Watcharapol Wiboolyasarin, Kanokpan Wiboolyasarin, Nattawut Jinowat

Yabancı dil olarak Tay dilini öğrenen üniversite öğrencilerin sözlü düzeltici geribildirim algıları ve tercihleri

Bu araştırmanın amacı, Doğu Asya lisans öğrencileri arasında algıların ve tercihlerin varlığını araştırmaktır. Bu amaçla, beş üniversitede Tay dili konuşma kurslarına katılan 99 L2 öğrencisi, tanıma ve tutumları hakkında rapor veren çevrimiçi bir anket doldurdu. Bulgular, Tay dilini yabancı dil olarak öğrenen (TFL) öğrencilerine en sık sunulan sözlü düzeltici geri bildirim stratejisinin (OCF) recast olduğunu ortaya koydu. TFL öğretim durumlarında açık düzeltme en çok tercih edilen teknik olduğu bulundu. Bir konuşmada, öğrencilerin özel yerlerde hata düzeltmesi sağlanmaya eğilimli ve akranları tarafından düzeltilmek istedikleri görüldü. Ayrıca, Çinli ve Koreli öğrenciler arasındaki bazı OCF görüşlerinin benzer olduğunu; açıklama talebi ve tekrarlama tekniklerini tercih etme eğiliminde oldukları ortaya çıktı. Buna karşılık, hataya dikkatsizlik, akran düzeltmesi ve herkesin öününde hata düzeltmesi daha az tercih ettikleri görüldü.

Learners’ oral corrective feedback perceptions and preferences in Thai as a foreign language tertiary setting

The goal of this research is to investigate the existence of perceptions and preferences among East Asianundergraduate students of Thai. To fill this gap, ninety-nine L2 learners having experience of studying Thaispeaking courses at five universities completed an online questionnaire reporting on their recognitions andattitudes. The findings revealed that recast was the most frequently perceived strategy of oral corrective feedback(OCF) that Thai as a foreign language (TFL) students were provided. Explicit correction was the most favouredtechnique in TFL teaching situations. In a speech, they inclined to be provided with the error correction in privateplaces and would like to be corrected by peers. Considering in terms of the nationalities. An analysis furthersuggested that some OCF opinions between Chinese and the Korean learners were similar; they tended to preferclarification request and repetition techniques. In contrast, inattention to error, peer correction, and error correctionin public were less preferable among them.© 2020 JLLS and the Authors - Published by JLLS.

