Male and Female Students’ Preferences on the Oral Corrective Feedback in English as Foreign Language (EFL) Speaking Classroom

Abstract

This research aimed at investigating the male and female students’ preferences on the six types of Oral Corrective Feedback (OCF). This qualitative research used observation and interview to collect data. The observation was done to know the practice of the six types of OCF in speaking class and the interview was conducted to reveal the students’ preferences for OCF. The result from the observation shows that the lecturer mostly uses Explicit Correction to correct the students’ error. Then, the result from the interview indicates that male students prefer to have Explicit Correction because this type is the easiest type to know the error and correction clearly. Whereas the female students prefer to have Recast and Metalinguistic Feedback because Recast does not encourage them and Metalinguistic Feedback can make them think critically under the lecturer’s clue. Subsequently, both male and female students perceive Clarification Request and Repetition as the ambiguous type to grasp what the lecturer’s mean. The result of this current research is expected to provide an additional information about the practice of OCF strategies in speaking classroom which is appropriate with the students’ preferences.

Preferred Methods of Providing Correction to EFL Students: A Case Study of Saudi Universities

“…The findings are consistent with those of studies by Babushko and Solovei (2020) and Nguyen and Nguyen (2022), who found that students favored using delayed OCF near the conclusion of an utterance or after finishing an oral task. Students in this study favored receiving OCF right after making errors, which contradicts the findings of previous research (Amalia et al, 2019;Syakira & Nur, 2022;Patra et al, 2022;Sá nchez Centeno & Ponce, 2019;etc.). This finding is consistent with other studies that found EFL teachers preferred to offer delayed OCF, i.e.…”

“…However, (Margi and Vodopija-Krstanovi, 2018) found that students desire to acquire feedback as soon as they make errors, despite teachers' reluctance to offer early OCF. Additional research conducted in a university setting (Amalia et al, 2019;Patra et al, 2022;Sá nchez Centeno & Ponce, 2019) shows that students who prefer immediate to delayed feedback report that the former is more beneficial while the latter helps them forget their faults. However, according to (Babushko & Solovei, 2020) after EFL students have finished their speaking assignment or utterance, they prefer the delayed OCF, which does not seem to interrupt them as much or make them feel as bad about themselves (Nguyen and Nguyen, 2022).…”

“…Even if there is still debate, it is clear that when instructors and students have the same understanding of the goals of CF, it is delivered more effectively and has a positive impact on student results. In order to maximize the efficacy of CF, educators should work to foster the positive CF types of their students (Amalia et al, 2019). What this means is that the more the CF approach is tailored to the needs of the learners, the more likely the students will be able to develop and enhance their language skills.…”

“…Preliminary results suggest that the study's conclusions will have far-reaching implications for the classroom and beyond. As a result, educators will be more likely to encourage their students to achieve their language learning goals (Amalia et al, 2019).…”

Association between Oral Error Corrections of University Teacher and English Majors’ Language Anxiety in Philippine Higher Education Context

“…In the early 70's up to the present days, one of the crucial issues in teaching process, more specifically in error correction is how the teacher can correct the learner without de-motivating his learners. According to Tomczyk (2013) as cited by Amalia, Fauziati, and Marmanto (2019), plenty of discussions on errors and corrections in language classroom were still ambiguous because of the fact that the attitudes towards errors of both teachers and students differ, as well as error correction diverge depending on the approaches that are applied.…”