Transcript Corrective Feedback – pronunciation errors How effective it is in

Corrective Feedback – pronunciation errors
How effective it is in learning L2 oral communication
Nguyễn Thị Tố Hạnh
I.
INTRODUCTION
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
1. What is an error?
2. Types of corrective feedback?
3. Researchers’ findings of effects of corrective
feedback on language oral communication
III. METHODOLOGY
1. The participants
2. Methodology tools
3. The procedures
III. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
IV. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
V. CONCLUSION
INTRODUCTION
Errors are part of the non-native speakers’ (NNS)
language learning process and a certain amount
of “corrective feedback” from a NNS’s
utterances is essential for continued
interlanguage development.
Vigil & Oller (1976: 281)
Research questions
• What types of learners’ errors should be
corrected?
• What types of corrective feedback should be
given?
• When and how should corrective feedback be
used?
LITERATURE REVIEW
• What is an error? Why correct errors?
* self-repair
* assist transitional competence
* develop metalinguistic awareness
* avoid fossilization
• When?
immediate repairs?
delayed treatments?
• Types of corrective feedback
* Implicit
- recasts
- repetitions
- clarification requests
- Elicitation
* Explicit
- explicit correction
- metalinguistic feedback
Researchers’ findings
Approved
Corrective feedback is usable
and needs to be repeated
continuously and consistently.
+ helps learners with the exact
environment in which to apply
rules and discover the precise
semantic range of lexical items
+ helps learners to discard what
is unacceptable or inappropriate
from their interlanguage
Disapproved
When the results of error
correction are only “temporary
changes” in learners’ language
performance and “the risk of
negative reactions”, it is best
avoided.
+ may make students frustrated
and even lose confidence
Implicit feedback
Approved
Recasts
+ are effective and
+ are used frequently in ESL
classroom settings
+ help to keep a good flow of
learners’ content
Disapproved
Recasts
+ might be influenced by the
targeted linguistic feature,
learners’ tendency to notice
linguistic items, and the
developmental readiness of the
learner, and other factors
+ do not make learners detect
their discrepancy or correct their
errors
Explicit feedback
Approved
Explicit feedback
+ makes the corrective force
clear to the learner
+ gives clues as to the exact
location of the error
+ might help learners to carry
out of the cognitive comparison
between their error and the target
form
Disapproved
Explicit feedback that consists of
simply indicating that a problem
exists does not appear to be
helpful
Empirical enquiry: corrective feedback
•
•
•
•
•
5 students – real-time experiment
10 students - interview
7 teachers – interview
100 students - questionnaire
Classroom observation
Empirical enquiry: corrective feedback
•
•
•
•
•
5 students – real-time experiments
10 students - interview
7 teachers – interview
100 students - questionnaire
Classroom observation
Feedback to speaking
(experimental group)
Types of corrective
feedback
recasts
repetitions
Immediate
repairs
3/5 (uptake)
2/5 (uptake)
Delayed
treatments
0
0
Explicit correction
5 (uptake)
3
Clarification requests
1 (no uptake)
0
elicitation
0
2
Multiple feedback
2 (uptake)
(repetitions + clarification
requests)
0
Feedback type by 7 teachers
in Speaking activities
Types of feedback
recasts
repetitions
Explicit correction
Immediate
repairs
5/7 (71.4%)
4/7 (57.1%)
1/7 (14.2%)
Delayed
treatments
√
Clarification requests
√
elicitation
√
Multiple feedback
(mixed)
√
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
students' interview s
teachers' interview s
students'
questionnaire
immediate delayed
repairs treatments
F.1. Opinions about errors correction in speaking tests or presentations
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
students' interview s
teachers' interview s
students'
questionnaire
immediate delayed
repairs treatments
F.2. Opinions about errors correction in speaking activities without mark evaluations
80
70
60
50
40
students'
interviews
30
students'
questionnaire
20
10
0
      
  
F.3. Frequency of repetition of students’ errors for future utterances
70
60
50
40
30
students'
interviews
20
students'
questionnaire
10
0
immediately sometimes
didn't
recognized recognized recognize
F.4. Students’ ability of recognition their errors for future utterances
Suggestions
Corrective feedback for phonological errors
• For immediate treatments (limited)
- recasts
- repetitions (better used for students of high language
proficiency)
• For delayed treatments
Variety of corrective feedback
- clarification requests
- elicitation
- explicit correction
- multiple feedback
What should ESL teachers
consider?
• consider students’ cognition, students’
preferences of error correction and affective
reality
• decide what type of error to correct, when and
how to correct it, and who should correct it
• be flexible to provide any types of corrective
feedback for different students
Limitations and Conclusion
• Experiments were applied to a small group of
students
• Observations were implemented only at one class
• Only qualitative research was used
• Experiments and observations on different English
classes should have been carried out
• Both qualitative and quantitative researches should
have been used
Thank you for listening!