Preferences for Oral Corrective Feedback: Are Language Proficiency, First Language, Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety, and Enjoyment Involved?

Watcharapol Wiboolyasarin; Phornrat Tiranant; Teavakorn Khumsat; Tidarat Ngamnikorn; Kanokpan Wiboolyasarin; Somkiat Korbuakaew; Nattawut Jinowat

doi:10.17323/jle.2023.16141

Watcharapol Wiboolyasarin Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0920-0423
Phornrat Tiranant The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3354-7665
Teavakorn Khumsat Nanjing Tech University Pujiang Institute, Nanjing, People's Republic of China
Tidarat Ngamnikorn Busan University of Foreign Studies, Busan, Republic of Korea
Kanokpan Wiboolyasarin Chandrakasem Rajabhat University, Bangkok, Thailand https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6314-1279
Somkiat Korbuakaew Demonstration School of Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University, Bangkok, Thailand
Nattawut Jinowat Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University, Bangkok, Thailand https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9445-3232

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.16141

Keywords: oral corrective feedback, preference, proficiency level, first language, anxiety, enjoyment

Abstract

Background. The effectiveness of oral corrective feedback (OCF) in language learning is influenced by learners' comprehension and response to various OCF techniques. Therefore, it is essential for teachers to consider learners' preferences for OCF strategies.

Purpose. This quantitative study aimed to investigate the preferences of Thai as a foreign language (TFL) learners for ten commonly discussed types of OCF. Specifically, it examined whether these preferences are influenced by four learner variables: proficiency level, first language (L1), foreign language classroom anxiety (FLCA), and foreign language enjoyment (FLE).

Methods. The study involved 288 university students from Chinese, Japanese, and Korean TFL settings, and the data from questionnaires were analysed using appropriate statistical methods.

Results. The findings indicate that, regardless of proficiency level, L1, FLCA, or FLE level, learners prefer more explicit OCF techniques, such as metalinguistics feedback and explicit correction. However, Korean undergraduates scored lower in the majority of OCF strategies (i.e., ignoring, elicitation, recast, explanation, and public feedback) compared to the other participants. The MANOVA analysis revealed significant differences in ignore, peer correction, recast, and private feedback based on proficiency level and L1 background. Although the differences between the FLE and FLCA approaches were not statistically significant, high FLE and FLCA groups tended to prefer more OCF strategies than the low groups.

Conclusion. This study has significant implications for instructional practices in TFL settings and for L2 lecturers in the classroom. By understanding learners' preferences for OCF, educators can tailor their instructional approaches to meet the specific needs of their students.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adigun, O. T. (2021). Inclusive education among pre-service teachers from Nigeria and South Africa: A comparative cross-sectional study. Cogent Education, 8(1), 1-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.1930491

Bada, E., & Okan, Z. (2000). Students' language learning preferences. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 4(3), 1-15.

Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 219-233. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572132

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge.

Deptolla, A. (2019). Language-learner preferences for corrective feedback (Publication No. 13812139) [Master's thesis, University of Colorado at Boulder]. ProQuest Dissertations and These Global.

Dewaele, J.-M. (2017). Psychological dimensions and foreign language anxiety. In S. Loewen, & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 433-450). Routledge.

Dewaele, J.-M., & Dewaele, L. (2020). Are foreign language learners' enjoyment and anxiety specific to the teacher? An investigation into the dynamics of learners' classroom emotions. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 45-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.1.3

Dewaele, J.-M., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2014). The two faces of Janus? Anxiety and enjoyment in the foreign language classroom. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 4(2), 237-274. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2014.4.2.5

Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1(1), 3-18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5070/l2.v1i1.9054

Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. Routledge.

Fidan, D. (2015). Learners' preferences of oral corrective feedback: An example of Turkish as a foreign language learners. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(9), 1311-1317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2015.2162

Geçkin, V. (2020). Do gender differences affect foreign language anxiety and preferences for oral corrective feedback? Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 13(3), 591-608. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.64744

George, D., & Mallery, P. (2016). IBM SPSS statistics 23 step by step: A simple guide and reference (14th ed.). Routledge.

Gómez Argüelles, L., Hernández Méndez, E., & Perales Escudero, M. D. (2019). EFL teachers' attitudes towards oral corrective feedback: A case study. PROFILE: Issues in Teachers' Professional Development, 21(1), 107-120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v21n1.69508

Gooch, R., Saito, K., & Lyster, R. (2016). Effects of recasts and prompts on L2 pronunciation development: Teaching English /ɹ/ to Korean adult EFL learners. System, 60, 117-127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.06.007

Ha, X. V., & Nguyen, L. T. (2021). Targets and sources of oral corrective feedback in English as a foreign language classrooms: Are students' and teachers' Beliefs aligned? Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.697160

Horwitz, E. K. (2010). Foreign and second language anxiety. Language Teaching, 43, 154-167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144480999036X

Horwitz, E. K. (2017). On the misreading of Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope (1986) and the need to balance anxiety research and the experiences of anxious language learners. In C. Gkonou, M. Daubney, & J.-M. Dewaele (Eds.), New insights into language anxiety: Theory, research and educational implications (pp. 31-47). Multilingual Matters.

Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. Modern Language Journal, 70, 125-132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781

Huberty, C. J, & Petoskey, M. D. (2000). Multivariate analysis of variance and covariance. In H. E. A. Tinsley, & S. D. Brown (Eds.), Handbook of applied multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling (pp. 183-208). Academic Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012691360-6/50008-2

Kartchava, E., & Ammar, A. (2014). Learners' beliefs as mediators of what is noticed and learned in the language classroom TESOL Quarterly, 48(1), 86-109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.101

Lee, E. J. (2013). Corrective feedback preferences and learner repair among advanced ESL students. System, 41(2), 217-230. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.01.022

Lee, I. (2017). Classroom assessment and feedback in L2 school contexts. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000247

Li, S. (2018). Corrective feedback in L2 speech production. In J. Liontas (Ed.), The TESOL encyclopedia of English language teaching (pp. 1-9). John Wiley & Sons.

Li, S. (2021). Oral corrective feedback. In H. Mohebbi, & C. Coombe (Eds.), Research questions in language education and applied linguistics: A reference guide (pp. 353-357). Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79143-8_63

Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(3), 399-432. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263104263021

Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 265-302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990520

Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms Language Teaching, 46(1), 1-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000365

MacIntyre, P. D., & Gregersen, T. (2012). Emotions that facilitate language learning: The positive-broadening power of the imagination. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2, 193-213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2012.2.2.4

Martínez Agudo, J. D. (2013). An investigation into how EFL learners emotionally respond to teachers' oral corrective feedback. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 15(2), 265-278.

Muslem, A., Zulfikar, T., Astilla, I., Heriansyah, H., & Marhaban, S. (2021). Students' perception toward oral corrective feedback in speaking classes: A case at English education department students.International Journal of Language Education, 5(4), 244-259. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v5i4.19010

Nassaji, H. (2016). Anniversary article interactional feedback in second language teaching and learning: A synthesis and analysis of current research. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 535-562. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816644940

Oflaz, A. (2019). The effects of anxiety, shyness and language learning strategies on speaking skills and academic achievement. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(4), 999-1011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.4.999

Papi, M., Wolff, D., Nakatsukasa, K., & Bellwoar, E. (2021). Motivational factors underlying learner preferences for corrective feedback: Language mindsets and achievement goals. Language Teaching Research, 25(6), 858-877. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211018808

Rassaei, E. (2015). Oral corrective feedback, foreign language anxiety and L2 development. System, 49, 98-109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.01.002

Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59(1), 23-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci003

Sakiroglu, 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.

Sepehrinia, S., Fallah, N., & Torfi, S. (2020). English language teachers' oral corrective preferences and practices across proficiency groups. PROFILE: Issues in Teachers' Professional Development, 22(2), 163-177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v22n2.82369

Tasdemir, M. S., & Yalcin Arslan, F. (2018). Feedback preferences of EFL learners with respect to their learning styles. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1481560

Ur, P. (2012). A course in English language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Wiboolyasarin, K., Kamonsawad, R., Jinowat, N., & Wiboolyasarin, W. (2022). EFL learners' preference for corrective feedback strategies in relation to their self-perceived levels of proficiency. English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 5(1), 32-47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v5i1.4403

Wiboolyasarin, W., Wiboolyasarin, K., & Jinowat, N. (2020). Learners' oral corrective feedback perceptions and preferences in Thai as a foreign language tertiary setting. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 16(2), 912-929. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.759344

Yakisik, B. Y. (2021). EFL learners' preferences and emotions about oral corrective feedback at secondary education in Turkey: Are there gender and grade-level differences? Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 103-122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21093/ijeltal.v6i1.889

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: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.08.004

Yu, S. (2019). Learning from giving peer feedback on postgraduate theses: Voices from master's students in the Macau EFL context. Assessing Writing, 40, 42-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.03.004

Zhu, Y., & Wang, B. (2019). Investigating English language learners' beliefs about oral corrective feedback at Chinese universities: A large-scale survey. Language Awareness, 28(2), 139-161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2019.1620755

Preferences for Oral Corrective Feedback: Are Language Proficiency, First Language, Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety, and Enjoyment Involved.