An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback

Una investigación sobre cómo los aprendices del inglés como idioma extranjero responden a la retroalimentación oral de sus profesores

Authors

  • Juan de Dios Martínez Universidad de Extremadura

Keywords:

retroalimentación oral correctiva, daño afectivo (es).

Keywords:

oral corrective feedback, affective damage (en).

Downloads

Abstract (en)

This research study draws on research in SLA and language pedagogy and hopes to throw some light on the pedagogical effectiveness of the oral feedback process in L2 classrooms by focusing exclusively on the potential affective damage that teachers´ oral corrective feedback can cause among learners in classroom settings. The paper describes a study in which we investigated how EFL learners actually perceive or rather emotionally respond to the oral feedback process. This paper aims to investigate to what extent the way teachers provide oral corrective feedback is somehow associated with learners´ motivations and attitudes. For this purpose, a short questionnaire was designed and distributed among a sample of 208 EFL secondary school learners. The article first reviews the literature on the controversial role of corrective feedback in L2 classrooms. Next, the findings are reported and discussed. This research paper suggests that EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers´ oral corrective feedback in different ways. Additionally, it found evidence that anxiety can have a negative effect on the way learners benefit from the oral feedback process. Thus, the paper issues warnings about the potential affective damage oral corrective feedback can cause among learners in classroom situations.

Abstract (es)

Este estudio de investigación se basa en la investigación sobre adquisición de segundas lenguas y pedagogía lingüística y pretende arrojar algo de luz sobre la eficacia pedagógica del proceso de retroalimentación oral en las aulas de segunda lengua, centrándose exclusivamente en el potencial daño afectivo que la retroalimentación correctiva oral de los docentes puede provocar entre los alumnos en las aulas. El artículo describe un estudio en el que se investigó cómo los estudiantes de inglés como lengua extranjera perciben en realidad o, más bien, cómo responden emocionalmente al proceso de retroalimentación oral. Este trabajo tiene como objetivo investigar en qué medida el modo en que los docentes proporcionan retroalimentación correctiva oral se asocia de alguna manera con las motivaciones y actitudes de los alumnos. Para ello, un breve cuestionario se diseñó y distribuyó entre una muestra de 208 estudiantes de secundaria de inglés como lengua extranjera. El artículo primero revisa la literatura sobre el controvertido papel de la retroalimentación correctiva en las aulas de segunda lengua. Seguidamente se presentan y discuten los resultados. Esta investigación sugiere que los estudiantes de inglés como lengua extranjera responden emocionalmente a la retroalimentación correctiva oral proporcionada por los docentes de diferentes maneras. Además, se encontró evidencia de que la ansiedad puede tener un efecto negativo en la forma en que los estudiantes se beneficien del proceso de retroalimentación oral. Por consiguiente, este trabajo lanza una advertencia sobre el daño afectivo potencial que la retroalimentación correctiva oral puede causar entre los estudiantes en situaciones de aula.

Author Biography

Juan de Dios Martínez, Universidad de Extremadura

Is an Associate Professor of EFL Teacher Education at the Faculty of Education of the Universidad de Extremadura (Spain) and head of the research group in English Language Teaching and Learning.

References

Arnold, J., & Brown, H. D. (1999). A map of the terrain.

In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in Language Learning (pp.

-24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ayedh, A., & Khaled, E. (2011). EFL teachers’ feedback to

oral errors in EFL classroom: Teachers´ perspectives.

Arab World English Journal,2, (1), 214-232.

Basturkmen, H., Loewen, S., & Ellis, R. (2004). Teachers’

stated belief about incidental focus on form and

their classroom practices.Applied Linguistics,25,

-272.

Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written

corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language

Writing, 17, 102–118.

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2009). The relative effectiveness of different types of direct written corrective

feedback. System,(37), 322-329.

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). The contribution of

written corrective feedback to language development: A ten month investigation. Applied Linguistics,

, 193-214.

Bitchener, J., Young, S., & Cameron, D. (2005). The

effect of different types of corrective feedback on

ESL student writing”. Journal of Second Language

Writing, 14,191-205.

Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of

error feedback for improvement in the accuracy

and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second

Language Writing,12,267-296.

Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom.The Modern Language

Journal,78, (3), 273-284.

Colomb. Appl. Linguist. J.

ISSN 0123-4641 • June - December 2013. Vol. 15 • Number 2 • Bogotá, Colombia. p. 265 - 278

An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback

Ellis, R. (2005).Instructed Second Language Acquisition:

A Literature Review. Wellington, New Zealand: New

Zealand Ministry of Education. Available online at

http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/__data/assets/

pdf_file/0008/6983/instructed-second-language.pdf

Ellis, R. (2006). Researching the effects of form-focused

instruction on L2 acquisition.AILA,19, 18-41.

Ellis, R. (2007). Corrective feedback in theory, research

and practice. In: The 5

th

International Conference on

ELT in China & the 1

st

Congress of Chinese Applied

Linguistics, May 17-20, Beijing Foreign Language

Studies University, Beijing, China. Available online at

http://www.celea.org.cn/2007/keynote/ppt/Ellis.pdf

Ellis, R. (2009a). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1, 1, 3-18.

