Impact of Elicitation and Clarification Request Corrective Feedback on Intermediate Introvert/Extrovert EFL Learners’ Speaking Ability

Subject Areas :

Atousa Ebrahimi ¹ , Davood Mashhadi Heidar ² , Mohammad Reza khodareza ³

1 - Department of English Language and Literature, Tonekabon Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tonekabon, Iran
2 - Department of English, Tonekabon Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tonekabon, Iran
3 - Assistant Professor of TEFL, Department of English Language, Islamic Azad University, Tonekabon Branch, Tonekabon, Iran.

Received: 2024-05-25 Accepted : 2024-07-03 Published : 2024-07-03

Keywords: corrective feedback, elicitation, clarification, learning styles, introvert/extrovert, speaking ,

Abstract :

The current research investigates the impact of two types of corrective feedback such as elicitation, and clarification requests - out of five types of corrective feedback - on the speaking abilities of Iranian intermediate EFL learners who are either introverts or extroverts. Participants in the study included 172 intermediate level students in 11 groups: 10 experimental and 1 control groups. They were language learners studying English in The Iran Language Institute in three branches: two branches in Babol, and one in Sari. The tools applied in this quasi-experimental research were: Oxford Placement Test (OPT) to achieve the homogeneity of the groups, speaking section of IELTS as pre-test and post-test and a Learning Style Survey to examine extraversion and introversion. ANCOVA and two-way ANOVA statistics were employed to analyze the data. The findings revealed that the extroverts had better performance in elicitation while the introverts had better performance in clarification corrective feedback. Employing the findings of the study, teachers can create a supportive and inclusive atmosphere that encourages both introverted and extroverted learners to participate and engage in speaking activities.

References:

