An Exploration of Teachers' Corrective Intention and College Students' Interpretation of Oral Corrective Feedback

教師糾錯意圖與大學生對口語糾錯回饋解釋之探索

吳佩樺(Mia Pei-Hua Wu)

指導教授 ： 柯安娜

國立清華大學/人文社會學院/外國語文學系/碩士(2011年)

摘要

在過去數十年間許多研究者花了大量精力研究糾錯回饋。然而，很少研究檢視老師糾錯意圖與學生解釋的重疊部分。因此，本研究旨在探討(1)在教室的情境中，老師有意糾正學生錯誤的程度；(2)老師糾錯意圖與學生解釋的重疊部分；(3)學生對糾正性回饋的意見及看法。
本研究觀察與記錄兩個班級五個禮拜，研究對象包括兩位大一英文老師及其51位學生。在觀查期間，研究者從兩班課堂錄影中挑選20段回饋給予事件。這些事件幾乎平均分配至學生的三種錯誤類型(語音、文法、用字)，也包含了老師不同的糾錯回饋類型。在每堂課結束一個禮拜內，研究者訪問並記錄授課老師給予每個回饋的意圖。研究者將20段回饋給予事件及10段干擾項組合成一段新的影片剪輯。所有的學生必須同時看此剪輯與填寫問卷。問卷首先要求學生判斷影片裡學生話語的正確性及錯誤類別，接著學生必須判斷老師給予某段話語的用意。問卷提供五項固定的敘述讓學生解釋老師的用意。問卷填寫結束後，研究者訪問16名參與學生。這些學生因為他們常得到或從未得到老師的糾錯回饋而被挑選為受訪者。研究者詢問受訪者對於老師糾錯回饋的意見及看法。
研究結果顯示，老師在給予學生的語音、句法、用字錯誤回饋時有糾錯意圖。兩位老師都顯露不同程度的糾錯意圖且有時一個回饋囊括多重意圖。然而，可能只有當老師糾正語音錯誤時學生才能成功解釋其意圖。其他老師的回饋多半被視為無糾正性質。因此，本研究建議，若老師選擇糾正學生的口語錯誤，可以將焦點放在語音錯誤而非其它錯誤類型。此外，老師在糾正學生非語音錯誤時必須結合不同的提示與方法。否則，學生改善錯誤的機會就會減低許多，因為他們甚至沒有注意到老師的糾正。

關鍵字

糾錯回饋

並列摘要

Researchers have put forth a lot of effort in the field of oral corrective feedback for the past several decades. However, few studies have looked at the overlap of teachers’ corrective intentions and students’ interpretations. Thus, the purposes of the present study are to find out (1) the extent teachers make deliberate efforts to correct students’ errors in classroom settings; (2) the overlap of teachers’ corrective intentions and students’ interpretations ; and (3) students’ opinions and feelings about oral corrective feedback.
In the present study, two freshman classes were observed and recorded for five weeks. There were totally two teachers and 51 students participating in this study. During the observation period, 20 feedback-giving events were selected from the video recordings of the two classes. The 20 events were almost equally distributed to students’ three oral error types, namely, phonological, grammatical, and lexical errors and with various teachers’ corrective feedback types contained. The two teachers were asked to recall their intentions to every corrective feedback event individually no more than one week after they finished each class. The 20 feedback-giving events along with 10 distractors were later combined to form a new video clip. All student participants had to watch the video and fill in a questionnaire at the same time. The questionnaire first asked students to judge the correctness and error type of student utterances in the video clip. Then, students had to interpret the intention of teachers’ utterances. The questionnaire provided five fixed interpretations for students to interpret the teachers’ intentions. After finishing the questionnaire, the researcher interviewed 16 of the student participants. These selected students were those who received the teachers’ most corrective feedback or those who had never been corrected by the teachers. The interviewees were invited to share their opinions and feelings about the teachers’ corrective feedback.
The results show that the teachers had corrective intentions when giving responses to students’ phonological, grammatical, and lexical errors. Both teachers revealed different amounts of corrective intentions and sometimes they had more than one intention when correcting students. However, results seemed to indicate that students could successfully interpret teachers’ intentions only when the correction was focused on phonological errors. Most of teachers’ other corrective feedback was regarded as non-corrective. Therefore, it is suggested that teachers may focus more on phonological errors than other errors if they choose to correct students’ errors. Also, when correcting students’ errors, teachers need integrate more hints and strategies, especially when the errors are non-phonological. Otherwise, the possibility of students’ correcting their errors will be very limited since students do not even notice the correction.

並列關鍵字

corrective feedback

參考文獻

Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning.

Studies of Second Language Acquisition, 28, 543-574.

interpretations of recasts. Studies of Second Language Acquisition, 28, 209-236.

Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001) Preemptive focus on form in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 407-432.

Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.