Ellis, R. (2009b). A typology of written corrective feedback types.English Language Teaching Journal,

, 97-107.

Ellis, R. (2010). Cognitive, social and psychological

dimensions of corrective feedback. In R. Batstone

(Ed.),Sociocognitive Perspectives on Language

Use and Language Learning (pp. 151-165). Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. (2011). A principled approach to incorporating

second language acquisition research into a teacher

education programme.Reflections on English Language Teaching,9 (1), 1–17.

Ellis, R., & Sheen, Y. (2006). Re-examining the role of

recasts in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,28, 575–600.

Ellis, R., Sheen, Y., Murakami, M., & Takashima, H. (2008).

The effects of focused and unfocused written corrective feedback in an English as a foreign language

context”. System, 36, 353-371.

Erlam, R., Ellis, R., & Batstone, R. (2013). Oral corrective

feedback on L2 writing: Two approaches compared.

System, 41 (2), 257-268.

Evans, N.W., Hartshorn, K.J., McCollum, R.M., & Wolfersberger, M. (2010). Contextualizing corrective

feedback in second language writing pedagogy.

Language Teaching Research, 14, 445-463.

Farrokhi, F., & Sattarpour, S. (2012). The effects of direct

written corrective feedback on improvement of

grammatical accuracy on high-proficient L2 learners”. World Journal of Education, 2 (2),49-57.

Guenette, D. (2007). Is feedback pedagogically correct?

Research design issues in studies of feedback on

writing. Journal of Second Language Writing,16,

-53.

Han, Z. H. (2002). Rethinking of corrective feedback in

communicative language teaching. RELC Journal,

, 1-33.

Havranek, G. (1999). The effectiveness of corrective

feedback: Preliminary results of an empirical study.Acquisition et Interaction en langue étrangère:

Proceedings of the Eighth EUROSLA Conference,

, 189–206.

Havranek, G. (2002). When is corrective feedback most

likely to succeed?.International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 255-270.

Hyland, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback.System, 31 (2),

-230.

Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback in Second

Language Writing: Contexts and Issues.Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Iwashita, N. (2003). Negative feedback and positive evidence in task-based interaction: Differential effects

on L2 development. Studies in Second Language

Acquisition, 25 (1), 1–36.

Jean, G., & Simard, D. (2011). Grammar learning in

English and French L2: Students´ and teachers´

beliefs and perceptions. Foreign Language Annals,

(4), 465-492.

Krashen, S. (1982).Principles and Practice in Second

Language Acquisition.Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J.M. (2005). Error correction:

Students’ versus teachers’ perceptions. Language

Awareness, 14 (2–3), 112–127.

Lee, E. J. (2013). Corrective feedback preferences and

learner repair among advanced ESL students. System, 41 (2), 217-230.

Li, Sh. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback

in SLA: A Meta-Analysis.Language Learning, 60,

, 309–365.

Liang, Y. (2008). The effects of error feedback in second

language writing.Second Language Acquisition and

Teaching, 15,65-79.

Loewen, S. (2004). Uptake in incidental focus on form in

meaning-focused ESL lessons.Language Learning,

, 153-188.

Loewen, S., & Erlman, R. (2006). Corrective feedback

in the chatroom: An experimental study. Computer

Assisted Language Learning,19 (1), 1-14.

Loewen, S., & Nabei, T. (2007). Measuring the effects

of oral corrective feedback on L2 knowledge. In A.

Martínez J., (2013) Colomb. Appl. Linguist. J.

ISSN 0123-4641 • Bogotá, Colombia. Pages 265 - 278 276

Mackey (Ed.),Conversational Interaction in Second

Language Acquisition: A Collection of Empirical

Studies (pp. 361-377). Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Lyster, R. (1998). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner

repair in immersion classrooms.Language Learning,

, 183-218.

Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second

Language Acquisition,26, 399-432.

Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and

learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language

Acquisition, 20, 37-66.

Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in SLA classroom research: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second

Language Acquisition, 32 (2), 265-302.

Lyster, R., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1999). A response to Truscott’s ‘What’s wrong with oral grammar

correction’. Canadian Modern Language Review, 55

(4), 457-467.

Lyster, R., Saito, K. &, Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective

feedback in second language classrooms. Language

Teaching,46 (1), 1-40.

Mackey, A., & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in

SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In A.

Mackey (Ed.), Conversational Interaction in Second

Language Acquisition: A Collection of Empirical

Studies (pp. 407-452). Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Mackey, A., Al-Khalil, M., Atanassova, G., Hama, M.,

Logan-Terry, A., Nakatsukasa, K. (2007). Teachers´

intentions and learners´ perceptions about corrective feedback on the L2 classroom. Innovation in

Language Learning and Teaching, 1 (1), 129-152.

Mackey, A., Oliver, R., & Leeman, J. (2003). Interactional

input and the incorporation of feedback: An exploration of NS-NNS and NNS-NNS adult and child

dyads. Language Learning, 53 (35)–66.

