T1 112009098 Full text
TEACHER’S ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN EFL JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Vega Febrian Persi
112009098
ENGLISH TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
2015
Teacher‟s Oral Corrective Feedback in EFL Junior High School
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Vega Febrian Persi
112009098
ENGLISH TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
2015
Teacher’s Oral Corrective Feedback in EFL Junior High School
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Vega Febrian Persi
112009098
Approved by:
Victoria Usadya Palupi, MA-ELT
Supervisor
Debora Tri Ragawanti, MA-ELT
Examiner
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This thesis contains no such material as has been submitted for examination in any course
or accepted for the fulfillment of any degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my
knowledge and my belief, this contains no material previously published or written by any other
person except where due reference is made in the text.
Copyright@ 2015. Vega Febrian Persi and Victoria Usadya Palupi, MA-ELT
All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced by any means without the
permission of at least one of the copyright owners or the English Department, Faculty of
Language and Literature, Satya Wacana ChristianUniversity, Salatiga.
Vega Febrian Persi:
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT DECLARATION
As a member of the (SWCU) Satya Wacana Christian University academic community, I
verify that:
Name
Student ID Number
Study Program
Faculty
Kind of Work
:
:
:
:
:
Vega Febrian Persi
112009098
English Teacher Education Program
Language and Literature
Undergraduate Thesis
In developing my knowledge, I agree to provide SWCU with a non-exclusive royalty free right
for my intellectual property and the contents therein entitled:
TEACHER‟S ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN EFL JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
along with any pertinent equipment.
With this non-exclusive royalty free right, SWCU maintains the right to copy, reproduce, print,
publish, post, display, incorporate, store in or scan into a retrieval system or database, transmit,
broadcast, barter or sell my intellectual property, in whole or in part without my express written
permission, as long as my name is still included as the writer.
This declaration is made according to the best of my knowledge.
Made in
Date
: Salatiga
: January 30, 2015
Verified by signee,
Vega Febrian Persi
Approved by
Thesis Supervisor
Thesis Examiner
Victoria Usadya Palupi, MA-ELT
Debora Tri Ragawanti, MA-ELT
Abstract
The use of oral corrective feedback has been found to help teacher with different
method that will suit different situation in which Lyster & Ranta (1997) have made it clear
to provide some types to help teacher provide oral corrective feedback (CF). This study is
aimed to find out how teacher perceive CF in their teaching in the way they use certain type
of CF their teaching. Observation was conducted to capture the detail of during the teaching
to find all detail when the teacher provided CF for the student. An interview was then given
after the observation was done to find the underlying reason of why they use certain type
of CF. This study found that teacher use almost of all CF type to provide helpful feedback
for the student. It is found from the reasons they stated that CF is given by teachers in
order to provide benefit of improvement for the student.
Keyword: EFL, Corrective Feedback
Abstract
The use of oral corrective feedback has been found to help teacher with different
method that will suit different situation in which Lyster & Ranta (1997) have made it clear
to provide some types to help teacher provide oral corrective feedback (CF). This study is
aimed to find out how teacher perceive CF in their teaching in the way they use certain type
of CF their teaching. Observation was conducted to capture the detail of during the teaching
to find all detail when the teacher provided CF for the student. An interview was then given
after the observation was done to find the underlying reason of why they use certain type
of CF. This study found that teacher use almost of all CF type to provide helpful feedback
for the student. It is found from the reasons they stated that CF is given by teachers in
order to provide benefit of improvement for the student.
Keyword: EFL, Corrective Feedback
INTRODUCTION
Errors often occur in EFL classroom while the students are trying to improve their second
language (L2). However, errors are not always related to negative effect during the learning
process. Instead, it is considered as the evidence that there are processes and strategies exist
within the errors (Dabaghi, 2006). In other word, those processes also indicate that the students
are learning about certain topic given in their EFL classroom. To help students cope with those
errors that often occur throughout the learning process, feedback is given by the teacher so that
students may improve their performance in L2. This type of feedback which is given as those
responses to student utterance containing an error is considered as corrective feedback by Ellis
(2006).
Using CF to help learner or student to improve their L2 or to continue their L2 growth is
suggested by some researchers as they provide strong support for the effectiveness of CF as they
found CF has great effect in helping learner to improve their English for example in oral
accuracy (Lyster et al., 2013; Chu, 2011). It is why further study is needed to provide more
details regarding how to use corrective feedback effectively.
For teachers to be able to use CF effectively, it is important to understand the role of CF
plays in classroom. To find the pattern of how CF is used in the recent EFL classroom by
language teacher as educator will be significant since it will provide information regarding the
most effective feedback for the learner toward the error they make within their utterances.
This study is intended to figure out what kind of CF that are often used in classroom in
classroom and further explanation regarding why certain type of CF is used in the classroom. In
order to figure out how CF is used specifically to get the benefit of its effectiveness, there are
some questions reformulate to help identify the used of CF in classroom recently: what type of
CF is used mostly? Why does the teacher use certain type of CF in the classroom? In order to get
the answer for that question and further explanation regarding how CF is used in the classroom.
By answering those questions regarding how CF is used in classroom, it will be quite
clear related to whether those types of CF which is brought by Lyster and Ranta with further
detail of result that may appear for certain type of CF, it will be possible to figure out what role
CF play in classroom and how CF is used classroom. Those result will help the researchers and
also the teachers or educators to see how different types of CF are used in classroom recently
compared to how different it is compared to the past years especially in how teacher will use CF
in classroom, whether or not they come with those common type of CF proposed by Lyster &
Ranta (1997) or there might be different type of oral corrective feedback that brought by teacher.
RESEARCH QUESTION
This study tries to shed light on the use of oral corrective feedback (CF) in the recent
classroom activity. As an effort to describe the use of CF in the recent classroom, this study tries
to answers the following questions.
1. How do teachers perceive oral corrective feedback (CF)?
2. What is teachers‟ underlying reason of using certain of feedback?
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Ellis (2006), defined CF as those responses to learner utterances containing error.
Therefore, any response given to student in which there is error within their utterance is
considered as corrective feedback. As has been defined by Chaudron (1977) that CF is any
reaction of the teacher which will clearly transform, disapprovingly refers to, or demand
improvement of the learner utterances.
There are different types that appear as the most often types that are used by teachers up
to today. According to Lyster nd Ranta (1997), there are different types that have been identified
previously. Those types of CF are divided into into six different types named as explicit
feedback, clarification, recast, metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, and repetition.
Classification of Corrective Feedback
Lyster and Ranta (1997) have put forward those different types of CF that classified into
six different types of CF. Those six different types of CF is classified according to different
feedback presented by teacher to help students repair their error. Following description below
will show further description of each CF presented by Lyster and Ranta.
1. Explicit Correction
To provide the feedback for the learner, this type of correction is given by
providing the correct form and clearly indicates the error (Lyster & Ranta, 1997). The
following example will show how this kind of CF is given.
St
: He take the bus to go to school.
T
: Oh, you should say he takes. He takes the bus to go to school.
This kind of feedback is provided by bringing the correct form together by indicating
that there is error in student utterance. Lochtman proposed that explicit feedback is
very clear feedback that the learners will understand easily of teacher‟s correction
toward the error they make (as cited in Ragawanti, 2007).
2. Recasts
In this feedback, reformulation of all or part of student‟s error is presented
without error. It means when teacher reformulate students error form into the correct
one, it will be identified as recast.
St
: He take the bus to go to school.
T
: He takes the bus to go to school.
It can be simply stated that recast is used as teacher‟s reformulation of all or part of
student‟s utterance without the error (Lyster & Ranta, 1997).
3. Clarification Requests
When the teacher uses the question that indicate the utterance has been
misunderstood or ill-formed and a repetition or reformulation is needed, this kind of
feedback is considered as clarification request.
St
: He take the bus to go to school.
T
: Pardon me?
According to Lyster and Ranta (1997), certain expression such as “Pardon Me…”
is often appears as the expression to ask student‟s clarification for the error the make.
Furthermore, it is also find that this following expression “What do you mean by …
?” is also used to clearly help the student clarify their error.
4. Metalinguistic Feedback
This feedback is used by giving any comment, information, or questions, related
to the well-formedness of student‟s utterance with no correct form in provided (Lyster
& Ranta, 1997).
St
: he take the bus to go to school.
T
: do we say he take?
The question used above will provide student a clue to recognize the error he or
she makes in his or her utterance. Other than in form of question, this feedback can
also be in form of comment or information.
5. Elicitation
According to Lyster and Ranta (1997), this CF is used by asking for the
completion of sentence, or asking questions, or asking for reformulation in order to
elicit the correct form. Furthermore, this kind of feedback is known to appear in three
different techniques.
The first technique of elicitation is given by giving the pause or time for the
student so that the student is allowed to provide correct answer.
St
: He take the bus to go to school.
T
: He ….?
The example above shows how teacher give the student pause or more time to
find the correct answer or correct form for their utterance.
The second technique of elicitation is presented by using question in order to
elicit the correct form. To make it different from the metalinguistic feedback, the
question that is used in this technique excludes those yes/no questions such as “Do we
spell this word this way in English?” Instead, it will use the question such as “ How
do we spell this word in English?” The last technique of elicitation is presented by
simply asking the student to reformulate their utterance.
6. Repetition
Teacher uses repetition in isolation of utterance containing error. It is the way
repetition is presented by teacher according to the classification proposed by Lyster
and Ranta (1997). In order to clearly present it as a feedback, this kind of CF is found
to be given by teacher by adjusting the intonation that intended to highlight the error
that is made by the student.
