口头纠正反馈偏好:语言能力、母语、外语课堂焦虑和享受是否相关?

IF 1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Language and Education Pub Date : 2023-03-31 DOI:10.17323/jle.2023.16141
Watcharapol Wiboolyasarin, Phornrat Tiranant, Teavakorn Khumsat, Tidarat Ngamnikorn, Kanokpan Wiboolyasarin, Somkiat Korbuakaew, Nattawut Jinowat
{"title":"口头纠正反馈偏好:语言能力、母语、外语课堂焦虑和享受是否相关?","authors":"Watcharapol Wiboolyasarin, Phornrat Tiranant, Teavakorn Khumsat, Tidarat Ngamnikorn, Kanokpan Wiboolyasarin, Somkiat Korbuakaew, Nattawut Jinowat","doi":"10.17323/jle.2023.16141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. The effectiveness of oral corrective feedback (OCF) in language learning is influenced by learners' comprehension and response to various OCF techniques. Therefore, it is essential for teachers to consider learners' preferences for OCF strategies. \nPurpose. This quantitative study aimed to investigate the preferences of Thai as a foreign language (TFL) learners for ten commonly discussed types of OCF. Specifically, it examined whether these preferences are influenced by four learner variables: proficiency level, first language (L1), foreign language classroom anxiety (FLCA), and foreign language enjoyment (FLE). \nMethods. The study involved 288 university students from Chinese, Japanese, and Korean TFL settings, and the data from questionnaires were analysed using appropriate statistical methods. \nResults. The findings indicate that, regardless of proficiency level, L1, FLCA, or FLE level, learners prefer more explicit OCF techniques, such as metalinguistics feedback and explicit correction. However, Korean undergraduates scored lower in the majority of OCF strategies (i.e., ignoring, elicitation, recast, explanation, and public feedback) compared to the other participants. The MANOVA analysis revealed significant differences in ignore, peer correction, recast, and private feedback based on proficiency level and L1 background. Although the differences between the FLE and FLCA approaches were not statistically significant, high FLE and FLCA groups tended to prefer more OCF strategies than the low groups. \nConclusion. This study has significant implications for instructional practices in TFL settings and for L2 lecturers in the classroom. By understanding learners' preferences for OCF, educators can tailor their instructional approaches to meet the specific needs of their students.","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preferences for Oral Corrective Feedback: Are Language Proficiency, First Language, Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety, and Enjoyment Involved?\",\"authors\":\"Watcharapol Wiboolyasarin, Phornrat Tiranant, Teavakorn Khumsat, Tidarat Ngamnikorn, Kanokpan Wiboolyasarin, Somkiat Korbuakaew, Nattawut Jinowat\",\"doi\":\"10.17323/jle.2023.16141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background. The effectiveness of oral corrective feedback (OCF) in language learning is influenced by learners' comprehension and response to various OCF techniques. Therefore, it is essential for teachers to consider learners' preferences for OCF strategies. \\nPurpose. This quantitative study aimed to investigate the preferences of Thai as a foreign language (TFL) learners for ten commonly discussed types of OCF. Specifically, it examined whether these preferences are influenced by four learner variables: proficiency level, first language (L1), foreign language classroom anxiety (FLCA), and foreign language enjoyment (FLE). \\nMethods. The study involved 288 university students from Chinese, Japanese, and Korean TFL settings, and the data from questionnaires were analysed using appropriate statistical methods. \\nResults. The findings indicate that, regardless of proficiency level, L1, FLCA, or FLE level, learners prefer more explicit OCF techniques, such as metalinguistics feedback and explicit correction. However, Korean undergraduates scored lower in the majority of OCF strategies (i.e., ignoring, elicitation, recast, explanation, and public feedback) compared to the other participants. The MANOVA analysis revealed significant differences in ignore, peer correction, recast, and private feedback based on proficiency level and L1 background. Although the differences between the FLE and FLCA approaches were not statistically significant, high FLE and FLCA groups tended to prefer more OCF strategies than the low groups. \\nConclusion. This study has significant implications for instructional practices in TFL settings and for L2 lecturers in the classroom. By understanding learners' preferences for OCF, educators can tailor their instructional approaches to meet the specific needs of their students.