Martínez, J. D. (2008). Linguistic risk-taking and corrective feedback. In J. D. Martínez (Ed.), Oral Communication in the EFL Classroom (pp. 165-193). Sevilla:

Ediciones Alfar.

Montgomery, J., & Baker, W. (2007). Teacher-written

feedback: Student perceptions, teacher self-assessment, and actual teacher performance.Journal

of Second Language Writing, 16, 82-99.

Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective

feedback and uptake in an Adult ESL classroom.

TESOL Quarterly, 36, (4), 573-595.

Rassaei, E. (2013). Corrective feedback, learners´

perceptions, and second language development.

System,41 (2), 472-483.

Russell, J., & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar.

A metaanalysis of the research. In J. M. Norris & L.

Ortega (Eds.) Synthesizing Research on Language

Learning and Teaching (pp. 133-164). Philadelphia:

John Benjamins.

Russell, V. (2009). Corrective feedback, over a decade

of research since Lyster and Ranta (1997): Where

do we stand today? Electronic Journal of Foreign

Language Teaching, 6 (1), 21-31.

Schulz, R. A. (2001). Cultural differences in student and

teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar

instruction and corrective feedback: USA-Columbia.

Modern Language Journal, 85, 244-258.

Schwartz, B. (1993). On explicit and negative data

effecting and affecting competence and linguistic

behavior.Studies in Second Language Acquisition,

, 147–163.

Shaofeng, L. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis.Language Learning,

, 2, 309-365.

Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner

uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research,

(3), 263–300.

Sheen, Y. (2006). Exploring the relationship between

characteristics of recasts and learner uptake.Language Teaching Research, 10, 361-392.

Sheen, Y. (2007). The effect of focused written corrective

feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’

acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly,41, 255-283.

Sheen, Y. (2010a). The role of oral and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language

Acquisition, 32, 169-179.

Sheen, Y. (2010b). Differential effects of oral and written

corrective feedback in the ESL classroom”. Studies

in Second Language Acquisition,32, 203-234.

Sheen, Y., Wright, D., & Moldawa, A. (2009). Differential

effects of focused and unfocused written correction

on the accurate use of grammatical forms by adult

ESL learners. System, 37, 556-569.

Storch, N. (2010). Critical feedback on written corrective

feedback research. International Journal of English

Studies,10 (2), 29-46.

Colomb. Appl. Linguist. J.

ISSN 0123-4641 • June - December 2013. Vol. 15 • Number 2 • Bogotá, Colombia. p. 265 - 278

An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback

Truscott, J. (1999). What´s wrong with oral grammar

correction.The Canadian Modern Language Review,

(4), 437-455.

Truscott, J. (2004). Evidence and conjecture on the effects of correction: A response to Chandler. Journal

of Second Language Writing,13, 337–343.

Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second

Language Writing, 16, 255-272.

Yoshida, R. (2008). Teachers’ choice and learners’

preference of corrective feedback types. Language

awareness,17, 1, 78-93.

Zacharias, T. (2007). Teacher and student attitudes

towards feedback.RELC Journal, 38, 38-52

How to Cite

APA

Martínez, J. de D. (2013). An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 15(2), 265–278. https://doi.org/10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2013.2.a08

ACM

[1]
Martínez, J. de D. 2013. An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal. 15, 2 (Jul. 2013), 265–278. DOI:https://doi.org/10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2013.2.a08.

ACS

(1)
Martínez, J. de D. An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback. Colomb. appl. linguist. j 2013, 15, 265-278.

ABNT

MARTÍNEZ, J. de D. An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, [S. l.], v. 15, n. 2, p. 265–278, 2013. DOI: 10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2013.2.a08. Disponível em: https://revistas.udistrital.edu.co/index.php/calj/article/view/5133. Acesso em: 1 dec. 2021.

Chicago

Martínez, Juan de Dios. 2013. “An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback”. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal 15 (2):265-78. https://doi.org/10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2013.2.a08.

Harvard

Martínez, J. de D. (2013) “An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback”, Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 15(2), pp. 265–278. doi: 10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2013.2.a08.

IEEE

[1]
J. de D. Martínez, “An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback”, Colomb. appl. linguist. j, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 265–278, Jul. 2013.

MLA

Martínez, J. de D. “An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback”. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, vol. 15, no. 2, July 2013, pp. 265-78, doi:10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2013.2.a08.

Turabian

Martínez, Juan de Dios. “An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback”. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal 15, no. 2 (July 1, 2013): 265–278. Accessed December 1, 2021. https://revistas.udistrital.edu.co/index.php/calj/article/view/5133.

Vancouver

1.
Martínez J de D. An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers’ oral corrective feedback. Colomb. appl. linguist. j [Internet]. 2013Jul.1 [cited 2021Dec.1];15(2):265-78. Available from: https://revistas.udistrital.edu.co/index.php/calj/article/view/5133

Download Citation

Visitas

3479

Dimensions


PlumX


Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...