PDF

___

Ahangari, S., & Amirzadeh, S. (2011). Exploring the teachers’ use of spoken corrective feedback in teaching Iranian EFL learners at different levels of proficiency. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1859-1868. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.435
Alhaysony, M. (2016). Saudi EFL preparatory year students’ perception about corrective feedback in oral communication. English Language Teaching, 9(12), 47-61. DOI: 10.5539/let.v9n12p47
Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all?: Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second language Acquisition, 28(4), 543-574. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263106060268
Bang, Y.-J. (1999). Reactions of EFL students to oral error correction. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 3, 39-51.
Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 207-217. DOI: 10.1016/ j.jslw.2010.10.002
Brown, D. (2016). The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A metaanalysis. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 436-458. DOI: 10.1177/1362168814563200
Calsiyao, I. S. (2015). Corrective feedback in classroom oral errors among Kalinga-Apayao State College students. International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research, 3(1), 394-400.
Chaudron, C. (1977). A descriptive model of discourse in the corrective treatment of learners’ errors. Language Learning, 27(1), 29-46. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1977.tb00290.x
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). New York: Routledge.
Doughty, C. (2001). Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 206-257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R. (2017). Oral corrective feedback in L2 classroom. In H. Nassaji & E. Kartchava (Eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning (pp. 3-18). New York: Routledge.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies of Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339-368. DOI: 10.1017/S027 2263106060141
Fanselow, J. (1977). Beyond Rasomon – conceptualizing and describing the teaching act. TESOL Quarterly, 11(1), 17-39.
Faqeih, H. I. (2015). Learners’ attitudes towards corrective feedback. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 664-671. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.101
Fu, T., & Nassaji, H. (2016). Corrective feedback, learner uptake, and feedback perception in a Chinese as a foreign language classroom. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 159- 181. DOI: 10.14746/ssllt.2016.6.1.8
Gardner, R. C. (1990). Attitudes, motivation and personality as predictors of success in foreign language learning. In T. S. Parry & C. W. Stansfield (Eds.), Language aptitude reconsidered. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall Regents.
Genc, Z. S. (2014). Correction spoken errors in English language teaching: Preferences of Turkish EFL learners at different proficiency levels. Education and Science, 39(174), 259-271. DOI: 10.15390/ EB.2014.1438
Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom (Vol. 106). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Katayama, A. (2007). Learners’ perceptions toward oral error correction. In K. Bradford-Watts (Ed.), JALT2006 Conference Proceedings (pp. 284-299). Tokyo: JALT.
Kennedy, S. (2010). Corrective feedback for learners of varied proficiency levels: A teacher’s choices. TESL Canada Journal, 27(2), 31-50. DOI: 10.18806/tesl.v27i2.1054
Kırkgöz, Y., & Agcam, R. (2015). Teachers’ perceptions on corrective feedback in Turkish primary schools. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 574-581. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015. 06.096
Lee, E. J. (2016). Advanced ESL students’ prior ESL education and their perceptions of oral corrective feedback. Journal of International Students, 6(3), 798-816.
Lee, J. (2007). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in English immersion classrooms at the primary level in Korea. English Teaching, 62(4), 311-334. DOI: 10.15858/engtea.62.4.200712.311.
Li, H., & Iwashita, N. (2019). The role of recasts and negotiated prompts in an FL learning context in China with non-English major university students. Language Teaching Research, 1-15. DOI: 10. 1177/1362168819839727
Li, S., Zhu, Y., & Ellis, R. (2016). The effects of the timing of corrective feedback on the acquisition of a new linguistic structure. The Modern Language Journal, 100(1), 275-295. DOI: 10.1111/ modl.12315
Lightbown, P. (1998). The importance of timing in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus of form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 177-196). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Loh, C. Y. R., & Teo, T. C. (2017). Understanding Asian students learning styles, cultural influence and learning strategies. Journal of Education & Social Policy, 7(1), 194-210.
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(3), 399-432. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263104263021
Lyster, R., & Mori, H. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 269-300. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263106060128
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. DOI: 10.1017/ S0272263197001034
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching Research, 46(1), 1-40. DOI: 10.1017/S0261444812000365
Ölmezer-Öztürk, E., & Öztürk, G. (2016). Types and timing of oral corrective feedback in EFL classrooms: Voices from students. Novitas-ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language), 10(2), 113- 133.
Ozmen, K. S., & Aydin, H. Ü. (2015). Examining student teachers’ beliefs about oral corrective feedback: Insights from a teacher education program in Turkey. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(12), 141-164. DOI: 10.14221/ajte.2015v40n12.10
Öztürk, G. (2016). An investigation on the use of oral corrective feedback in Turkish EFL classrooms. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 12(2), 22-37.
Nassaji, H. (2016). Anniversary article international feedback in second language teaching and learning: A synthesis and analysis of current research. Language Teaching Research. 20(4), 535-562. DOI: 10.1177/1362168816644940
Panova, I, & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36(4), 573-595. DOI: 10.2307/3588241
Paulhus, D. L., Duncan, J. H., & Yik, M. S. M. (2002). Patterns of shyness in East-Asian and Europeanheritage students. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(5), 442-462. DOI: 10.1016/S0092- 6566(02)00 005-3
Ranta, L., & Lyster, R. (2007). A cognitive approach to improving immersion students’ oral language abilities: The awareness-practice-feedback sequence. In R. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 141-160). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Şakiroğlu, H. Ü. (2020). Oral corrective feedback preferences of university students in English communication classes. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 6(1), 172-178.
Schulz, R. (2001). Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 85(2), 244-258. DOI: 10.1111/0026- 7902.00107
Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8(3), 263–300. DOI: 10.1191/136216 8804lr146oa
Sheen, Y. (2006). Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner uptake. Language Teaching Research, 10(4), 361-392. DOI: 10.1191/1362168806lr203oa
Sheen, Y., & Ellis, R. (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (2nd ed.) (pp. 593-610). New York: Routledge.
Spada, N. (2013). Corrective feedback (oral). In P. Robinson (Ed.), The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition (pp. 139-142). London: Routledge.
Ur, P. (2012). A course in English language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wang, W., & Loewen, S. (2015). Nonverbal behavior and corrective feedback in nine ESL universitylevel classrooms. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 459-478. DOI: 10.1177/1362168 815577239
Wiliam, D. (2018). Feedback: At the heart of – but definitely not all of – formative. In A. A. Lionevich & J. K. Smith (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of instructional feedback. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yang, J. (2016). Learners' oral corrective feedback preferences in relation to their cultural background, proficiency level and types of error. System, 61, 75-86. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2016.08.004.
Yang, Y., & Lyster, R. (2010). Effects of form-focused practice and feedback on Chinese EFL learners’ acquisition of regular and irregular past tense forms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 235-263. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263109990519
Yoshida, R. (2008). Teachers’ choice and learners’ preference of corrective-feedback types. Language Awareness, 17(1), 78-93. DOI: 10.2167/la429.0
Zhang, L. J., & Rahimi, M. (2014). EFL learners’ anxiety level and their beliefs about corrective feedback in oral communication classes. System, 42, 429-439. DOI: 10.1016/j.system. 2014.01.012