ECONOMICS SOCIETYl QUAN DIEM CUA SINH VIEN DOI VOll PHAN HOI SOfA LOI TRONG THI/C HANH KY NANG NOI TIENG ANH LEARNER PERCEPTIONS OF FEEDBACK ON SPOKEN ERRORS IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING CONTEXT Nguye[.]
ECONOMICS-SOCIETYl QUAN DIEM CUA SINH VIEN DOI VOll PHAN HOI SOfA LOI TRONG THI/C HANH KY NANG NOI TIENG ANH LEARNER PERCEPTIONS OF FEEDBACK ON SPOKEN ERRORS IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING CONTEXT Nguyen Thu Hong c o r r e c t i n g s p o k e n errors a n d r e p o r t o n Tom tat a research p r o j e c t o n learner a t t i t u d e s t o Ph^n h6i siSi loi ta linh vu'c duocnghien cu^ rong rai gilng day ngoai ngC.f)! co rat nhieu quan diem CF in f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g c o n t e x t khacnhau ve vai tr6 va y nghia cua phan hoi su'a loi day va hoc ngoai ngQ va giao vien nen lam gl sinh vien mac 16i tieng Anh noi Bai bao trlnh bay ccisci ly luan cua ph j n hoi sufa loi not tieng Anh va su'dung bSng du h6i dieu tra nh3m tim hieu guan diem cua sinh vien doi vdi phan hoi sisa loi noi Idpti^ng Anh giao tiep Ket qua nghien cul; cho thay, sinh vien mong muon: (i) difdc sAa loi ndi sai; (ii) phSn hoi su'a loi nen di kem vdi giai thich cua giao vien; (Hi) each s&a loi tot nhat la giao vien gOi y de sinh vien tirtimravatusiia loi Ti^ketquSnghilnci^ nay, tac gi^de xuat: sAa loi chosinh vien, giao vien nen tranh gay cang thing hay l^m sinh vien mat A sii tif tin; phSn hoi cua giao vien can hu'dng den muc tieu giiJp sinh vi@n c^i thien va nSng cao sif tir tin noi tieng Anh For a l m o s t half a c e n t u r y , t h e o r i e s o f ESL a n d L2 e d u c a t i o n have taken v a r y i n g perspectives o n t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f C F W h i l e b e h a v i o r i s t v i e w s called f o r i m m e d i a t e e r a d i c a t i o n o f errors as t h e y w e r e d a m a g i n g t o l e a r n i n g , CF p l a y e d a m i n o r role u n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f nativist v i e w s a b o u t l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g (Sheen Tic khoa: ph^n hdi sDa loi, loi tieng Anh noi, tutin, tusii^ loi & Ellis, 2011) iVlore recently, errors w e r e regarded as treatable through the Abstract f e e d b a c k arising naturally in i n t e r a c t i o n Conective feedback (CF) has gained prominence in studies on second and foreign language education (Sheen & Ellis, 2011) It is clear t h a t t h e There have been different viewpoints of both educators and learners on the rale of CF and what teachers s t u d y o f CF has b e e n a p p r o a c h e d f r o m should with learners' errors This research paper includes a theoretical review about spoken errors d i f f e r e n t angles correction and employs a questionnaire for data collection to understand learners' attitudes toward CF in a Vietnamese EFL learning context Students' responses to the questionnaire indicate that (i) they would like their spoken errars to be corrected as soon as the errors occur; (ii) the errar repair needs to be In contrast t o Truscott (1999) w h o claims t h a t , " c o r r e c t i o n , b y its n a t u r e , interrupts communicative activities" followed by explanations to be fully understood and memorized, and (Hi) self-correction is considered (p.442), a the most important and effective correcting method Basing on the above results, the writer would like on to recommend that when using CF, teachers should avoid causing students to anxiety or losing their v i e w p o i n t Those studies have p o i n t e d confidence and that CF should aim at Improving students'confidence in speaking English o u t t h a t f e e d b a c k p r o v i d e d d u r i n g oral Keywords: corrective feedback, spoken errors, confident, self-correct activities m a y facilitate s e c o n d l a n g u a g e ThS Nguyen IhuHflng Tmng tam Ngoai ngO', TiUcmg M hgc Dau Viet Nam Fmail: hong.nguyen@pvii edu.vn number experiments of have studies based rejected this a c q u i s i t i o n For e x a m p l e , a c c o r d i n g Ngaynhanbai: 12/6/2014 Ngay chap nhan Sang: 15/10/2014 to H e n d n c k s o n (1978), learners' oral errors should definitely be c o r r e c t e d , which was based o n b o t h t h e o r e t i c a l g r o u n d s l.ABRIEFREVIEW