BELIEF SYSTEM TOWARDS EXPLICIT CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN EFL CLASSROOM: THE CASE OF FOUNDATION STUDENTS OF OMAN COLLEGE OF HEALTH SCIENCES

Authors

  • Marlon P. Manuel Dr., Faculty of English Oman College of Health Sciences Sohar City, Sultanate of Oman

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46827/ejel.v0i0.2262

Keywords:

explicit corrective feedback, belief system, instrumental, retentive effect, speaking skill

Abstract

Explicit corrective feedback has always been a topic of huge interest among educators. While various studies have investigated on certain types of error treatment methods, there has been little research conducted to look into explicit corrective feedback. The current research was designed to investigate the belief system of students on explicit corrective feedback in ESL classroom, particularly in speaking classes. The sample of the study consisted of 30 Omani EFL foundation learners which were randomly selected. In this study a series of qualitative survey tasks were conducted to determine the attitude of the respondents towards the method, the impact to respondents’ speaking fluency and the type of error treatment in which they are at ease most. Results revealed that respondents have positive attitude towards the method as they perceived it as instrumental in improving their speaking errors in grammar, diction, pronunciation and intonation. Additionally, majority of them opined that ECF is on top of all other corrective types when it comes to effect and value owing to its retentive effect. These emphasize the need to foster this method in EFL environment where teacher's feedback is the most important step through which learners improve their language proficiency.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter

DOI

References

Carpenter, H., Jeon, K., MacGregor, D., & Macky, A. (2006). Learners’ interpretation of recasts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 209-236.

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

Fu, T. (2012). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in a Chinese as a foreign language class: Do perceptions and the reality match? Unpublished master thesis. University of Victoria.

Lyster, R., & Ranta, E. (1997).Corrective feedback and learner uptake: negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-61.

Lyster, R. (1998). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 48, 183- 218.

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

Panova, I. & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36(4), 573-595.

Pawlak, M. & Pospieszyn´ska, M. (2003). Does implicit corrective feedback work for pronunciation errors? In W. Sobkowiak & E. Waniek-Klimczak (Eds.). Dydaktyka fonetyki je˛zyka obcego (pp.125–138). Płock: Wydawnictwo Pan´stwowej Wy zszej Szkoły Zawodowej w Płocku.

Pennington, M. C. & Richards, J. C. (1986). Pronunciation revisited. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 207-225.

Richards, J.C. & Schmidt, R. (2010). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics (4th ed.) Harlow: Longman Group UK Limited.

Rosa, E. & Leow, R. (2004). Computerized task-based exposure, expliteness, type of feedback and Spanish L2 development. Modern Language Journal, 88, 192-216.

Russell, J. & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar: A meta-analysis of the research. In J. Norris and L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp.133-164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

Saito, K. & Lyster, R. (2011). Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of /r/ by Japanese learners of English. Language Learning.

Sanz, C. (2003). Computer delivered implicit vs. explicit feedback in processing instruction. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction (pp. 241-256). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 128-158.

Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners' acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 255-283.

Downloads

Published

2019-02-12

Issue

Vol 4, No 3 (2019)

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

 

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).