St
: He take the bus to go to school.
T
: He take? (or He take the bus?)
Instead of only proposing merely different type of CF, Lyster and Ranta also classified
those six types of CF into two broad categories of reformulation and prompt. Those categories
are given based on different signal given by each of type of CF (Lyster and Ranta, 2007). For
instance; recasts and explicit correction are considered as reformulation since they supply
learners with target reformulation of their non-target output. On the other hand, elicitation,
metalinguistic feedback, clarification requests, and repetition are categorized as prompt in which
this kind of CF will include various signals minus reformulation to push learner to do self-repair.
Those six types of CF and broad categories that proposed by Lyster and Ranta may give a
complete identification which will give a better explanation regarding certain CF that is usually
used in classroom. Still, there are further details related to those types of CF proposed by Lyster
and Ranta that may elaborate those types of CF by Lyster and Ranta previously which is known
well as the best description of different type of CF used in classroom.
Sheen and Ellis (2011) also suggested quite similar taxonomy to the taxonomy by Lyster
and Ranta. However, what they proposed will only divide those types of CF that some are
already suggested by Lyster and Ranta into two different types: implicit and explicit CF.
Using the taxonomy suggested by Ellis & Sheen (2011), those six types of corrective
feedback will be able to be distinguished into two different ways of how each of them is given,
implicitly and explicitly. When the feedback is given implicitly, there is a chance that the learner
may not recognize that a feedback is given when they do any error in learner‟s utterance. On the
other hand, when the feedback is given explicitly, the learners will easily realize and recognize
that there is certain correction given to them. Nevertheless, some researchers brought a
cautiously recommendation that implicit CF might last longer than the explicit CF, even though
explicit CF is considered more effective in short term (Mackey & Goo 2007, Li 2010). Further
on the taxonomy proposed by Ellis & Sheen (2011), they defined more specific on explicit CF
this way. Explicit CF that requests clarification for the error made by learner orally and explicit
CF that directly correct learner‟s error in which it can also be in form of providing metalinguistic
explanation related to the error made by learner.
To explain more about it the following table will give clear description of how Lyster and
Ranta‟s CF type comes together with taxonomy of Sheen and Ellis.
Table 1 CF Types (Adapted from Ranta & Lyster 2007; Sheen & Ellis 2011)
Implicit
Reformulation
Conversational recasts
Explicit
Didactic Recast
• a reformulation of a student • a reformulation of a student
utterance in an attempt to resolve a utterance in the absence of
communication breakdown
a communication problem
• often take the form of confirmation Explicit correction
checks
• a reformulation of a student
utterance plus a clear
indication of an error
Explicit
correction
with
metalinguistic explanation
• in addition to signaling an error
and providing the
correct form, there is also a
metalinguistic comment
Prompts
Repetition
Metalinguistic clue
• a verbatim repetition of a student • a brief metalinguistic statement
utterance, often with
aimed at eliciting a
adjusted intonation to highlight the self-correction from the student
error
Elicitation
Clarification request
• directly elicits a self-correction
• a phrase such as „Pardon?‟ and „I from the student, often in
don‟t understand‟
the form of a wh-question
following a student utterance to Paralinguistic signal
indirectly signal an
• an attempt to non-verbally elicit
error
the correct form from
the learner
The examples given in Sheen and Ellis‟ taxonomy include didactic recasts and explicit
correction with or without metalinguistic explanation as the explicit CF with correct form
provided. On the other hand, the metalinguistic clues and elicitation are considered as those types
of CF with no correct form provided. Those distinctions that proposed by those researchers
(Lyster & Ranta 1997; Sheen & Ellis 2011) may give further explanation regarding different
types of CF that may appear in classroom especially in English as Foreign Language (EFL)
classroom.
In addition to be able to give different type of CF toward students‟ error within their
utterances, it is also essential to identify what kind of error that can be found in classroom.
Mackey et al. (2007) and have identified those errors that usually occur in classroom especially
in student utterance and divided those errors into four different types of error.
1. Incorrect use of word order, tense, conjugation, and particles which is known as
morphosyntactic error.
2. Mispronouncing word by learners that is known as phonological error.
3. Inappropriate use of vocabulary or code-switch due to lack of lexical knowledge
which is known as Lexical error.
4. Misunderstanding of a leaner‟s utterance, although there is no grammatical, lexical, or
phonological error found.
Those specific errors are identified in order to find out what kind of error that will be
probably be found in classroom. Those types of errors proposed by Mackey et al. (2007) in
which they usually occur within student utterances may assist the researcher to figure out the
attitude language teacher toward CF and the role CF plays in classroom recently to get recent
result of the recent use of CF in classroom
METHODOLOGY
Context of the Study
The study is conducted in SMP Negeri 1 Salatiga. It is located in the small town of
Salatiga, Central Java, Indonesia. Although English was not used actively in this school, most of
the English lessons are presented using English to encourage students‟ growth in L2 in which
Indonesian language is L1 and the English is the L2 in this school. The school allocated two
hours (2 x 40 minutes) English class to cover all lessons to develop speaking, listening, reading,
and writing skill in every meeting. The teachers in this school was often used several specific
types of CF to correct the student utterance which was given to help students recognize the errors
they made.
Participants of the Research
The participants of this study are three English teachers of SMP Negeri 1 Salatiga. In
which the method used in choosing the participant is sample of convenience (McKay, 2006). It is
easier to get further detail of information from the participant with whom the researcher has
known previously because the research will need very specific detail that is probably not
delivered very well if the researcher and the participant do not know each other before.
Instruments of Data Collection
The instrument used in this data collection was observation using video-taping method
that was followed by interview. The observation with video-taping was used to record the
activity that may happen in classroom. It will record the use of CF by teachers to help the
students correct the error in their utterance. Video-taping method is used in order to get the entire
situation in classroom so that the researcher will get the information on what type of CF is
usually used by certain teacher. Since there will be three teachers that are going to observed, it is
important to bring this video-taping method to record every specific details regarding the use of
CF in classroom so that it will clearly capture varied form of CF that can be found in the recent
classroom activity. The observation was then followed by interview that is addressed to all
teachers to get further detail related to the teaching. The interview will provide information
related to the information of the reason why certain CF is used in classroom.
Data Collection Procedure
The observation that was used is in this research is descriptive observation since this
research is prepared to capture what is going on during the lesson in classroom. Descriptive
observation was selected to capture every activity and feedback used in the classroom so that it
will be easier to categorize every form of oral corrective feedback which was given by teacher
since the form of feedback often comes in different form to suit different classroom situation.
There were three teachers who taught different classroom of grade 7 to grade 9. The observation
focused on the teacher to see what kind of feedback was giving in each classroom.
The observation was done to capture every detail related to the use of CF by teacher in
classroom. Those details will consist of specific form of CF which is used in the classroom and
how many times certain type of CF is used in the classroom. After the observation was done, a
brief interview was given to get further explanation of the reason underlie every teacher to use
certain type of CF that was seen during the observation.
After the data collected from the observation, a brief interview was given to those three
teachers in order to find further explanation of underlying reason of why certain teacher might
use specific type of CF more often instead of the other type of the CF. In other word, this
interview was given in order to get deeper explanation of why teacher choose specific type of
CF.
Data Analysis
The video-taped activity that was recorded during the observation was analyzed to see
which type of CF. It was analyzed by looking at the data found from the video-tape related to
how many times each CF type was used in every classroom by each teacher that often used in
classroom by each teacher that will show a major pattern that showed what kind of CF used more
often and what kind of CF that used less. It provided result for the research objective. After that,
the result was used to ask further information related to the underlying reason of using certain
type of CF by each teacher. At the end, the result described the underlying reason of the teacher
that this research seeks to find out.
Three teachers were observed and interviewed right after the teaching. After the
observations were conducted in several classes in which those three teachers taught for two hours
(2 x 40 minutes) in every meeting.
FINDING AND DISCUSSION
From the observation conducted, it could be seen that there was certain pattern in the way
each teacher provide CF for their students. Among those types of CF mentioned by Lyster and
Ranta (1997), there were only three types of CF that were often used by those three teachers:
elicitation, repetition and recast, as shown in the table below. Despite the occurrence related to
the use of those certain types of feedback, those three teachers sometimes used the other type of
CF such as: explicit correction and clarification. In the description of the result of the
observation, the three teachers will be named as Teacher A, Teacher B and Teacher C.
Table 1. The Use of CF by the Teachers
Explicit Recast Clarification Metalinguistic Elicitation Repetition Total
Correct
Feedback
Each
ion
Teacher
Teacher A
1
5
7
2
12
27
Teacher B
1
3
3
10
4
21
Teacher C
2
14
Total
4
22
16
10
12
16
64
Table 1 shows the use of different type of CF in their classes teaching during the
observation. It was found that there were three types of CF that were preferred by the teachers to
provide feedback: elicitation, repetition, and recast.
As can be seen from the table 1 above, there is quite significant number in which recast is
found with the biggest number of CF that was used in the classroom. The findings of the current
study are consistent with those of Lyster and Ranta (1997) who found that recast appeared as the
most often used CF types among the other types. What is interesting in this data is that, teacher C
was, in fact, found with the smallest number of feedback among the other teacher. It will explain
the reason why recast became the most frequent CF used in classroom due to the limited type of
CF used by teacher C. In fact, he was not seen to use any other type of CF beside explicit
correction and recast.