There have b e e n d i f f e r e n t Corrective f e e d b a c k (CF) has recently o n t h e role o f CF a n d w h a t t h e t e a c h e r viewpoints g a i n e d p r o m i n e n c e \n s t u d i e s o f s e c o n d s h o u l d d o w i t h learner errors This p a p e r andforeignlanguageeducationcontexts will review t h e current theories a b o u t (i.e CF helps learners e n g a g e in the process o f h y p o t h e s i s t e s t i n g ) a n d on e m p i r i c a l g r o u n d s (i.e research revealed t h a t students wished t o be corrected) I n e issues o f n o w a n o w n e n t o giveCF, So •TapchiKHOAHOC&CONGNGHE^ •SIIEfM)!XAHOI Table! Participant Demographic Information w h a t t y p e s o f error s h o u l d be c o r r e c t e d a n d w h o s h o u l d correct learner errors have also b e e n investigated A c c o r d i n g Vietnamese 20 years old t o Ellis (2009), It is best n o t t o c o r r e c t students d u r i n g f l u e n c y w o r k T h e m o s t 19 years old Age efficient corrections are s u p p o s e d m o s t 18yearsold likely t o occur w h e n m o r e t i m e , l o n g e r explanations, a n d d i f f e r e n t strategies are correction (Lasagabaster used Male Gender Female & llyeats Sierra, 2005) 10 years It is o b s e r v e d t h a t teachers t e n d e d years Yeats of pnor formal study of Englisil t o select f e e d b a c k t y p e s in accordance years w i t h error types: namely, recasts after years grammatical and phonological errors n e g o t i a t i o n o f f o r m after lexical errors tl 101 18 67 16 Detaiiedinfomuition Category Fir;t language and (Lyster, 2001) The types of % 100% 18% 66% 16% 80 21 79% 21% 10 18 JI 32 10% 18% 9% 31% 32% has b e e n s t u d i e d w i d e l y b u t t h e r e is were gathered and analyzed a lack o f studies b a s e d o n V i e t n a m e s e RESEARCH D E S I G N f e e d b a c k w h i c h is f o u n d t o be effective intermediate-level learners Research i n f o r m a n t s w e r e t o answer are explicit a n d o u t p u t - p r o m p t i n g rather Accordingly, this s t u d y a i m s t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e f o l l o w i n g : (1) D o y o u t h i n k your t h a n i m p l i c i t or recast (Sheen & Ellis, the errors s h o u l d b e c o r r e c t e d ? All, s o m e or 2011) a d u l t learner p e r c e p t i o n s o f With correct argues regard to who should learner errors, Truscott that, "Peer (1999) correction moves students' attention further away communicative activities, as from well as p r o d u c i n g corrections o f l o w e r q u a l i t y " (p.443} In contrary, Nguyen (2013) observes t h a t "Feedback is t h e t y p e o f peer s c a f f o l d i n g n o t e d b y m o s t o f t h e Vietnamese intermediate-level feedback o n s p o k e n errors in c o m p a r i s o n with m o s t o f t h e m ? (2) W h e n d o y o u think they should i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r English t e a c h i n g Also, answering grammar and investigations of intermediate-level a d u l t questions? (3) s t u d e n t s ' preferences f o r CF w i l l should help be ( p o l i t e o r informal)? (4) H o w s h o u l d your errors b e c o r r e c t e d ? U s i n g s h o r t clues t o The following questions i n v e s t i g a t i o n : (a) framed Should learner h e l p y o u self-correct; t h e c o r r e c t answer IS g i v e n t o y o u ; t h e e r r o r Is explained at t h e t i m e ; o r t h e e r r o r Is e x p l a i n e d later? o n errors c a n i m p r o v e learners' accuracy H o w s h o u l d learner errors b e c o r r e c t e d ? a n d c o n f i d e n c e in p r o d u c t i v e skills This (e) W h o s h o u l d c o r r e c t errors m a d e b y Language is a c o n d i t i o n f o r t h e learners t o a c h i e v e learners? University h i g h e r level o f l a n g u a g e p r o f i c i e n c y a n d T h e error repair w i t h i n t h i s study (5) W h o s h o u l d c o r r e c t y o u r errors? Your t e a c h e r , y o u r c l a s s m a t e o r yourself? T h e s t u d y w a s c o n d u c t e d in Foreign aims at b o t h p e r f o r m a n c e errors ( d u e English language learning to equivalent learner's lack knowledge) and of proper language competence errors (resulting f r o m t h e i r failure t o utilize a from beliefs? k n