TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ABOUT ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN EFL SPEAKING CLASSES: A CASE AT COLLEGES IN THE MEKONG DELTA, VIETNAM

Ngan Kim Tran, Cang Trung Nguyen

Abstract


Corrective feedback has received much attention in language teaching and learning, including English as a foreign language. However, little research has been done with regard to college teachers’ perceptions about this area of interest in speaking language classes. The present study, therefore, focuses on teachers’ perceptions about oral corrective feedback and its types at tertiary contexts within a local province of the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. This paper draws on data collected as part of a larger study consisting of questionnaires. The findings indicate that teachers had positive perceptions about oral corrective feedback. However, some considered oral corrective feedback as optional since they were concerned with learners’ uptake when provided with corrective feedback. Elicitation was the most favored technique, followed by meta-linguistic feedback. Furthermore, implications are also presented.

Article visualizations:

Hit counter


Keywords


oral corrective feedback, speaking class, EFL college-school teachers, Mekong Delta

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bachmann, D., & Elfrink, J. (1996). Tracking the progress of email versus snail-mail. Marketing Research 8(2), 31-35.

Baker, J., & Westrup, H. (2003). Essential speaking skills: A handbook for English language teachers. London: Continuum.

Cohen, A. D. (1975). Error correction and the training of language teachers. The Modern Language Journal, 59(8), 414-422.

Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Humanities.

Garton, L., Haythornthwaite, C., & Wellman, B. (1999). Studying online social networks. In S. Jones (Ed.), Doing Internet research: Critical Issues and Methods for Examining the Net (pp.75–105). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Harmer, J. (1991). The practice of English language teaching. London and New York: Longman

Méndez, E. H., & Cruz, M. d. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions about oral corrective feedback and their practice in EFL classrooms. Profile, 14(2), 63–75.

Katayama, A. (2007). Japanese EFL students’ preferences toward correction of classroom oral errors. Asian EFL Journal, 9(4), 284-299. Conference Proceedings.

Kennedy, C., & Kennedy, J. (1996). Teacher attitudes and change implementation. System, 24(3), 351-360.

Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37-66.

Lyster, R. & Mori, H. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 269-300.

Ohta, A. S. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

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

Safari, P. (2013). A descriptive study on corrective feedback and learners’ uptake during interactions in a communicative EFL class. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(7), 1165-1175.

Sheen, Y. (2011). Corrective feedback, individual differences and second language learning. New York: Springer.

Spada, N., & Fröhlich, M. (1995). COLT -Communicative orientation of language teaching observation scheme: Coding conventions and applications. Sydney: National Centre of English Language Teaching and Research.

Tsang, W. (2004). Feedback and uptake in teacher-student interaction: An analysis of 18 English lessons in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Regional Language Centre Journal, 35, 187–209.

Williams, J. (2001). The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System, 29, 325-340.

Yun, G. W., & Trumbo, C. W. (2000). Comparative response to a survey executed by post, email, and web form. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1).

Yoshida, R. (2008). Teachers’ choice and learners’ preference of corrective-feedback types. Language Awareness, 17, 78-94.

Yoshida, R. (2010). How do teachers and learners perceive corrective feedback in the Japanese language classroom? Modern Language Journal, 94(2), 293–314.

Zhao, B. (2009). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in primary school EFL classrooms in China. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 6(3), 45-72.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejfl.v5i2.3322

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright © 2015. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching (ISSN 2537-1754) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing GroupAll rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms.

All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).