In coherent of an implementation of Common European Framework Research (CEFR) to enhance the English proficiency among the graduates, this study investigates one of the alternatives that can be applied by the language teachers to help the students especially low level groups to improve their English proficiency, namely Corrective Feedback (CF). The types and timing of CF used in the higher education language classrooms are investigated simultaneously. The types of CF (explicit and implicit) and timing of CF (online and offline) was the central focus of this study and four language teachers were observed. In order to discover the real practice of language instructors in their language classrooms, 16 hours of class observations was done. It was found out that even the language teachers frequently used explicit correction and recast in providing CF, they also tend to vary their types of CF to the students. It showed that they were all aware of the using types of CF in their language classrooms; however, most of them chose not to correct all their students’ oral errors. In terms of the timing of CF, Offline CF or delayed feedback was the preference timing used by the teachers. This finding indicated that the oral CF also tends to receive offline timing. All in all, the findings of this study is important to be understood by the language teachers to enlighten them on the importance of CF as the platform to supply feedback to the low level graduates (A1 to A2 level) to improve their proficiency for the sake of L2 development.
Ahangari, S., & Amirzadeh, S. (2011). Exploring the Teachers’ Use of Spoken Corrective
Feedback in Teaching Iranian EFL Learners at Different Levels of Proficiency. Procedia -
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1859-1868. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.435
Brown, D. (2014). The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A
meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research. doi: 10.1177/1362168814563200
Chu, R. (2011). Effects of Teacher’s Corrective Feedback on Accuracy in the Oral English of
English-Majors College Students. Theory and practice in language studies, 1(5), 454-459.
Dil?ns, G. (2015). Corrective feedback in L2 Latvian classrooms: Teacher perceptions versus the
observed actualities of practice. Language Teaching Research. doi:
10.1177/1362168815584454
Ellis, R. (2010). Epilogue. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(02), 335-349.
Faqeih, H. I. (2015). Learners’ Attitudes towards Corrective Feedback. Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 192, 664-671.
Farahani, A. A., & Salajegheh, S. (2015). Iranian teachers’ and students’ preferences for
correction of classroom oral errors: Opinions and responses. AJAL, 14.
Harmer, J. (2009). Doing Task-Based TeachingTasks in Second Language Learning. ELT Journal,
63(2), 173-176. doi: 10.1093/elt/ccp007
Kennedy, S. (2010). Corrective Feedback for Learners of Varied Proficiency Levels: A Teacher’s
Choices. TESL Canada Journal, 27(2), 31.
Kershaw, G. (2002). Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. T. Hedge. ELT Journal,
56(3), 337-341. doi: 10.1093/elt/56.3.337
Lee, A. H., & Lyster, R. (2015). The effects of corrective feedback on instructed L2 speech
perception. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1-30.
Lee, E. J. E. (2013). Corrective feedback preferences and learner repair among advanced ESL
students. System, 41(2), 217-230.
Li, S. (2014). Oral corrective feedback. ELT Journal, 68(2), 196-198. doi: 10.1093/elt/cct076
Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Corrective feedback in the chatroom: An experimental study.
Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(1), 1-14.
Long, M. H. (2007). Recasts in SLA: The story so far. Problems in SLA, 75-116.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in second
language acquisition, 19(01), 37-66.
Motlagh, L. N. (2015). Irinan EFL Teachers’ Preferences For Corrective Feedback Types, implicit
Vs Explicit. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 364-370.
Palys, T. (2008). Purposive sampling. The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods, 2,
697-698.
Quinn, P. (2014). Delayed Versus Immediate Corrective Feedback on Orally Produced Passive
Errors in English. University of Toronto.
Rassaei, E. (2013). Corrective feedback, learners' perceptions, and second language
development. System, 41(2), 472-483.
Sheen, Y. (2010). Differential effects of oral and written corrective feedback in the ESL
classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(02), 203-234.
Suzuki, M. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in adult ESL classrooms. Teachers
College Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL and Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 56-77.
Yoshida, R. (2010). How do teachers and learners perceive corrective feedback in the Japanese
language classroom? The modern language Journal, 94(2), 293-314.
Sawaluddin, S., & Tajuddin, A. J. A. (2017). Oral Corrective Feedback: Teacher’s Selection in Actual Practices. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(5), 345-356.
Copyright: © 2017 The Author(s)
Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