o w n s y s t e m correctly) intensive CF reveals that error questionnaire in which all questions require t h e participants t o give A n o v e r v i e w o f t h e literature f o c u s i n g on Research d a t a w e r e c o l l e c t e d f r o m survey correction f u r t h e r e x p l a n a t i o n s t o t h e i r responses Both qualitative a n d quantitative data | | Tap dii KHOA HOC&CONG NGHE So informants English 4.0-4.5 proficiency is lELTS, a g e d 18-20 1) D o i n g the English p r o g r a m s , t h e i r aim IS t o b e a b l e t o use t h e l a n g u a g e as an RESEARCH M E T H O D a whose 7-11 years ( t a b l e learners have t h e s a m e a t t i t u d e s a n d learners prefer t o have t h e i r oral mistakes PetroVietnam research years, a n d h a d s t u d i e d English fonnally researchers a n d teachers D o study, Center, All ( n = 1 ) w e r e V i e t n a m e s e s t u d e n t s of a t t a i n t h e o b j e c t i v e s in s e c o n d / f o r e i g n w e r e n o t nearly as c o n v i n c e d errors Pronunciation, a n d mistakes m o r e successfully learner errors s h o u l d b e c o r r e c t e d ? (d) c o r r e c t e d i m m e d i a t e l y , w h e r e a s teachers vocabulary your t o c o r r e c t t h e i r s t u d e n t s ' u t t e r a n c e errors s h o u l d errors b e c o r r e c t e d ? (c) W h i c h (2009) corrected? of teacher; g r a m m a r , v o c a b u l a r y , c h o i c e o f words CF plays in ESL a n d L2 c o n t e x t F e e d b a c k Brown's Which the teachers select a p p r o p r i a t e CF strategies literature a f f i r m e d t h e i m p o r t a n t role t h a t to which to errors in English b e c o r r e c t e d ? (b) W h e n According In classmates; s p e a k i n g pedagogical To d a t e , t h e m a j o r i t y o f studies in t h e the corrected? p a r t s o f t h e lesson: s p e a k i n g t o your in L2 literature, a n d d r a w this A b o v e are t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f be t h e w i d e l y - a c c e p t e d p e r c e p t i o n s in CF s t u d e n t s , a n d it is also t h e t y p e t h e y h i g h l y appreciated." (p.69) adult i n s t r u c t i o n m e d i u m f r o m t h e t h i r d year onwards RESULTS T h e m a i n results o f t h e s t u d y are s u m m a r i z e d as f o l l o w : - ECONQMICS-SOCIETYJ - Question 1: Should learner errors be corrected? All, some or most of them? Nearly a half o f t h e participants agree t h a t all o f t h e i r errors should choice, t h e participants explain that interaction with other fellow students be c o r r e c t e d as t h i s h e l p s t h e m a v o i d without awareness interact In addition, repeating t h e errors o v e r a n d i m p r o v e students the c o m p r e h e n s i b i l i t y i n c o n v e r s a t i o n m o s t o f t h e t i m e , so A s t u d e n t a d d s t h a t o n c e e r r o r s are interaction should be a priority t o fossilized, t h e y g i v e n c o r r e c t i v e f e e d b a c k o n ( t a b l e 3) to repair will become However, she difficult also notes that she is a f r a i d o f l o s i n g f a c e w h e n are in favor of being Responses responses Speaking to classmates Answering grammar t o correct all s t u d e n t s ' m i s t a k e s ; s o m e and vocabulary others questions important t h i n g in s p e a k i n g is f l u e n c y a n d t h a t it is not a b i g p r o b l e m if t h e y m a k e m i n o r nfiistakes w h i c h have no significant influence o n t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e w h o l e conversation; especially, a participant prefers t o still r e t a i n his n a t i v e l a n g u a g e 48 36% 60 45% 24 18% or informal) Table Responses on viltether errors should be Almost Respomes % Number of responses 46 20 36 Some Most of them 45% 20% 35% - Question 2: When should errors be corrected? The respondents' learner students favored the participants prioritize agree t h a t E n g l i s h , is a make hindrance in Meanwhile, according t o some students, speaking t o t e a c h e r s m a y b e stressful and embarrassing as s o m e tend t o overcorrect t h e m A teachers student adds t h a t "I c a n ' t s p e a k f l u e n t l y in f r o n t o f t h e teachers" As f o r s p e a k i n g t o t h e i r classmates, t h e s e c o n d m o s t fevored