From the table 1 above, we can see that none of those three teachers in their teachings
were seen to use metalinguistic feedback as the part of their CF used in classroom.
Metalinguistic feedback was not used by those three teachers.
From the data presented in the table 1, elicitation, repetition, and recast were the types of
CF which were the most frequently used by all teachers. This finding is in agreement with Zhuo
(2010) findings which showed that recast provided improvement to student significantly
especially for specific type of explicit recast. In addition, those two other types of CF, elicitation
and repetition, are also considered as implicit feedback which is mentioned by some researchers
with the recommendation that implicit CF might last longer than the explicit CF.
The Use of Corrective Feedback by Teacher A
Table 2. Frequency of CF used in teaching three classrooms by teacher A
Explicit
Recast
Clarification Metalinguistic Elicitation Repetition
Correction
1st teaching
1
2
2nd teaching
2
3
3rd teaching
2
2
5
7
Total
1
Feedback
1
5
2
4
3
2
12
For instance, Teacher A used repetition in the most of her teaching, as shown in the table
2. Nevertheless, she was also found using the other type of CF in her teaching such as recast,
clarification request, explicit correction and elicitation. The result of this study indicates that
those types of CF that proposed by Lyster and Ranta appeared in the way teacher give their oral
feedback addressed to student‟s error.
To provide further explanation related to teacher underlying reason of why they use
certain type of feedback more often than the other type, following discussion will provide further
answer for the question related to the underlying reason why some teacher used the two types of
oral corrective feedback promoted by Lyster and Ranta appeared often in those classes in which
taught by the three teachers.
During the teaching among those three classes by Teacher A, it is found that the result is
quite similar one to another. It is because teacher A taught three classes from the same grade.
Since the Teacher A taught in the classroom with the same grade, the materials given were also
very similar among the three classes she was teaching. It might be the cause of why there is quite
similar result found related to frequency of CF used by Teacher A as shown in table 2.
From the table above, it is found that repetition appeared more often than the other types
of CF. However, there are still some other types of CF which is also found during the teaching of
teacher A. Those types of CF are appeared as the feedback for different type of error since there
is different kind of error found from those three teachings. Following example of error that
happened in the classroom will explain more about how certain type CF is used by teacher A.
The excerpt was from the classroom in which morphosyntactic errors were found in certain word
produced by the student.
Excerpt 1
Student
: How many cage is there? (incorrect form of the word
„cage‟ and incorrect to be)
Teacher A
: How many cage is there? (Type of CF: Repetition – the utterance in
error is repeated by the teacher by adjusting their intonation to highlight
the word cage where the error occur)
Student
: How many cage is there?
(Observation 1, 17 November 2014)
From the excerpt above, the students was found to make a mistake in providing correct
form of a question in which plural form should be used in the question. Instead of using “How
many cage is there?”, the question should be “How many cages are there?” It was then followed
by giving type of CF below to help the student understand the feedback given by teacher.
Excerpt 2
Student
: How many cage is there? (incorrect form of the word
„cage‟ and incorrect to be)
Teacher A
: How many cage is there? (Type of CF: Repetition)
Student
: How many cage is there?
Teacher A
: It is not how many cage, but how many?
Student
: Cages
Teacher A
: Okay, how many cages is there? Sorry? (Type of CF: Clarification)
Student
: How many cages are there?
(Observation 1, 17 November 2014)
From the excerpt above, teacher A used repetition as the part of the feedback given to the
student. The error that happened in the conversation above is categorized as morphosyntactic
error in which this kind of error included the incorrectly use of word order including the use of
plural form and to be. From the excerpt above the errors were all in the same type of error,
morphosyntactic error. To cope with morphosyntactic error that is made by the student, Teacher
A used repetition feedback to help student repair the error. In order to help the student repair the
sentence, there is also another type of CF included to make it clearer for the student who found
that Repetition feedback by teacher A was not very helpful. In excerpt above, clarification was
used to make the feedback clear when Repetition could not help the student provide correct form
of the question.
As shown from the table 2 above and what can be found in the observation, repetition
was seen as the most often type of CF that was used in the classroom. On the other hand, there
were also the other type of CF that were still used by Teacher A to help the student understand
the error they made and repair the error by themselves such as clarification request, explicit
correction, and elicitation. The use of Clarification Request that can be seen on the excerpt 1 was
to clarify when there was still another error made by the student. The excerpt showed the whole
conversation that happened between Teacher A and the student and showed how different type of
feedback was used by Teacher A to help student easily recognize the error and repair it.
Excerpt 2
Student
: I take a bath two times a day.
Teacher A
: Two times should be? Two…? Two…? (Type of CF: Elicitation)
Student
: Twice
(Observation 2, 26 November 2014)
Beside the Repetition as the type of CF that was often used by teacher, it was found that
Teacher A also used elicitation as the other type of CF to help student recognize the error and
found the error on their own.
In this context, the student seemed to have the lesson related to the use of adverb once,
twice and thrice instead of one time, two times, and three times. The use of elicitation for the
error made by the student in the excerpt above is intended to help student remember the correct
form that had been discussed previously.
The Use of Feedback by Teacher B
Table 3. Frequency of CF used in teaching three classrooms by teacher B
Explicit
Recast
Clarification Metalinguistic Elicitation Repetition
Correction
1st teaching
2nd teaching
1
1
3rd teaching
Total
Feedback
1
4
1
1
2
3
2
1
1
3
1
3
3
10
4
Similar result is actually shown by Teacher B where she showed the use of certain type of
CF more often than the other type of CF as shown in table 3 in which elicitation was found as the
most frequently used CF type. This kind of CF was used in her classroom that varied from two
different grades, grade 7 and 8. The result shown quite similar where elicitation was the most
often CF used in classroom. In Teacher B‟s teaching context where elicitation was used often,
students made errors of pronunciation instead of the other errors such as grammatical error. To
explain more about it, the following excerpt will describe it occurred. In this context, the teacher
played a song where the students were asked to listen to the song and then they were asked to
write those words they got from the song they listened.
Excerpt 3
Student
: Mother and how. (mispronouncing of the word „mother‟ and
„how‟)
Teacher B
: Mother and how? Could you correct that? (Type of CF: Elicitation)
(Observation 1, 20 November 2014)
The excerpt above showed the error made when the student were asked to tell those
words they got from the song they listened. The word that mentioned in the recording was quite
clear that the student could actually find the correct form. However, there was phonological error
found when they pronounced certain word such as „mother‟ and „how‟ as the two words
mentioned by the student as can be seen in the excerpt 3. The teacher still provided corrected
form of the error that made the student like what you can find below.
Excerpt 4
Student
: Mother and how. (mispronouncing of the word „mother‟ and
„how‟)
Teacher B
: Mother and how? Could you correct that? (Type of CF: Elicitation)
Student
: Mother and how (error still occurs)
Teacher B
: Once again.
Mother and how. (CF type used: Recast)
Student
: Mother and how. (Correct pronunciation)
(Observation 1, 20 November 2014)
Though elicitation is the type of CF that was used more frequently in the classroom by
Teacher B, she is also noticed that she used also different type of CF. It can be seen from the
table 3 above where there were some different types of CF which are found to be used in her
teaching in those three different classrooms. Explicit correction, recast, clarification request and
repetition were also the other types of CF which were used to repair the error that was made by
student in which elicitation still the most frequently used type of CF that was used in giving oral
feedback.
Excerpt 5
Student
: Dear, Ina. I hope you are okay. (mispronouncing of the word „hope‟)
Teacher B
: I? (Elicitation)
Student
: I hope you are okay.
Teacher B
: I hope you are okay? (Repetition)
Student
: I hope you are okay.
Teacher B
: Not I hope, but I hope. (Explicit correction)
(Observation 2, 23 November 2014)
Similar to Teacher A, Teacher B provided quite similar pattern in giving oral corrective
feedback. In this case, elicitation was used more frequently by Teacher B. The example in the
conversation above provided further detail of how different type of feedback was used in order to
help student understand what the teacher intended to say. For example, when there was an error
occurred, teacher B directly used elicitation as the feedback. Unfortunately, the student did not
understand what the teacher meant. She continued to use repetition to make it clearer for the
student. At last, explicit correction was used to provide student clear and simple feedback so that
the student was expected to recognize what error he made and how to repair it.
The Use of Feedback by Teacher C
Table 4 Frequency of CF used in teaching three classrooms by teacher C
Explicit
Recast
Clarification Metalinguistic Elicitation Repetition
Correction
1st teaching
2
Feedback
4
2nd teaching
6
3rd teaching
4
Total
2
14
While two teachers above came with similar type of CF that was used in the classroom,
Teacher C was found to use different type of CF. As shown in the table 4, Teacher C used recast
more often than the other CF. Recast was often used by Teacher C to provide oral feedback for
the student.
Table 4 above showed how Teacher C provided different type of CF for certain type of
feedback. There were some examples that will explain how teacher gave certain type of feedback
for the student in order to repair the error made in the classroom. Following excerpt is a simple
example that will describe it.
Excerpt 6
Student
: I want to go to the concert tonight. (mispronouncing of the word
„concert‟)
Teacher C
: I want to go to the concert tonight. (Type of CF: Recast)
Student
: I want to go to the concert tonight (correct pronunciation)
(Observation 1, 18 November 2014)
The excerpt above shows how teacher used recast to provide feedback for the student.
