خلاصة:
The present study investigated EFL teachers’ beliefs about oral corrective feedback (CF), their CF-provision practices across elementary and intermediate levels, and their beliefs-practices correspondence. To this end, the researchers conducted a semi- structured interview with the teachers and went on an overall forty- hour observation of their classrooms across both levels. The findings revealed that there was a significant difference in the teachers’ employment of CF strategies across the two levels with more frequent presence of explicit correction, elicitation, metalinguistic clues, clarification request, and repetition at elementary level. Moreover, it was demonstrated that the teachers did not differentiate in their focus on morpho-syntactic, phonological, and lexical errors at both levels. The results further highlighted some areas of belief-practice mismatch in teachers’ sensitivity to students’ errors, their employment of different CF strategies, use of explicit and implicit CF, application of immediate and delayed CF, correction of global and local errors, focus on different linguistic targets, and reliance on self, peer, and teacher correction. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications.
ملخص الجهاز:
The results further highlighted some areas of belief-practice mismatch in teachers’ sensitivity to students’ errors, their employment of different CF strategies, use of explicit and implicit CF, application of immediate and delayed CF, correction of global and local errors, focus on different linguistic targets, and reliance on self, peer, and teacher correction.
As an evidence-based feedback signaling the presence of incorrect linguistic forms (Russell & Spada, 2006) and as a complex instructional- interactive phenomenon (Ellis, 2009) in reference to methodological approaches adopted by the teachers in research-practice domains (Russell, 2009), CF stands for "teachers’ or other learners’ responses to second language or foreign language learners’ erroneous or inappropriate products, by reformulating the forms or giving clues for corrections" (Yoshida, 2008a, p.
Given the significance of CF provision as one of the main instructional responsibilities of the teachers in the classroom (Mori, 2011) and the limited number of studies comparing the teachers’ beliefs and actual practices of CF (Roothooft, 2014), there is an urgent call for addressing the teachers’ beliefs about the unforeseen dimensions of teaching including error correction (Basturkmen, 2012).
Teachers’ beliefs about oral CF Teachers’ beliefs about oral CF: A thematic framework Sensitivity to correction of students’ errors Use of different CF strategies at different levels Employment of explicit and implicit CF Reliance on immediate and delayed CF Application of output-promoting strategies Correction of global and local errors Focus on different linguistic targets Preference for self, peer, and teacher correction Emphasis on affective side of CF Reference to mental readiness for provision of CF Promotion of CF for learners’ interlanguage development Presentation of factors affecting teacher’s approach to CF All 5 teachers believed in the importance of providing CF for the sake of promoting the oral performance of the learners.