Spoken Error Correction Practices and Beliefs of EFL University Teachers in Saudi Arabia

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24256/itj.v3i1.1739

Keywords:

Corrective feedback, error correction, spoken errors

Abstract

Despite the wealth of knowledge in the field of oral corrective feedback, empirical evidence is still scarce regarding the EFL teachers’ OCF perceptions and practices in Saudi Arabian context. This study therefore, sought to gain an understanding of teachers’ use of oral corrective feedback (OCF) in the Saudi Arabian EFL context. The following two questions guided the study: 1) According to teachers, what are the methods/strategies by which they provide oral corrective feedback (OCF) in the Saudi Arabian EFL context? 2) Is the teachers’ oral corrective behaviour in this context informed by the research?  For this purpose, a short questionnaire was designed and distributed among EFL instructors in Saudi Arabia. The research paper suggests that the OCF practices of EFL teachers in Saudi are mostly inline with the research.

Author Biography

Hira Hanif, Princess Nourah Bint Abdul Rahman University

Hira works as an educator in Saudi Arabia in a higher education context. She is committed to teaching and learning. She has conducted multiple research projects in her educational context and her passion is to bridge the gap between education and practice.

 

Hira has taught English for general and academic purposes at various higher education institutes in the UK and Saudi Arabia. Her areas of research include use of mother tongue in language learning, error correction and language teacher professional development.  

References

Basturkmen, H. (2010). Developing courses in English for specific purposes. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Dörnyei, Z., (2003). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

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

Griffiths, C. (2007). Language learning strategies: students’ and teachers’ perceptions. ELT Journal, 61(2), 91–99.

Harmer, J (video) Interview with Jeremy Harmer - Jeremy talks about extensive reading and error correction in the communicative approach. Harrogate Online, The 48th Annual International IATEFL Conference & Exhibition

Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and researching writing. London: Longman.

Li, S. (2014). Oral corrective feedback. ELT Journal, 68(2),196-198.

Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are learned. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Lynch, T. (1997). Nudge, nudge: teacher interventions in task-based learner talk. ELT Journal, 51 (4): 317-325.

Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (2013). Counterpoint piece the case for variety in corrective feedback research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 167–184.

Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46(1), 1-40.

Mustafa, R. (2012). Feedback on the feedback: Sociocultural interpretation of saudi esl learners’ opinions about writing feedback. English Language Teaching, 5(3), 3-15.

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.

Session Notes, MA Research methods 2012. Oxford Brookes University.

Walz, C. (1982), Language in education-theory and practice. Center for Applied linguistics: Washington. Available at http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED217704.pdf [Accessed on 23/02/2014].

Wright, K. (2005). Researching internet-based populations: advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (10)3.

Downloads

Published

2021-03-31

Issue

Vol. 3 No. 1 (2021): Indonesian TESOL Journal (March)

Section

Articles

License

Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See the Effect of Open Access)