This type of CF is considered as explicit type of CF in which this kind of CF is given to clearly
tell the student the correct form of the error they made or to simply tell the error that the student
made. Beside recast, there were two types of CF, explicit correction and recast that were used by
Teacher C in which both of them are considered as explicit CF. The example below also shows
of how teacher C gave CF to his student.
Excerpt 7
Student
: Will you take a walk with me? (mispronouncing of the word „walk‟)
Teacher C
: Will you take a walk with me? (teacher followed imitate student‟s
mistake)
Teacher C
: Will you take a walk with me? (Type of CF: Recast)
(Observation 1, 18 November 2014)
From the excerpt above, Teacher C did use repetition. However, it did not seem to require
any response from the student. Instead, Teacher C followed his question with reformulated form
of sentence with corrected word. It explains how teacher C provided certain type of CF and
directly provided correction of error made by student.
From the table 1, Teacher A and B were found to use elicitation and repetition more often
than the other type of CF, while teacher C was found to use recast as the type of CF that was
used more frequently than the other type of CF. The correlation between teacher A and B is
interesting because they come with similar type of CF used to cope with error. From the table 1,
Teacher A and Teacher B was found to use elicitation and repetition as the most frequently used
CF. Those two types of CF are considered as implicit CF. On the other hand, teacher C used
recast as the most frequently used CF in which this kind of CF was considered as explicit CF.
Despite certain types of CF that were more frequently used than the other types of CF,
the teachers also used explicit correction and clarification in which the other type of CF is used
to help the teacher to provide a clear feedback for the student so that the student will be able to
repair their error. The excerpt below will show how explicit correction and clarification were
used in the classroom.
Student
: How many cage is there? (incorrect form of the word
„cage‟ and incorrect to be)
Teacher A
: How many cage is there? (Type of CF: Repetition)
Student
: How many cage is there?
Teacher A
: It is not how many cage, but how many?
Student
: Cages (correct word to be used in the sentence)
Teacher A
: Okay, how many cages is there? Sorry? (Type of CF: Clarification
was used to help the student recognize the error)
Student
: How many cages are there?
(Observation 1, 17 November 2014)
Underlying Reason of Using Specific CF Type
The use of oral corrective feedback was often used in classroom such as when the
students answer the question of the exercise given to student in which often the error related to
morphosyntactic and phonological error. The current study found that there were different reason
of those three teachers of using certain type of CF more frequently than the other type of CF.
Those findings will explain more about how they perceive the use of CF in classroom and why
they use it to cope with certain error.
The use of CF according to Chu (2011) was intended to provide positive effect on
improving oral English accuracy. It is what the teachers did during the classroom by using the
certain type of CF to provide oral feedback for the student. From the interview with the teachers,
it was revealed that those teachers used certain CF for the following reasons below.
1. Repetition
The reason why repetition was used by most teachers is to encourage the student
by not declaring that certain student comes with wrong answer. This is based on the
explanation of the two teachers of teacher A and teacher B. According to Teacher A:
It is important to correct the student implicitly that it will not make the student
feel embarrassed whenever they make error in their English no matter what kind
of error it is. It is because some students often make fun of the student‟s error that
discourages the student to improve their English. (Teacher A, 26 November 2014)
According to teacher A, this certain type of implicit feedback that she used in the
classroom was used to avoid the student feel discouraged since student was easily to be
discouraged when the teacher explicitly said that the student made an error. The use of
corrective feedback especially with certain type of feed such as repetition was intended to
avoid this kind experience where the student might feel discourage when the error was
exposed when the teacher pinpointed the error and gave the correct form directly.
Similar to teacher A, teacher B also came with the thought that implicit CF will
encourage students to learn from the error they made, as she mentioned in the interview.
Teacher B also comes with similar opinion that supports this reason as shown in the
excerpt of the interview below.
It is important to encourage the student to improve their English. Giving the
implicit feedback is preferred to be the best way to help the student improve their
English since the fear of doing mistake has been very great threat to discourage
student of learning from doing some errors first.
Teachers avoided clearly saying that the student answer incorrectly in which it is
considered as the implicit way to tell the student that she or he was incorrect. Though the
reason might not be exactly similar to those previous results that implicit CF will
encourage student, this following conclusion by Mackey and Goo (2007) that the effect
of implicit feedback will last longer and will be more effective than the explicit feedback
can be the support of the reason why teachers use this type of feedback.
2. Elicitation
Elicitation that used most often by teacher B is intended to stimulate student‟s
thinking process. What is meant by „to stimulate‟ is that the teacher did not provide
correct answer and instead, the teacher asks the completion or the correct form of the
answer. By doing so the teacher wants the student to think as the correct form they had
already learned. In fact, they already learned about it or know about the correct form of
the error that they might do. It is the reason that mentioned only by teacher B that
explained this way.
Using CF, especially certain type of CF, such as elicitation is important for those
students. It will help them stimulate their thinking process to let them find the
correct form of the error they made. In my opinion it is an effective way to help
the student learn the error they made and show a better performance next time.
However, it might be different when it is applied to poor student.
Though the reason does not clearly explain more on the result, it seems that this
reason is very similar to some researcher recommendation that implicit CF will last
longer than explicit CF. The example below will show how CF will serve the purpose to
stimulate student‟s thinking process.
Excerpt 8
Student
: Aspirin is one of the drugs invented by man (phonological error of the
word „invented‟)
Teacher A
: Aspirin is one of …? (Elicitation is used with pause to provide a break
for the student to find the correct answer)
Student
: Aspirin is one of the drugs invented by man (with corrected
pronunciation of „invented‟)
The excerpt above shows elicitation was used to stimulate student‟s thinking
process. When the student was found with phonological error, the teacher used elicitation
in which this type of CF can be in a form of giving incomplete sentence or phrase with
omitted error which will provide pause so that the student may have more time to find the
correct answer. It is how teacher stimulated thinking process of the student by giving the
student time to find the answer on their own.
Elicitation was also used to promote the situation that teacher is not the only
person that provides correct answer in which students is also allowed as the one that that
will also provide the correct answer or correct form for the other student. Teacher is not
only person in the classroom that comes with always-right answer. Teacher B said, “It is
wise to let the students think that teacher is not the only person who can always correct
students‟ mistakes.” According to her student will also be able to find more resources to
help their learning outside the classroom in which they might get something that have not
learned in the classroom so that they will be able to provide correct answer before the
teacher provides further explanation about certain material.” Giving certain feedback
such as elicitation will let the student think that they can also come with the correct
answer.
This finding was unexpected and it can be an advice for the other teacher to
motivate them to explore their student‟s ability by allowing the students to go to certain
field in which they not know very well about it and explore it even before it is explained
in the classroom. It is an unexpected finding that will be also helpful for the other teacher
to allow their student talk more instead of only dominating the teaching-learning activity.
3. Recast
Recast was given to manage teaching time effectively. It is a different reason that
was revealed by the Teacher C. He added that he uses certain type of CF, which is known
as recast, as his main option of oral corrective feedback because the previous technique
did not work so well due to extended time needed. Teacher C previously used the method
in which he will make a list of incorrect word that might come up from the student during
the lesson and discuss it at the end of the lesson. After several times using this technique,
it turned out that the technique was time consuming. More about this reason, he gave his
explanation and opinion about this:
I previously used different type of feedback, in which it will allow the student to
have the correct form of the error at the end. It turned out that this method was not
so effective that I would need more time to cope with errors and feedback. Due to
the ineffective of this method, the teaching and learning since the student cannot
understand the feedback clearly as the time given is not sufficient to manage the
feedback. (Teacher C, 26 November 2014)
According to him, he found that this kind of method more effective in time
management that he was able to use the teaching time with no extended time needed to
provide feedback for the student that will help the student recognize repair their error. In
fact, the use of recast is considered as an effective CF type to provide a clear repair for
the student according to Lyster and Ranta (1997)
REFERENCES
Chaudron, C. (1977). A descriptive model of discourse in the corrective treatment of learners'
errors. Language Learning, 27, 29-46
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), 454459.
Dabaghi, A. (2006). Error correction: Report on a study. Language Learning Journal, 34(1), 1013.
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language
Learning 60.2, 309–365.
Lyster, R. & L. Ranta (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in
communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20, 37–66.
Lyster, R. & K. Saito (2010).Oral feedback in classroom SLA: Ameta-analysis. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition 32, 265–302.
Mackey, A. & J. Goo (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research
synthesis. In A.Mackey (ed.), 407–452.
Mackey, A., Al-Khalil, M., Atanassova, G., Hama, M., Logan-Terry, A., & Nakatsukasa, K.
(2007). Teachers' intentions and learners' perceptions about corrective feedback in the L2
classroom. International Journal of Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1),
129-152
Méndez, E. H., Cruz, R. R., & Loyo, G. M.(2010). Oral corrective feedback by EFL teachers at
Universidad de Quintana Roo
Ragawanti, D. T. (2007). How Should Teachers Give Feedback: Indonesian Learners‟
Perspectives. The New English Teacher , 1.2, 62-76
Roy Lyster, Kazuya Saito and Masatoshi Sato (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second
language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46, pp 140.
Russell, J.&N. Spada (2006).The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2
grammar. In J. Norris & L. Ortega (eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning
and teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 133–162.
Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency
development: Monitoring, practice, and proceduralization. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 34 (4), 591-626.
Sheen, Y. & R. Ellis (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching. In E. Hinkel (ed.),
Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, Vol. 2. New York:
Routledge, 593–610.