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37020,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Language and Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Language and Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.16141\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Language and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.16141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景口语纠正反馈在语言学习中的有效性受学习者对各种纠正反馈技术的理解和反应的影响。因此,教师必须考虑学习者对强迫症策略的偏好。意图本定量研究旨在调查泰语作为外语(TFL)学习者对十种常见的OCF类型的偏好。具体而言,它考察了这些偏好是否受到四个学习者变量的影响:熟练程度、第一语言(L1)、外语课堂焦虑(FLCA)和外语享受(FLE)。方法。这项研究涉及来自中国、日本和韩国TFL环境的288名大学生,并使用适当的统计方法对问卷数据进行了分析。后果研究结果表明,无论熟练程度、L1、FLCA或FLE水平如何,学习者都更喜欢更明确的OCF技术,如元语言反馈和明确的纠正。然而,与其他参与者相比,韩国本科生在大多数OCF策略(即忽视、启发、改写、解释和公众反馈)中的得分较低。MANOVA分析显示,基于熟练程度和L1背景,忽视、同伴纠正、重铸和私人反馈方面存在显著差异。尽管FLE和FLCA方法之间的差异在统计学上并不显著,但高FLE组和FLCA组倾向于比低组更喜欢OCF策略。结论这项研究对TFL环境中的教学实践和课堂上的二语讲师具有重要意义。通过了解学习者对OCF的偏好,教育工作者可以调整他们的教学方法来满足学生的具体需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Preferences for Oral Corrective Feedback: Are Language Proficiency, First Language, Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety, and Enjoyment Involved?
Background. The effectiveness of oral corrective feedback (OCF) in language learning is influenced by learners' comprehension and response to various OCF techniques. Therefore, it is essential for teachers to consider learners' preferences for OCF strategies. Purpose. This quantitative study aimed to investigate the preferences of Thai as a foreign language (TFL) learners for ten commonly discussed types of OCF. Specifically, it examined whether these preferences are influenced by four learner variables: proficiency level, first language (L1), foreign language classroom anxiety (FLCA), and foreign language enjoyment (FLE). Methods. The study involved 288 university students from Chinese, Japanese, and Korean TFL settings, and the data from questionnaires were analysed using appropriate statistical methods. Results. The findings indicate that, regardless of proficiency level, L1, FLCA, or FLE level, learners prefer more explicit OCF techniques, such as metalinguistics feedback and explicit correction. However, Korean undergraduates scored lower in the majority of OCF strategies (i.e., ignoring, elicitation, recast, explanation, and public feedback) compared to the other participants. The MANOVA analysis revealed significant differences in ignore, peer correction, recast, and private feedback based on proficiency level and L1 background. Although the differences between the FLE and FLCA approaches were not statistically significant, high FLE and FLCA groups tended to prefer more OCF strategies than the low groups. Conclusion. This study has significant implications for instructional practices in TFL settings and for L2 lecturers in the classroom. By understanding learners' preferences for OCF, educators can tailor their instructional approaches to meet the specific needs of their students.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Language and Education
Journal of Language and Education Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
14.30%
发文量
33
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Scrutinizing the Relationship between Vietnamese English Majors’ Intrinsic Motivation and Perceptions Towards Five Components of the 5Ts Framework Examining the Evolution and Components of the Culture of Learning in University Education: A Systematic Scoping Review Predictive Effects of English Classroom Anxiety and Motivation on Chinese Undergraduate EFL Learners’ English Achievement Literary Works and Technology Aids Inclusion in Foreign Language Learning: Case of Kosovo Students’ Approach Teacher Development in Technology-Enhanced Language Teaching: Book Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1