Methods help you self-correct h e l p t h e m I m p r o v e s p e a k i n g b u t also skill IVlany others suppose t h a t t o m a k e t h e m correct f r o m the e r r o r s is a m u s t in l a n g u a g e classes; mistakes w i l l become other errors To a c c o u n t f o r t h i s , t h e y states t h a t l e a r n i n g English v o c a b u l a r y is t h e m o s t d i f f i c u l t p a r t w h i c h requires a l o t o f t i m e a n d e f f o r t Further, it is usually difficult t o c h o o s e t h e right w o r d f o r t h e r i g h t c o n t e x t T h e r e f o r e , it is necessary f o r t h e i r lexical e r r o r s i n s p e a k i n g t o b e c o r r e c t e d ( t a b l e 4) Table Responses on which learner enors should beconected Number of responses Using short clues to given to you s t u d e n t s p l a c e a n e m p h a s i s o n lexical wrong a n d are able t o suggest t h e g o o d understanding Table S, Responses on how errors should be Tbecorrectansweris only h a r d t o c o r r e c t later o n S o m e ways t o c o r r e c t e r r o n e o u s u t t e r a n c e s The explanations conected to not otherwise, the exactly w h e t h e r s t u d e n t s are r i g h t o r that b e i n g g i v e n later (table 5) c o m m u n i c a t i o n T h e y a d d t h a t accurate reason know category r e s p o n d e n t s are i n t o t h e e x p l a n a t i o n s mispronouncing mistake t o choice is t o receive c o r r e c t i o n s d u r i n g is t e a c h e r s responses correction-plus- t h e m t o self-correct In c o n t r a s t , v e r y f e w teacher-student interactions The main mentioned the mistakes b e i n g r e p e a t e d in t h e f u t u r e beginning, feedback on pronunciation most suppose w o r d stress a n d i n t o n a t i o n listening of the errorso f t e a c h e r s u s i n g s h o r t c l u e s i n h e l p i n g responses in t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e Nearly speaking in A d d i t i o n a l l y , m a n y s t u d e n t s are in f a v o r w o r d s , a n easy iUI half found learner w h i c h possibly makes t h e m r e m e m b e r 201 responses, t h e b i g g e s t n u m b e r o f of them 18% immediate-explanation c o r r e c t i n g p r o n u n c i a t i o n errors M a n y QXiected 36 - Question 4: How should errors be corrected? give t h e m a t h o r o u g h This q u e s t i o n receives as m a n y as of 39% 15% 28% it l o n g e r a n d t h u s p r e v e n t s t h e s a m e ' Question 3: Which learner should be corrected? 40% accent in his English ( t a b l e 2) Choice of words (polite 79 30 56 o f w h y a c e r t a i n u t t e r a n c e is w r o n g , Speaking to the t i m e is t o o r e s t r i c t e d f o r t h e t e a c h e r the be % Number of teachers that student-student Grammar Vocabulary are are a v a r i e t y o f reasons f o r t h i s : class suppose peers responses Pronunciation Table Responses on when errors should be in f r o n t o f h e r classmates % o f t h e respondents their corected being c o r r e c t e d t o o m u c h , e s p e c i a l l y corrected f o r m o s t o f t h e i r errors T h e r e with % Numtierof Aspects b e i n g i n e x p e r i e n c e d learners, it is easy f o r t h e m t o m a k e errors a n d m i s t a k e s in The error is explained at the same nme The error is explained later % 43 33% 21 16% 63 48% 4% - Question 5: Who should correct learner errors? Most of the respondents emphasize the importance of teachers and themselves in error treatment Some students prefer firstly their common mistakes to be corrected by their teacher as a model; then they selfcorrect the rest Some others would like the pronunciation errors and mistakes to be corrected by the teacher and they self-correct grammar ones A participant would like to self-correct first, then discuss with her friend(s), ask for the S o , • Tap dii KHOA HOC & CONG NGHE L MMIglSfcH XAHOL teacher's h e l p at last She believes t h a t this step-by-step method helps her r e m e m b e r t h e corrected l a n g u a g e easily Some others explain t h a t self-correction a n d peer-correction are very I m p o r t a n t as teachers c a n n o t correct all o f the students' errors (table 6) Table Responses on who should conect the enors KfAo Number of responses Teacher Classmate Self 85 