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Vega Febrian Persi
112009098
ENGLISH TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
2015
Teacher‟s Oral Corrective Feedback in EFL Junior High School
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Vega Febrian Persi
112009098
ENGLISH TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
SATYA WACANA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
2015
Teacher’s Oral Corrective Feedback in EFL Junior High School
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Vega Febrian Persi
112009098
Approved by:
Victoria Usadya Palupi, MA-ELT
Supervisor
Debora Tri Ragawanti, MA-ELT
Examiner
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This thesis contains no such material as has been submitted for examination in any course
or accepted for the fulfillment of any degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my
knowledge and my belief, this contains no material previously published or written by any other
person except where due reference is made in the text.
Copyright@ 2015. Vega Febrian Persi and Victoria Usadya Palupi, MA-ELT
All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced by any means without the
permission of at least one of the copyright owners or the English Department, Faculty of
Language and Literature, Satya Wacana ChristianUniversity, Salatiga.
Vega Febrian Persi:
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT DECLARATION
As a member of the (SWCU) Satya Wacana Christian University academic community, I
verify that:
Name
Student ID Number
Study Program
Faculty
Kind of Work
:
:
:
:
:
Vega Febrian Persi
112009098
English Teacher Education Program
Language and Literature
Undergraduate Thesis
In developing my knowledge, I agree to provide SWCU with a non-exclusive royalty free right
for my intellectual property and the contents therein entitled:
TEACHER‟S ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK IN EFL JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
along with any pertinent equipment.
With this non-exclusive royalty free right, SWCU maintains the right to copy, reproduce, print,
publish, post, display, incorporate, store in or scan into a retrieval system or database, transmit,
broadcast, barter or sell my intellectual property, in whole or in part without my express written
permission, as long as my name is still included as the writer.
This declaration is made according to the best of my knowledge.
Made in
Date
: Salatiga
: January 30, 2015
Verified by signee,
Vega Febrian Persi
Approved by
Thesis Supervisor
Thesis Examiner
Victoria Usadya Palupi, MA-ELT
Debora Tri Ragawanti, MA-ELT
Abstract
The use of oral corrective feedback has been found to help teacher with different
method that will suit different situation in which Lyster & Ranta (1997) have made it clear
to provide some types to help teacher provide oral corrective feedback (CF). This study is
aimed to find out how teacher perceive CF in their teaching in the way they use certain type
of CF their teaching. Observation was conducted to capture the detail of during the teaching
to find all detail when the teacher provided CF for the student. An interview was then given
after the observation was done to find the underlying reason of why they use certain type
of CF. This study found that teacher use almost of all CF type to provide helpful feedback
for the student. It is found from the reasons they stated that CF is given by teachers in
order to provide benefit of improvement for the student.
Keyword: EFL, Corrective Feedback
Abstract
The use of oral corrective feedback has been found to help teacher with different
method that will suit different situation in which Lyster & Ranta (1997) have made it clear
to provide some types to help teacher provide oral corrective feedback (CF). This study is
aimed to find out how teacher perceive CF in their teaching in the way they use certain type
of CF their teaching. Observation was conducted to capture the detail of during the teaching
to find all detail when the teacher provided CF for the student. An interview was then given
after the observation was done to find the underlying reason of why they use certain type
of CF. This study found that teacher use almost of all CF type to provide helpful feedback
for the student. It is found from the reasons they stated that CF is given by teachers in
order to provide benefit of improvement for the student.
Keyword: EFL, Corrective Feedback
INTRODUCTION
Errors often occur in EFL classroom while the students are trying to improve their second
language (L2). However, errors are not always related to negative effect during the learning
process. Instead, it is considered as the evidence that there are processes and strategies exist
within the errors (Dabaghi, 2006). In other word, those processes also indicate that the students
are learning about certain topic given in their EFL classroom. To help students cope with those
errors that often occur throughout the learning process, feedback is given by the teacher so that
students may improve their performance in L2. This type of feedback which is given as those
responses to student utterance containing an error is considered as corrective feedback by Ellis
(2006).
Using CF to help learner or student to improve their L2 or to continue their L2 growth is
suggested by some researchers as they provide strong support for the effectiveness of CF as they
found CF has great effect in helping learner to improve their English for example in oral
accuracy (Lyster et al., 2013; Chu, 2011). It is why further study is needed to provide more
details regarding how to use corrective feedback effectively.
For teachers to be able to use CF effectively, it is important to understand the role of CF
plays in classroom. To find the pattern of how CF is used in the recent EFL classroom by
language teacher as educator will be significant since it will provide information regarding the
most effective feedback for the learner toward the error they make within their utterances.
This study is intended to figure out what kind of CF that are often used in classroom in
classroom and further explanation regarding why certain type of CF is used in the classroom. In
order to figure out how CF is used specifically to get the benefit of its effectiveness, there are
some questions reformulate to help identify the used of CF in classroom recently: what type of
CF is used mostly? Why does the teacher use certain type of CF in the classroom? In order to get
the answer for that question and further explanation regarding how CF is used in the classroom.
By answering those questions regarding how CF is used in classroom, it will be quite
clear related to whether those types of CF which is brought by Lyster and Ranta with further
detail of result that may appear for certain type of CF, it will be possible to figure out what role
CF play in classroom and how CF is used classroom. Those result will help the researchers and
also the teachers or educators to see how different types of CF are used in classroom recently
compared to how different it is compared to the past years especially in how teacher will use CF
in classroom, whether or not they come with those common type of CF proposed by Lyster &
Ranta (1997) or there might be different type of oral corrective feedback that brought by teacher.
RESEARCH QUESTION
This study tries to shed light on the use of oral corrective feedback (CF) in the recent
classroom activity. As an effort to describe the use of CF in the recent classroom, this study tries
to answers the following questions.
1. How do teachers perceive oral corrective feedback (CF)?
2. What is teachers‟ underlying reason of using certain of feedback?
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Ellis (2006), defined CF as those responses to learner utterances containing error.
Therefore, any response given to student in which there is error within their utterance is
considered as corrective feedback. As has been defined by Chaudron (1977) that CF is any
reaction of the teacher which will clearly transform, disapprovingly refers to, or demand
improvement of the learner utterances.
There are different types that appear as the most often types that are used by teachers up
to today. According to Lyster nd Ranta (1997), there are different types that have been identified
previously. Those types of CF are divided into into six different types named as explicit
feedback, clarification, recast, metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, and repetition.
Classification of Corrective Feedback
Lyster and Ranta (1997) have put forward those different types of CF that classified into
six different types of CF. Those six different types of CF is classified according to different
feedback presented by teacher to help students repair their error. Following description below
will show further description of each CF presented by Lyster and Ranta.
1. Explicit Correction
To provide the feedback for the learner, this type of correction is given by
providing the correct form and clearly indicates the error (Lyster & Ranta, 1997). The
following example will show how this kind of CF is given.
St
: He take the bus to go to school.
T
: Oh, you should say he takes. He takes the bus to go to school.
This kind of feedback is provided by bringing the correct form together by indicating
that there is error in student utterance. Lochtman proposed that explicit feedback is
very clear feedback that the learners will understand easily of teacher‟s correction
toward the error they make (as cited in Ragawanti, 2007).
2. Recasts
In this feedback, reformulation of all or part of student‟s error is presented
without error. It means when teacher reformulate students error form into the correct
one, it will be identified as recast.
St
: He take the bus to go to school.
T
: He takes the bus to go to school.
It can be simply stated that recast is used as teacher‟s reformulation of all or part of
student‟s utterance without the error (Lyster & Ranta, 1997).
3. Clarification Requests
When the teacher uses the question that indicate the utterance has been
misunderstood or ill-formed and a repetition or reformulation is needed, this kind of
feedback is considered as clarification request.
St
: He take the bus to go to school.
T
: Pardon me?
According to Lyster and Ranta (1997), certain expression such as “Pardon Me…”
is often appears as the expression to ask student‟s clarification for the error the make.
Furthermore, it is also find that this following expression “What do you mean by …
?” is also used to clearly help the student clarify their error.
4. Metalinguistic Feedback
This feedback is used by giving any comment, information, or questions, related
to the well-formedness of student‟s utterance with no correct form in provided (Lyster
& Ranta, 1997).
St
: he take the bus to go to school.
T
: do we say he take?
The question used above will provide student a clue to recognize the error he or
she makes in his or her utterance. Other than in form of question, this feedback can
also be in form of comment or information.
5. Elicitation
According to Lyster and Ranta (1997), this CF is used by asking for the
completion of sentence, or asking questions, or asking for reformulation in order to
elicit the correct form. Furthermore, this kind of feedback is known to appear in three
different techniques.
The first technique of elicitation is given by giving the pause or time for the
student so that the student is allowed to provide correct answer.
St
: He take the bus to go to school.
T
: He ….?
The example above shows how teacher give the student pause or more time to
find the correct answer or correct form for their utterance.
The second technique of elicitation is presented by using question in order to
elicit the correct form. To make it different from the metalinguistic feedback, the
question that is used in this technique excludes those yes/no questions such as “Do we
spell this word this way in English?” Instead, it will use the question such as “ How
do we spell this word in English?” The last technique of elicitation is presented by
simply asking the student to reformulate their utterance.
6. Repetition
Teacher uses repetition in isolation of utterance containing error. It is the way
repetition is presented by teacher according to the classification proposed by Lyster
and Ranta (1997). In order to clearly present it as a feedback, this kind of CF is found
to be given by teacher by adjusting the intonation that intended to highlight the error
that is made by the student.