1. Ahangari, S., & Amirzadeh, S. (2011). Exploring the Teachers’ Use of Spoken Corrective Feedback in Teaching Iranian EFL Learners at Different Levels of Proficiency. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1859-1868. https:// doi. org/ https ://doi .org/1 0.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.435
2. Akiyama, Y. (2017). Learner beliefs and corrective feedback in telecollaboration: A longitudinal investigation. System, 64, 58-73. https:// doi.org/ https://do i.org/10.1 016/j.system.2016.12.007
3. Atai, M. R., & Shafiee, Z. (2017). Pedagogical knowledge base underlying EFL teachers’ provision of oral corrective feedback in grammar instruction. Teacher Development, 21(4), 580-596. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2016.1277257
4. Bao, R. (2019). Oral corrective feedback in L2 Chinese classes: Teachers’ beliefs versus their practices. System, 82, 140-150. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.04.004
5. Benson, S., & DeKeyser, R. (2019). Effects of written corrective feedback and language aptitude on verb tense accuracy. Language Teaching Research, 23(6), 702-726. https:/ /doi.org/10.1177/1362168818770921
6. Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(2), 102-118.https://do i.org/https:/ /doi.org/10. 1016/j.jslw. 2007.11.004
7. Cohen, A., Oxford, R., & Chi, J. (2001). Learning Style Survey: Assessing Your Own Learning Styles Learning Style Survey*: Assessing Your Own Learning Styles A -Total. Regents of the University of Minnesota.
8. Couper, G. (2019). Teachers’ cognitions of corrective feedback on pronunciation: Their beliefs, perceptions and practices. System, 84, 41-52.https:// doi.org/ https://d oi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.04.003
9. Eckstein, G., & Bell, L. (2023). Dynamic Written Corrective Feedback in First-Year Composition: Accuracy and Lexical and Syntactic Complexity. Relc Journal, 0(0), 00336882211061624. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882211061624
10. Evans, C. (2013). Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70-120. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312474350
11. Farrell, M. (2017). Leadership Reflections: Extrovert and Introvert Leaders. Journal of Library Administration, 57(4), 436-443. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2017.1300455
12. Fazilatfar, A. M., Fallah, N., Hamavandi, M., & Rostamian, M. (2014). The Effect of Unfocused Written Corrective Feedback on Syntactic and Lexical Complexity of L2 Writing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 482-488.https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.443
13. Feng, H., & Liu, H. (2021). International Perspectives on Teaching the Four Skills in ELT: Listening, Speaking, Reading, Writing. System, 98, 102467. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102467
14. Ferris, D. R., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. (2013). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(3), 307-329.https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.009
15. Gao, J., & Ma, S. (2022). Instructor feedback on free writing and automated corrective feedback in drills: Intensity and efficacy. Language Teaching Research, 26(5), 986-1009. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820915337
16. Gholami, L. (2022). Incidental corrective feedback provision for formulaic vs. Non-formulaic errors: EFL teachers’ beliefs and practices. Language Awareness, 31(1), 21-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2021.1943421
17. Gholami, L. (2023). Oral corrective feedback and learner uptake in L2 classrooms: Non-formulaic vs. formulaic errors. Language Teaching Research, 0(0), 13621688211021560. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211021560
18. Ha, X. V., & Murray, J. C. (2023). Corrective feedback: Beliefs and practices of Vietnamese primary EFL teachers. Language Teaching Research, 27(1), 137-167.https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820931897
19. Haifaa, F., & Emma, M. (2014). Oral Corrective Feedback and Learning of English Modals. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 136, 322-329.https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.337
20. Han, Y. (2017). Mediating and being mediated: Learner beliefs and learner engagement with written corrective feedback. System, 69, 133-142. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.07.003
21. Han, Y., & Hyland, F. (2015). Exploring learner engagement with written corrective feedback in a Chinese tertiary EFL classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 31-44. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.002
22. Hartono, D., Basthomi, Y., Widiastuti, O., & Prastiyowati, S. (2022). The Impacts of Teacher’s Oral Corrective Feedback to Students’ Psychological Domain:A Study on EFL Speech Production. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2152619.https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2152619
23. ILI.English.Series.Intermediate. (2004). The ILI English Series Intermediate 3. ILI Language Institute.
24. Iraji, S., Zoghi, M., & Nemat-Tabrizi, A. (2014). Corrective Feedback and Learners’ Uptake Across Gender in an EFL Context. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 680-687. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.468
25. Karim, K., & Nassaji, H. (2018). The revision and transfer effects of direct and indirect comprehensive corrective feedback on ESL students’ writing. Language Teaching Research, 24(4), 519-539. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818802469
26. Kessler, M. (2023). Written corrective feedback in an online community: A typology of English language learners’ requests and interlocutors’ responses. Computers and Composition, 67, 102752. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2023.102752
27. Kim, Y., Choi, B., Kang, S., Kim, B., & Yun, H. (2020). Comparing the effects of direct and indirect synchronous written corrective feedback: Learning outcomes and students’ perceptions. Foreign Language Annals, 53(1), 176-199.https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12443
28. Kirgoz, Y., & Agcam, R. (2015). Teachers’ Perceptions on Corrective Feedback in Turkish Primary Schools. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 574-581. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.096
29. Koltovskaia, S. (2020). Student engagement with automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) provided by Grammarly: A multiple case study. Assessing Writing, 44, 100450. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100450
30. Lee, I., Luo, N., & Mak, P. (2021). Teachers’ attempts at focused written corrective feedback in situ. Journal of Second Language Writing, 54, 100809. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100809
31. Li, S., & Vuono, A. (2019). Twenty-five years of research on oral and written corrective feedback in System. System, 84, 93-109.https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.05.006
32. Liu, Q., & Brown, D. (2015). Methodological synthesis of research on the effectiveness of corrective feedback in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 66-81. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.011
33. Lyster, R. (2023). Oral Corrective Feedback as a Pedagogical Strategy. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (pp. 1-7). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal1028.pub3
34. Mahalingappa, L., Polat, N., & Wang, R. (2022). A cross-cultural comparison in pedagogical beliefs about oral corrective feedback: the case of English language teachers in China versus the U.S. Language Awareness, 31(4), 410-430. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2021.1900211
35. Mandouit, L., & Hattie, J. (2023). Revisiting “The Power of Feedback” from the perspective of the learner. Learning and Instruction, 84, 101718. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101718
36. Mawlawi Diab, N. (2015). Effectiveness of written corrective feedback: Does type of error and type of correction matter? Assessing Writing, 24, 16-34. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2015.02.001
37. Mendez Seijas, J., & Spino, L. (2023). Written “corrective” feedback in Spanish as a heritage language: Problematizing the construct of error. Journal of Second Language Writing, 60, 100989. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2023.100989
38. Montazeri, M., & Salimi, E. A. (2019). Assessing motivation to speak (MTS) and willingness to communicate through metalinguistic corrective feedback. Learning and Motivation, 68, 101594. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2019.101594
39. Mori, R. (2011). Teacher cognition in corrective feedback in Japan. System, 39(4), 451-467. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.10.014
40. Nassaji, H. (2016). Researching corrective feedback in interaction and instruction. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 433-435. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816651018
41. Papi, M., Wolff, D., Nakatsukasa, K., & Bellwoar, E. (2021). Motivational factors underlying learner preferences for corrective feedback: Language mindsets and achievement goals. Language Teaching Research, 25(6), 858-877. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211018808
42. Penning de Vries, B. W., Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & van Hout, R. (2020). Spoken grammar practice in CALL: The effect of corrective feedback and education level in adult L2 learning. Language Teaching Research, 24(5), 714-735. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818819027
43. Rassaei, E. (2015). Oral corrective feedback, foreign language anxiety and L2 development. System, 49, 98-109. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.01.002
44. Sepehrinia, S., & Mehdizadeh, M. (2018). Oral corrective feedback: teachers’ concerns and researchers’ orientation. The Language Learning Journal, 46(4), 483-500https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2016.1172328
45. Winke, M. P., & Rawal, H. (2023). Teaching Large, Mixed-Ability Classes. In The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (pp. 1-6). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0222
46. Zhang, X., & Zhang, R. (2023). Feedback, Response, and Learner Development: A Sociocultural Approach to Corrective Feedback in Second Language Writing. SAGE Open, 13(1), 21582440231157680. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231157680
47. Zhu, Y., & Wang, B. (2019). Investigating English language learners’ beliefs about oral corrective feedback at Chinese universities: a large-scale survey. Language Awareness, 28(2), 139-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2019.1620755