27 53 % 52% 16% 32% DISCUSSION From the analysis given, some issues should be considered It is clear that there are both a great deal of intersection and discrepancies between students' attitude to error and error treatment they prefer from the teachers and the current theories about learner errors as discussed in the literature review The first finding is the students agree that their English spoken errors should be corrected as much as possible since it helps to enhance their oral proficiency This finding is consistent with Hendrickson's (1978) proposal that learners' oral errors should be corrected, which was based on both theoretical grounds and empirical grounds This is also in line with Ellis (2009) who claims that CF works and so teachers should not be afraid to correct students' errors This is true for both accuracy and fluency work, so CF has a place in both The fact that students proposing mistakes should be corrected in various ways is In line with Lasagabaster's and Sierra's (2005) and Ellis' (2009) suggestions of using different correction strategies in treating learner errors develop a "language ego" that is often fragile This view implies that language teachers should take student's language ego into consideration in the teaching and learning practices in general and giving feedback on errors in particular In another word, error treatment should not influence students' self-esteem or make them less confident in language learning CF should aim to create a low anxiety learning environment for students in order to be effective and to facilitate language learning The students reported to feeling best when being corrected in interaction with theirteachers and peers Students'further explanation to this question implies that when speaking to their classmates, they may feel confident and are willing to communicate without worrying about making mistakes or losing face when being corrected Being given negative feedback but positive encouragement may be what students all expect To put it another way, creating a lowanxiety environment is a requirement for language classes in which corrective feedback is an important part Besides, some students express their nervousness when being overcorrected.This supports Ellis' (2009) suggestion that teachers should monitor the extent to which corrective feedback causes anxiety in learners and should adapt the strategies they use to ensure that anxiety facilitates ratherthan debilitates language learning Also, this might give us, teachers an idea: feedback on errors is necessary but teachers should not go overboard on error correction Students learn most from the correction of their grammatical errors and least from correction of pronunciation errors It might be that there exists a gap between these students' perceptions and the actual effectiveness of classroom feedback This finding implies errors in all language areas (pronunciation, vocabulary and grammar) should be treated equally The priority of a certain type of errors may vary according to the teaching/ learning contexts and the purpose of an individual class In addition to direct correction, the students expressed a preference for being provided with explanation of the errors simultaneously This finding is consistent with Lasagabaster's and Sierra's (2005) proposal that the most efficient corrections are supposed most likely to occur when more time and longer explanations are utilized Further, the students' favored type of CF is congruent with the statement that explicit and output-prompting is more effective than implicit or recast (Sheen & Ellis, 2011) Most of the research participants emphasized the importance of teacher correction and self-correction whilethere are only some participants admitting the role of peer correction This finding supports Truscott's (1999) the negation of the role of peer correction but opposes Nguyen's (2013) findings in her recent research where she observes that "Feedback is the type of peer scaffolding noted bymostofthestudents,anditisalso the type they highly appreciated." {p.69) This discrepancy might be resulted from the difference in the individual learners' Concerning the types of errors, cognitive and effective needs Thus, I students prioritize the pronunciation support Ellis (2009) who recommends Further, the research informants errors and give grammatical errors the thatteachers should consider varying the suggest that teachers should take into least importance This recommendation correctors in accordance with the needs account the students' sensitivity, self- is in line with Hendrickson (1978) opinion of the individual learners In other words, esteem and individual identity when that students at all levels of proficiency they not need to follow a consistent giving CF This fact supports Brown's agreed that pronunciation ranked set of procedures for all students (1994) statement: language is deeply highest However, according to research persona i and all second language icdmei b uy Hdvroiick, G oiiiJ Ccamk, "1 (2GG1), I TapchiKHOAHOC&CONGNGHE So ECONOMICS-SOCIETj suggestion of doing corrective feedback step by step completely agrees with Sheen and Ellis' (2011) suggestion that teachers "conduct CF as a two-stage process: first encourage self-correction and, if that fails, provide the correction" (p,600} The emphasis of self-correction in this research is in line with Havranek, G and Cesnik, H (2001) who find out that the most successful format of correction is feedback successfully eliciting selfcorection in practice situations 6.C0NCLUSI0N AND IMPLICATIONS Two general conclusions can be drawn from the findings of this study Rrst, the study findings reflect the complexity of CF: the controversies that surround such issues as what to correct, how to correct, who are the correctors and when to correct The students have different viewpoints on these issues even though almost half of them believe that (1) all spoken errors should be corrected, (2) CF should be given when students speak to the teachers and their peers (3) correcting pronunciation errors is a priority (4) the error-repair should be followed by explanations, and (5) teacher correction and self correction play important roles in error treatment The fact that differences exist among expectations and preferences of learners calls for flexibility on teacher's part so as to cope with different demands and different teaching/learning contexts In other words, our approach to error correction in the language classroom cannot afford to be rigid Secondly, many of these learners' perceptions of spoken error correction in this study support the findings in the literature while many others disagree with the findings from the previous studies in the field We, teachers, should be willing to examine critically some of the things we believe in and practice, in the light of new evidence Where necessary, such beliefs and practice should be modified to cater io learners' expectations and needs Furthermore, there may be a need for teachers to communicate to learners their own expectations as to the goals and nature of CF This dialogue provides the learner with a better understanding of error correction and relating issues For example, teachers should make the students understand that pronunciation error treatment does not necessarily uptake their pronunciation accuracy; peer correction plays an important part in English speaking class, so on and so forth Such dialogues between the teacher and the student are a basis for creating trust between learners and teachers and will ultimately benefit language acquisition Throughout, the study has investigated student attitudes to spoken errors and error correction CF is viewed as a collaborative endeavor that must be adapted not only to the individual learner and the teacher but also to the social/ situational context in which the feedback occurs {Ellis, 2009) The mutual understanding between learners and teachers, therefore, may be a vital condition to ensure that learners cooperate with teachers in CF practices Further, it should be the grounds on which teachers adapt, innovate and improvise the error treatment in order to meet learners' needs in specific teaching contexts students' pronunciation accuracy uptake or to find out what type of CF generates the most learner repair Phan bien khoa hocTS Ho Kgoc Trunq REFERENCES [1] Brown, A., Students'and teachers'perceptions of effective foreign language teaching- A companson of ideals Modem Language Joumal, 93(1), 46-60 doi:10.1111/j.154O-4781.2009.00827j