St
: He take the bus to go to school.
T
: He take? (or He take the bus?)
Instead of only proposing merely different type of CF, Lyster and Ranta also classified
those six types of CF into two broad categories of reformulation and prompt. Those categories
are given based on different signal given by each of type of CF (Lyster and Ranta, 2007). For
instance; recasts and explicit correction are considered as reformulation since they supply
learners with target reformulation of their non-target output. On the other hand, elicitation,
metalinguistic feedback, clarification requests, and repetition are categorized as prompt in which
this kind of CF will include various signals minus reformulation to push learner to do self-repair.
Those six types of CF and broad categories that proposed by Lyster and Ranta may give a
complete identification which will give a better explanation regarding certain CF that is usually
used in classroom. Still, there are further details related to those types of CF proposed by Lyster
and Ranta that may elaborate those types of CF by Lyster and Ranta previously which is known
well as the best description of different type of CF used in classroom.
Sheen and Ellis (2011) also suggested quite similar taxonomy to the taxonomy by Lyster
and Ranta. However, what they proposed will only divide those types of CF that some are
already suggested by Lyster and Ranta into two different types: implicit and explicit CF.
Using the taxonomy suggested by Ellis & Sheen (2011), those six types of corrective
feedback will be able to be distinguished into two different ways of how each of them is given,
implicitly and explicitly. When the feedback is given implicitly, there is a chance that the learner
may not recognize that a feedback is given when they do any error in learner‟s utterance. On the
other hand, when the feedback is given explicitly, the learners will easily realize and recognize
that there is certain correction given to them. Nevertheless, some researchers brought a
cautiously recommendation that implicit CF might last longer than the explicit CF, even though
explicit CF is considered more effective in short term (Mackey & Goo 2007, Li 2010). Further
on the taxonomy proposed by Ellis & Sheen (2011), they defined more specific on explicit CF
this way. Explicit CF that requests clarification for the error made by learner orally and explicit
CF that directly correct learner‟s error in which it can also be in form of providing metalinguistic
explanation related to the error made by learner.
To explain more about it the following table will give clear description of how Lyster and
Ranta‟s CF type comes together with taxonomy of Sheen and Ellis.
Table 1 CF Types (Adapted from Ranta & Lyster 2007; Sheen & Ellis 2011)
Implicit
Reformulation
Conversational recasts
Explicit
Didactic Recast
• a reformulation of a student • a reformulation of a student
utterance in an attempt to resolve a utterance in the absence of
communication breakdown
a communication problem
• often take the form of confirmation Explicit correction
checks
• a reformulation of a student
utterance plus a clear
indication of an error
Explicit
correction
with
metalinguistic explanation
• in addition to signaling an error
and providing the
correct form, there is also a
metalinguistic comment
Prompts
Repetition
Metalinguistic clue
• a verbatim repetition of a student • a brief metalinguistic statement
utterance, often with
aimed at eliciting a
adjusted intonation to highlight the self-correction from the student
error
Elicitation
Clarification request
• directly elicits a self-correction
• a phrase such as „Pardon?‟ and „I from the student, often in
don‟t understand‟
the form of a wh-question
following a student utterance to Paralinguistic signal
indirectly signal an
• an attempt to non-verbally elicit
error
the correct form from
the learner
The examples given in Sheen and Ellis‟ taxonomy include didactic recasts and explicit
correction with or without metalinguistic explanation as the explicit CF with correct form
provided. On the other hand, the metalinguistic clues and elicitation are considered as those types
of CF with no correct form provided. Those distinctions that proposed by those researchers
(Lyster & Ranta 1997; Sheen & Ellis 2011) may give further explanation regarding different
types of CF that may appear in classroom especially in English as Foreign Language (EFL)
classroom.
In addition to be able to give different type of CF toward students‟ error within their
utterances, it is also essential to identify what kind of error that can be found in classroom.
Mackey et al. (2007) and have identified those errors that usually occur in classroom especially
in student utterance and divided those errors into four different types of error.
1. Incorrect use of word order, tense, conjugation, and particles which is known as
morphosyntactic error.
2. Mispronouncing word by learners that is known as phonological error.
3. Inappropriate use of vocabulary or code-switch due to lack of lexical knowledge
which is known as Lexical error.
4. Misunderstanding of a leaner‟s utterance, although there is no grammatical, lexical, or
phonological error found.
Those specific errors are identified in order to find out what kind of error that will be
probably be found in classroom. Those types of errors proposed by Mackey et al. (2007) in
which they usually occur within student utterances may assist the researcher to figure out the
attitude language teacher toward CF and the role CF plays in classroom recently to get recent
result of the recent use of CF in classroom
METHODOLOGY
Context of the Study
The study is conducted in SMP Negeri 1 Salatiga. It is located in the small town of
Salatiga, Central Java, Indonesia. Although English was not used actively in this school, most of
the English lessons are presented using English to encourage students‟ growth in L2 in which
Indonesian language is L1 and the English is the L2 in this school. The school allocated two
hours (2 x 40 minutes) English class to cover all lessons to develop speaking, listening, reading,
and writing skill in every meeting. The teachers in this school was often used several specific
types of CF to correct the student utterance which was given to help students recognize the errors
they made.
Participants of the Research
The participants of this study are three English teachers of SMP Negeri 1 Salatiga. In
which the method used in choosing the participant is sample of convenience (McKay, 2006). It is
easier to get further detail of information from the participant with whom the researcher has
known previously because the research will need very specific detail that is probably not
delivered very well if the researcher and the participant do not know each other before.
Instruments of Data Collection
The instrument used in this data collection was observation using video-taping method
that was followed by interview. The observation with video-taping was used to record the
activity that may happen in classroom. It will record the use of CF by teachers to help the
students correct the error in their utterance. Video-taping method is used in order to get the entire
situation in classroom so that the researcher will get the information on what type of CF is
usually used by certain teacher. Since there will be three teachers that are going to observed, it is
important to bring this video-taping method to record every specific details regarding the use of
CF in classroom so that it will clearly capture varied form of CF that can be found in the recent
classroom activity. The observation was then followed by interview that is addressed to all
teachers to get further detail related to the teaching. The interview will provide information
related to the information of the reason why certain CF is used in classroom.
Data Collection Procedure
The observation that was used is in this research is descriptive observation since this
research is prepared to capture what is going on during the lesson in classroom. Descriptive
observation was selected to capture every activity and feedback used in the classroom so that it
will be easier to categorize every form of oral corrective feedback which was given by teacher
since the form of feedback often comes in different form to suit different classroom situation.
There were three teachers who taught different classroom of grade 7 to grade 9. The observation
focused on the teacher to see what kind of feedback was giving in each classroom.
The observation was done to capture every detail related to the use of CF by teacher in
classroom. Those details will consist of specific form of CF which is used in the classroom and
how many times certain type of CF is used in the classroom. After the observation was done, a
brief interview was given to get further explanation of the reason underlie every teacher to use
certain type of CF that was seen during the observation.
After the data collected from the observation, a brief interview was given to those three
teachers in order to find further explanation of underlying reason of why certain teacher might
use specific type of CF more often instead of the other type of the CF. In other word, this
interview was given in order to get deeper explanation of why teacher choose specific type of
CF.
Data Analysis
The video-taped activity that was recorded during the observation was analyzed to see
which type of CF. It was analyzed by looking at the data found from the video-tape related to
how many times each CF type was used in every classroom by each teacher that often used in
classroom by each teacher that will show a major pattern that showed what kind of CF used more
often and what kind of CF that used less. It provided result for the research objective. After that,
the result was used to ask further information related to the underlying reason of using certain
type of CF by each teacher. At the end, the result described the underlying reason of the teacher
that this research seeks to find out.
Three teachers were observed and interviewed right after the teaching. After the
observations were conducted in several classes in which those three teachers taught for two hours
(2 x 40 minutes) in every meeting.
FINDING AND DISCUSSION
From the observation conducted, it could be seen that there was certain pattern in the way
each teacher provide CF for their students. Among those types of CF mentioned by Lyster and
Ranta (1997), there were only three types of CF that were often used by those three teachers:
elicitation, repetition and recast, as shown in the table below. Despite the occurrence related to
the use of those certain types of feedback, those three teachers sometimes used the other type of
CF such as: explicit correction and clarification. In the description of the result of the
observation, the three teachers will be named as Teacher A, Teacher B and Teacher C.
Table 1. The Use of CF by the Teachers
Explicit Recast Clarification Metalinguistic Elicitation Repetition Total
Correct
Feedback
Each
ion
Teacher
Teacher A
1
5
7
2
12
27
Teacher B
1
3
3
10
4
21
Teacher C
2
14
Total
4
22
16
10
12
16
64
Table 1 shows the use of different type of CF in their classes teaching during the
observation. It was found that there were three types of CF that were preferred by the teachers to
provide feedback: elicitation, repetition, and recast.
As can be seen from the table 1 above, there is quite significant number in which recast is
found with the biggest number of CF that was used in the classroom. The findings of the current
study are consistent with those of Lyster and Ranta (1997) who found that recast appeared as the
most often used CF types among the other types. What is interesting in this data is that, teacher C
was, in fact, found with the smallest number of feedback among the other teacher. It will explain
the reason why recast became the most frequent CF used in classroom due to the limited type of
CF used by teacher C. In fact, he was not seen to use any other type of CF beside explicit
correction and recast.
