STUDENTS’ PREFERENCES TOWARD LECTURERS’ TYPES IN GIVING CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON THEIR SPEAKING

Silfia Rahmi, Sirajul Munir

Abstract


The current study aims at investigating the students’ preferences toward types of corrective feedback applied by the lecturers on their speaking.  This research used a descriptive method. The participants of this research were 151 non English department students who took English subject. The instruments used to collect the data were questionnaire and interview guide. Those were adapted from Hyang (2010), Katayama (2007), together with Smith. They became the guideline on this research. The data  gathered from questionaire were analyzed by using formula suggested by Heaton and Arikunto. Then, the data obtained from interview guide were analyzed by using theory proposed by Miles and Huberman.  The research findings indicate that most students preferred to receive explicit corrective feedback using metalinguistic correction. It was caused by lack of language exposure due to limited  language knowledge they possess.

Keywords


Students’ Preferences, Corrective Feedbacks, Speaking

Full Text:

PDF (ENGLISH)

References


Arikunto, S. (2006). Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta.

Cascun, A. (2003). A Classroom Research. On Oral Error Correction. Abant Izzet Baysel University.

Choi, S.Y. and Li, S. (2012). Corrective Feedback and learner uptakein a child ESOL classroom. ESOL Classroom., 4(43,331-351).

Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective Feedback and Teacher Development. L2. Dulib Journal, 2(3-16.).

Heaton, J. (1990). Writing English Language Test:A Practical Guide for Teachers of English as A Second or Foreign Language. London: Longman Group.

Heift, G. (2002). When is Corrective Feedback most likely to succeed? International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciencenternational Journal of Educational Research.

Horwitz, E. (2008). Learner’s Perceptions of How Anxiety Interacts with Personal and Instructional Factors to Influence their Achievement in English: A Qualitative Analysis of EFL Learners in China. Language Learning Journal, 58(1), 1(58(1), 151–183).

Hyang-Sook Park. (2010). Teachers’ and Learners’ Preferences for Error Correction. The University of Texas Austin.

James, C. (1998). Errors in Language Learning and Use: Exploring Error Analysis. NewYork: Longman.

Katayama, A. (2007). Learners’ Perception Toward Oral Error Correction. University of Texas Austin.

Lyster, R & Panova, L. (2002). Pattern of Corrective Feedback and Uptake in an Adult ESL Classroom. TESOL Quarterly Journal , 36(36,573-595).

Lyster, R. (1997). Corrective Feedback and Learner Uptake, Studies in Second Language Acquisition,. Language Teaching Research, 3(20 (3)).

Mackey, A. (2012). Input, Interaction, and Corrective Feedback in L2 Learning. (Oxford Uni).

Maolida, H, E. (2014). A descriptive Study of Teacher’s Oral Feedback in an ESL Young Learner Classroom in Indonesia. Kata Journal, 2.

Miles,M.B.&Huberman, M. A. (1992). Analisis Data Kualitatif. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia.

Nunan, D. (2004). Practical English Language Teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Oxford, A. (2000). LongmanDictionary of Contemporary. . London: Longman.

Oxford, R. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. New York: New York.

Pavlu, L. L. (2007). Technique in Mistakes Correction. Masyaryx University BRNO.

Pyne, C. (2012). In the Classroom Cataway? English Teaching Profesional Journal, (Issue 80.).

Rahmi, S. (2017). Types of Corrective Feedback Used by Four Lecturers on Students’ Speaking Performance. Innovis Journal, 2(2).

Richard, J. C. L. (1996). Reflective Teaching in Second Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Riza, A. (2007). Lecturers Techniques in Giving Corrective Feedback in Classroom A Case Study of Graduate Lecturer’s Practice. State University of Padang.

Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective Feedback and Learner Uptake in Communicative Classroom Across Instructional Setting. Language Teaching Research, 8(3).

Smith, H. (2010). Correct Me If I am Wrong : Investigates the Preferences in Error Correction among Adult English learner. University of Central Florida. Retrieved from https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/4379.

Swain, M. (1993). Problems in Output and the Cognitive Processes they Generate: A Step towards Second Language Learning. Applied Linguistics, 16.

Ting, D. (2001). The Comparative Effectiveness of Recast and Prompts in Second Language Classroom. Journal of Cambridge Studies, 7(2).

Yoshida, R. (2008). Teachers Choice and Learners’ Preferences of Corrective Feedback Types. Language Awareness.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.31958/jt.v23i1.1364

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2020 Silfia Rahmi; Sirajul Munir

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

TA'DIB with registered number e-ISSN: 2580-2771, p-ISSN: 1410-8208 have been indexed on:

 

Ta'dib Visitor

Lisensi Creative Commons
Journal Ta'dib distribute under Lisensi Creative Commons Atribusi-NonKomersial 4.0 Internasional.


Contact us: Ta'dib; Address: FTIK, Universitas Islam Negeri Mahmud Yunus Batusangkar; Jl. Sudirman No. 137 Lima Kaum Batusangkar, Tanah Datar, Sumatera Barat, Indonesia. Email: [email protected]