of their tolerance of errors, preferred OCF types, the amount ofOCF and different types of OCF to different types of errors. Moreover, the follow-up interviewfindings demonstrated some similar and different dispositions between the teacher groupsconcerning several dimensions (whether, how, when, and which errors should be corrected, andby whom) including the effect of teaching experience and teacher education on their OCF-giving patterns.


2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nesa Bandarchian Rashti ◽  
Maryam Danaye Tous

<p>For decades now, there has been a good deal of research on factors affecting students’ oral corrective feedback preferences. Although it has been proven that learners’ characteristics such as their verbal intelligence and attitude toward error correction are highly effective in students’ preferred type of oral corrective feedback, the claims regarding the impact of learners’ proficiency level on their choice of oral corrective feedback have yet to be fully substantiated. In order to take this line of research one step forward, it is important to examine the potential effect of students’ level of proficiency in error correction literature. To this end, this paper aims to shed light on lower and higher level learners’ opinion about corrective feedback issues in an EFL context.</p>


2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 76
Author(s):  
Emre Debreli ◽  
Nazife Onuk

<p class="apa">In the area of language teaching, corrective feedback is one of the popular and hotly debated topics that have been widely explored to date. A considerable number of studies on students’ preferences of error correction and the effects of error correction approaches on student achievement do exist. Moreover, much on teachers’ preferences of error correction approaches has also been explored. However, less seems to be done with regard to teachers’ practices of error correction approaches, especially in the area of English as a Foreign Language (EFL). The present study explored EFL teacher’s preferences of error correction approaches in the speaking skill, and further focused on whether the teachers were able to employ the approaches they preferred in their classrooms. Data were collected from a group of 17 EFL teachers, through semi-structured interviews and classroom observations. The findings revealed that although the teachers had clear preferences for error correction approaches, they could not employ them in their classrooms owing to the educational programme constraints. Furthermore, it was observed that they often had to adopt approaches that they were not actually in favour of. Implications for programme and curriculum designers are further discussed.</p>


2020 ◽  
pp. 136216882093189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuan Van Ha ◽  
Jill C. Murray

This study investigates Vietnamese EFL teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding oral corrective feedback, exploring and seeking to explain some of the relationships between beliefs and classroom practices. Data were collected in primary schools in Vietnam, and consist of 24 classroom observations and interviews with six teachers. Overall, the teachers showed high levels of awareness of the benefits of oral corrective feedback. They nominated pronunciation errors as the most important target for correction in the primary context. In practice, although pronunciation and grammar accounted for the majority of the total errors, leading to the majority of total feedback moves, the frequency of feedback per error was much higher for vocabulary errors. Prompts were reported by teachers to be more effective and more favourable than reformulations, but this preference was not reflected in the classroom observations, in which a large number of didactic recasts were used. The observed discrepancies are interpreted in relation to contextual factors and the influence of different sets of beliefs on practices. It was also noted that the linguistic realizations of these teachers’ feedback moves contained some inaccuracies. Implications for educational practice are discussed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 129
Author(s):  
Mohamed B. Kasim Al-Azzawi ◽  
Angela O. Zaya Al-Barwari

This study aims to investigate types of oral corrective feedback strategies used by EFL teachers at secondary schools in Duhok city/Kurdistan region of Iraq. It also explores teachers’ attitudes towards the use of oral corrective feedback inside classrooms based on the three variables of gender, years of teaching experience, and the type of school (public or private). For these purposes, a classroom observation checklist was designed based on Panova and Lyster’s (2002) model of study in order to confirm the types of oral corrective feedback strategies used by the teachers, to highlight learners’ errors, and to examine the learners’ response to these strategies. Besides, a closed-ended questionnaire was distributed to the teachers to explore their attitudes about the effective use of oral corrective feedback. Fifty EFL teachers from twenty-five public and private secondary schools in Duhok were asked permission to attend their classes and observe the ways they correct their learners' errors. The data obtained from classroom observations and teachers’ responses to the questionnaire were identified, analysed quantitatively. The findings revealed that EFL teachers used different types of oral corrective feedback to learners’ errors. However, the most preferred correction strategy type used by them for correcting learners’ pronunciation errors was ‘recast’, and for grammatical errors was ‘metalinguistic explanation’. As for lexical errors, the strategy used most was ‘translation’. In terms of ‘learners’ uptake’, most of the corrective feedback provided resulted in ‘Repair’. Moreover, the study found out that EFL teachers have positive attitudes towards the use of oral corrective feedback. There were also no significant differences in their responses based on the three variables of gender, years of teaching experience and the type of school.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document