From the table 1 above, we can see that none of those three teachers in their teachings
were seen to use metalinguistic feedback as the part of their CF used in classroom.
Metalinguistic feedback was not used by those three teachers.
From the data presented in the table 1, elicitation, repetition, and recast were the types of
CF which were the most frequently used by all teachers. This finding is in agreement with Zhuo
(2010) findings which showed that recast provided improvement to student significantly
especially for specific type of explicit recast. In addition, those two other types of CF, elicitation
and repetition, are also considered as implicit feedback which is mentioned by some researchers
with the recommendation that implicit CF might last longer than the explicit CF.
The Use of Corrective Feedback by Teacher A
Table 2. Frequency of CF used in teaching three classrooms by teacher A
Explicit
Recast
Clarification Metalinguistic Elicitation Repetition
Correction
1st teaching
1
2
2nd teaching
2
3
3rd teaching
2
2
5
7
Total
1
Feedback
1
5
2
4
3
2
12
For instance, Teacher A used repetition in the most of her teaching, as shown in the table
2. Nevertheless, she was also found using the other type of CF in her teaching such as recast,
clarification request, explicit correction and elicitation. The result of this study indicates that
those types of CF that proposed by Lyster and Ranta appeared in the way teacher give their oral
feedback addressed to student‟s error.
To provide further explanation related to teacher underlying reason of why they use
certain type of feedback more often than the other type, following discussion will provide further
answer for the question related to the underlying reason why some teacher used the two types of
oral corrective feedback promoted by Lyster and Ranta appeared often in those classes in which
taught by the three teachers.
During the teaching among those three classes by Teacher A, it is found that the result is
quite similar one to another. It is because teacher A taught three classes from the same grade.
Since the Teacher A taught in the classroom with the same grade, the materials given were also
very similar among the three classes she was teaching. It might be the cause of why there is quite
similar result found related to frequency of CF used by Teacher A as shown in table 2.
From the table above, it is found that repetition appeared more often than the other types
of CF. However, there are still some other types of CF which is also found during the teaching of
teacher A. Those types of CF are appeared as the feedback for different type of error since there
is different kind of error found from those three teachings. Following example of error that
happened in the classroom will explain more about how certain type CF is used by teacher A.
The excerpt was from the classroom in which morphosyntactic errors were found in certain word
produced by the student.
Excerpt 1
Student
: How many cage is there? (incorrect form of the word
„cage‟ and incorrect to be)
Teacher A
: How many cage is there? (Type of CF: Repetition – the utterance in
error is repeated by the teacher by adjusting their intonation to highlight
the word cage where the error occur)
Student
: How many cage is there?
(Observation 1, 17 November 2014)
From the excerpt above, the students was found to make a mistake in providing correct
form of a question in which plural form should be used in the question. Instead of using “How
many cage is there?”, the question should be “How many cages are there?” It was then followed
by giving type of CF below to help the student understand the feedback given by teacher.
Excerpt 2
Student
: How many cage is there? (incorrect form of the word
„cage‟ and incorrect to be)
Teacher A
: How many cage is there? (Type of CF: Repetition)
Student
: How many cage is there?
Teacher A
: It is not how many cage, but how many?
Student
: Cages
Teacher A
: Okay, how many cages is there? Sorry? (Type of CF: Clarification)
Student
: How many cages are there?
(Observation 1, 17 November 2014)
From the excerpt above, teacher A used repetition as the part of the feedback given to the
student. The error that happened in the conversation above is categorized as morphosyntactic
error in which this kind of error included the incorrectly use of word order including the use of
plural form and to be. From the excerpt above the errors were all in the same type of error,
morphosyntactic error. To cope with morphosyntactic error that is made by the student, Teacher
A used repetition feedback to help student repair the error. In order to help the student repair the
sentence, there is also another type of CF included to make it clearer for the student who found
that Repetition feedback by teacher A was not very helpful. In excerpt above, clarification was
used to make the feedback clear when Repetition could not help the student provide correct form
of the question.
As shown from the table 2 above and what can be found in the observation, repetition
was seen as the most often type of CF that was used in the classroom. On the other hand, there
were also the other type of CF that were still used by Teacher A to help the student understand
the error they made and repair the error by themselves such as clarification request, explicit
correction, and elicitation. The use of Clarification Request that can be seen on the excerpt 1 was
to clarify when there was still another error made by the student. The excerpt showed the whole
conversation that happened between Teacher A and the student and showed how different type of
feedback was used by Teacher A to help student easily recognize the error and repair it.
Excerpt 2
Student
: I take a bath two times a day.
Teacher A
: Two times should be? Two…? Two…? (Type of CF: Elicitation)
Student
: Twice
(Observation 2, 26 November 2014)
Beside the Repetition as the type of CF that was often used by teacher, it was found that
Teacher A also used elicitation as the other type of CF to help student recognize the error and
found the error on their own.
In this context, the student seemed to have the lesson related to the use of adverb once,
twice and thrice instead of one time, two times, and three times. The use of elicitation for the
error made by the student in the excerpt above is intended to help student remember the correct
form that had been discussed previously.
The Use of Feedback by Teacher B
Table 3. Frequency of CF used in teaching three classrooms by teacher B
Explicit
Recast
Clarification Metalinguistic Elicitation Repetition
Correction
1st teaching
2nd teaching
1
1
3rd teaching
Total
Feedback
1
4
1
1
2
3
2
1
1
3
1
3
3
10
4
Similar result is actually shown by Teacher B where she showed the use of certain type of
CF more often than the other type of CF as shown in table 3 in which elicitation was found as the
most frequently used CF type. This kind of CF was used in her classroom that varied from two
different grades, grade 7 and 8. The result shown quite similar where elicitation was the most
often CF used in classroom. In Teacher B‟s teaching context where elicitation was used often,
students made errors of pronunciation instead of the other errors such as grammatical error. To
explain more about it, the following excerpt will describe it occurred. In this context, the teacher
played a song where the students were asked to listen to the song and then they were asked to
write those words they got from the song they listened.
Excerpt 3
Student
: Mother and how. (mispronouncing of the word „mother‟ and
„how‟)
Teacher B
: Mother and how? Could you correct that? (Type of CF: Elicitation)
(Observation 1, 20 November 2014)
The excerpt above showed the error made when the student were asked to tell those
words they got from the song they listened. The word that mentioned in the recording was quite
clear that the student could actually find the correct form. However, there was phonological error
found when they pronounced certain word such as „mother‟ and „how‟ as the two words
mentioned by the student as can be seen in the excerpt 3. The teacher still provided corrected
form of the error that made the student like what you can find below.
Excerpt 4
Student
: Mother and how. (mispronouncing of the word „mother‟ and
„how‟)
Teacher B
: Mother and how? Could you correct that? (Type of CF: Elicitation)
Student
: Mother and how (error still occurs)
Teacher B
: Once again.
Mother and how. (CF type used: Recast)
Student
: Mother and how. (Correct pronunciation)
(Observation 1, 20 November 2014)
Though elicitation is the type of CF that was used more frequently in the classroom by
Teacher B, she is also noticed that she used also different type of CF. It can be seen from the
table 3 above where there were some different types of CF which are found to be used in her
teaching in those three different classrooms. Explicit correction, recast, clarification request and
repetition were also the other types of CF which were used to repair the error that was made by
student in which elicitation still the most frequently used type of CF that was used in giving oral
feedback.
Excerpt 5
Student
: Dear, Ina. I hope you are okay. (mispronouncing of the word „hope‟)
Teacher B
: I? (Elicitation)
Student
: I hope you are okay.
Teacher B
: I hope you are okay? (Repetition)
Student
: I hope you are okay.
Teacher B
: Not I hope, but I hope. (Explicit correction)
(Observation 2, 23 November 2014)
Similar to Teacher A, Teacher B provided quite similar pattern in giving oral corrective
feedback. In this case, elicitation was used more frequently by Teacher B. The example in the
conversation above provided further detail of how different type of feedback was used in order to
help student understand what the teacher intended to say. For example, when there was an error
occurred, teacher B directly used elicitation as the feedback. Unfortunately, the student did not
understand what the teacher meant. She continued to use repetition to make it clearer for the
student. At last, explicit correction was used to provide student clear and simple feedback so that
the student was expected to recognize what error he made and how to repair it.
The Use of Feedback by Teacher C
Table 4 Frequency of CF used in teaching three classrooms by teacher C
Explicit
Recast
Clarification Metalinguistic Elicitation Repetition
Correction
1st teaching
2
Feedback
4
2nd teaching
6
3rd teaching
4
Total
2
14
While two teachers above came with similar type of CF that was used in the classroom,
Teacher C was found to use different type of CF. As shown in the table 4, Teacher C used recast
more often than the other CF. Recast was often used by Teacher C to provide oral feedback for
the student.
Table 4 above showed how Teacher C provided different type of CF for certain type of
feedback. There were some examples that will explain how teacher gave certain type of feedback
for the student in order to repair the error made in the classroom. Following excerpt is a simple
example that will describe it.
Excerpt 6
Student
: I want to go to the concert tonight. (mispronouncing of the word
„concert‟)
Teacher C
: I want to go to the concert tonight. (Type of CF: Recast)
Student
: I want to go to the concert tonight (correct pronunciation)
(Observation 1, 18 November 2014)
The excerpt above shows how teacher used recast to provide feedback for the student.
This type of CF is considered as explicit type of CF in which this kind of CF is given to clearly
tell the student the correct form of the error they made or to simply tell the error that the student
made. Beside recast, there were two types of CF, explicit correction and recast that were used by
Teacher C in which both of them are considered as explicit CF. The example below also shows
of how teacher C gave CF to his student.
Excerpt 7
Student
: Will you take a walk with me? (mispronouncing of the word „walk‟)
Teacher C
: Will you take a walk with me? (teacher followed imitate student‟s
mistake)
Teacher C
: Will you take a walk with me? (Type of CF: Recast)
(Observation 1, 18 November 2014)
From the excerpt above, Teacher C did use repetition. However, it did not seem to require
any response from the student. Instead, Teacher C followed his question with reformulated form
of sentence with corrected word. It explains how teacher C provided certain type of CF and
directly provided correction of error made by student.
From the table 1, Teacher A and B were found to use elicitation and repetition more often
than the other type of CF, while teacher C was found to use recast as the type of CF that was
used more frequently than the other type of CF. The correlation between teacher A and B is
interesting because they come with similar type of CF used to cope with error. From the table 1,
Teacher A and Teacher B was found to use elicitation and repetition as the most frequently used
CF. Those two types of CF are considered as implicit CF. On the other hand, teacher C used
recast as the most frequently used CF in which this kind of CF was considered as explicit CF.
Despite certain types of CF that were more frequently used than the other types of CF,
the teachers also used explicit correction and clarification in which the other type of CF is used
to help the teacher to provide a clear feedback for the student so that the student will be able to
repair their error. The excerpt below will show how explicit correction and clarification were
used in the classroom.
Student
: How many cage is there? (incorrect form of the word
„cage‟ and incorrect to be)
Teacher A
: How many cage is there? (Type of CF: Repetition)
Student
: How many cage is there?
Teacher A
: It is not how many cage, but how many?
Student
: Cages (correct word to be used in the sentence)
Teacher A
: Okay, how many cages is there? Sorry? (Type of CF: Clarification
was used to help the student recognize the error)
Student
: How many cages are there?
(Observation 1, 17 November 2014)
Underlying Reason of Using Specific CF Type
The use of oral corrective feedback was often used in classroom such as when the
students answer the question of the exercise given to student in which often the error related to
morphosyntactic and phonological error. The current study found that there were different reason
of those three teachers of using certain type of CF more frequently than the other type of CF.
Those findings will explain more about how they perceive the use of CF in classroom and why
they use it to cope with certain error.
The use of CF according to Chu (2011) was intended to provide positive effect on
improving oral English accuracy. It is what the teachers did during the classroom by using the
certain type of CF to provide oral feedback for the student. From the interview with the teachers,
it was revealed that those teachers used certain CF for the following reasons below.
1. Repetition
The reason why repetition was used by most teachers is to encourage the student
by not declaring that certain student comes with wrong answer. This is based on the
explanation of the two teachers of teacher A and teacher B. According to Teacher A:
It is important to correct the student implicitly that it will not make the student
feel embarrassed whenever they make error in their English no matter what kind
of error it is. It is because some students often make fun of the student‟s error that
discourages the student to improve their English. (Teacher A, 26 November 2014)
According to teacher A, this certain type of implicit feedback that she used in the
classroom was used to avoid the student feel discouraged since student was easily to be
discouraged when the teacher explicitly said that the student made an error. The use of
corrective feedback especially with certain type of feed such as repetition was intended to
avoid this kind experience where the student might feel discourage when the error was
exposed when the teacher pinpointed the error and gave the correct form directly.
Similar to teacher A, teacher B also came with the thought that implicit CF will
encourage students to learn from the error they made, as she mentioned in the interview.
Teacher B also comes with similar opinion that supports this reason as shown in the
excerpt of the interview below.
It is important to encourage the student to improve their English. Giving the
implicit feedback is preferred to be the best way to help the student improve their
English since the fear of doing mistake has been very great threat to discourage
student of learning from doing some errors first.
Teachers avoided clearly saying that the student answer incorrectly in which it is
considered as the implicit way to tell the student that she or he was incorrect. Though the
reason might not be exactly similar to those previous results that implicit CF will
encourage student, this following conclusion by Mackey and Goo (2007) that the effect
of implicit feedback will last longer and will be more effective than the explicit feedback
can be the support of the reason why teachers use this type of feedback.
2. Elicitation
Elicitation that used most often by teacher B is intended to stimulate student‟s
thinking process. What is meant by „to stimulate‟ is that the teacher did not provide
correct answer and instead, the teacher asks the completion or the correct form of the
answer. By doing so the teacher wants the student to think as the correct form they had
already learned. In fact, they already learned about it or know about the correct form of
the error that they might do. It is the reason that mentioned only by teacher B that
explained this way.
Using CF, especially certain type of CF, such as elicitation is important for those
students. It will help them stimulate their thinking process to let them find the
correct form of the error they made. In my opinion it is an effective way to help
the student learn the error they made and show a better performance next time.
However, it might be different when it is applied to poor student.
Though the reason does not clearly explain more on the result, it seems that this
reason is very similar to some researcher recommendation that implicit CF will last
longer than explicit CF. The example below will show how CF will serve the purpose to
stimulate student‟s thinking process.
Excerpt 8
Student
: Aspirin is one of the drugs invented by man (phonological error of the
word „invented‟)
Teacher A
: Aspirin is one of …? (Elicitation is used with pause to provide a break
for the student to find the correct answer)
Student
: Aspirin is one of the drugs invented by man (with corrected
pronunciation of „invented‟)
The excerpt above shows elicitation was used to stimulate student‟s thinking
process. When the student was found with phonological error, the teacher used elicitation
in which this type of CF can be in a form of giving incomplete sentence or phrase with
omitted error which will provide pause so that the student may have more time to find the
correct answer. It is how teacher stimulated thinking process of the student by giving the
student time to find the answer on their own.
Elicitation was also used to promote the situation that teacher is not the only
person that provides correct answer in which students is also allowed as the one that that
will also provide the correct answer or correct form for the other student. Teacher is not
only person in the classroom that comes with always-right answer. Teacher B said, “It is
wise to let the students think that teacher is not the only person who can always correct
students‟ mistakes.” According to her student will also be able to find more resources to
help their learning outside the classroom in which they might get something that have not
learned in the classroom so that they will be able to provide correct answer before the
teacher provides further explanation about certain material.” Giving certain feedback
such as elicitation will let the student think that they can also come with the correct
answer.
This finding was unexpected and it can be an advice for the other teacher to
motivate them to explore their student‟s ability by allowing the students to go to certain
field in which they not know very well about it and explore it even before it is explained
in the classroom. It is an unexpected finding that will be also helpful for the other teacher
to allow their student talk more instead of only dominating the teaching-learning activity.
3. Recast
Recast was given to manage teaching time effectively. It is a different reason that
was revealed by the Teacher C. He added that he uses certain type of CF, which is known
as recast, as his main option of oral corrective feedback because the previous technique
did not work so well due to extended time needed. Teacher C previously used the method
in which he will make a list of incorrect word that might come up from the student during
the lesson and discuss it at the end of the lesson. After several times using this technique,
it turned out that the technique was time consuming. More about this reason, he gave his
explanation and opinion about this:
I previously used different type of feedback, in which it will allow the student to
have the correct form of the error at the end. It turned out that this method was not
so effective that I would need more time to cope with errors and feedback. Due to
the ineffective of this method, the teaching and learning since the student cannot
understand the feedback clearly as the time given is not sufficient to manage the
feedback. (Teacher C, 26 November 2014)
According to him, he found that this kind of method more effective in time
management that he was able to use the teaching time with no extended time needed to
provide feedback for the student that will help the student recognize repair their error. In
fact, the use of recast is considered as an effective CF type to provide a clear repair for
the student according to Lyster and Ranta (1997)
REFERENCES
Chaudron, C. (1977). A descriptive model of discourse in the corrective treatment of learners'
errors. Language Learning, 27, 29-46
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), 454459.
Dabaghi, A. (2006). Error correction: Report on a study. Language Learning Journal, 34(1), 1013.
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language
Learning 60.2, 309–365.
Lyster, R. & L. Ranta (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in
communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20, 37–66.
Lyster, R. & K. Saito (2010).Oral feedback in classroom SLA: Ameta-analysis. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition 32, 265–302.
Mackey, A. & J. Goo (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research
synthesis. In A.Mackey (ed.), 407–452.
Mackey, A., Al-Khalil, M., Atanassova, G., Hama, M., Logan-Terry, A., & Nakatsukasa, K.
(2007). Teachers' intentions and learners' perceptions about corrective feedback in the L2
classroom. International Journal of Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1),
129-152
Méndez, E. H., Cruz, R. R., & Loyo, G. M.(2010). Oral corrective feedback by EFL teachers at
Universidad de Quintana Roo
Ragawanti, D. T. (2007). How Should Teachers Give Feedback: Indonesian Learners‟
Perspectives. The New English Teacher , 1.2, 62-76
Roy Lyster, Kazuya Saito and Masatoshi Sato (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second
language classrooms. Language Teaching, 46, pp 140.
Russell, J.&N. Spada (2006).The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2
grammar. In J. Norris & L. Ortega (eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning
and teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 133–162.
Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency
development: Monitoring, practice, and proceduralization. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 34 (4), 591-626.
Sheen, Y. & R. Ellis (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching. In E. Hinkel (ed.),
Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, Vol. 2. New York:
Routledge, 593–610.