The Effect of Teacher’s Feedback on Students’ Language Skills at University Level
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v6i1p177Keywords:
Improving Language Skills, Oral Feedback, Teacher Feedback, Written Feedback, Writing Ability, Speaking AbilityAbstract
The study examines the effects of teacher feedback on students’ language skills. The motive behind the study was to explore the ways that can be used to enhance the effectiveness of teacher feedback. Questionnaires were used to collect data from a purposive sample of 205 students studying at Salahaddin University. Regression analysis was used to determine the effects of teacher feedback on students’ language skills with the aid of SPSS version 23. The results of the study showed that oral feedback has positive effects on the students’ speaking skills. It was also revealed that the provision of oral feedback causes an improvement in the students’ writing skills. The results further showed that the use of written feedback was observed to be posing negative effects on the students’ writing skills. A lot of students certainly wanted their teachers to focus on sentence structure and style (structural mistakes). It was concluded that the effectiveness of teacher feedback is mainly influenced by the amount of the feedback followed by the timing of the feedback and lastly the mode of the feedback. The study recommended that university teachers must use oral feedback more but, in most cases, it is always important for them to use both oral and written feedback depending on the circumstance. The originality of the study is in its potency to highlight that teacher feedback does not always yield the desired results and its use is subjective to the timing, mode and amount of the feedback provided.
References
Abdullah, B. M. A. (2015). Kurdish students’ perception toward communicative language teaching at a university in Kurdistan Region Iraq. European Scientific Journal, 414-426.
Ahmad, I., Saeed, M., & Salam, M. (2013). Effect of corrective feedback on academic achievements of students: Case of government secondary schools in Pakistan. International Journal of Science and Research, 2(1), 36-40.
Banditvilai, C. (2016). Enhancing Students’ Language Skills through Blended Learning. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 14(3), 220-229.
Boyles, J. (2017). The effect of oral feedback on perceived classroom community in undergraduate students. Doctoral Disssertation, Liberty University. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2565&context=doctoral.
Brown, G. T., Peterson, E. R., & Yao, E. S. (2016). Student conceptions of feedback: Impact on self‐regulation, self‐efficacy, and academic achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(4), 606-629.
Cardelle, M., & Corno, L. (1981). Effects on second language learning of variations in written feedback on homework assignments. TESOL Quarterly, 15, 251–261
Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 267-296.
Cohen, A. D. & Robbins, M. (1976). Towards assessing interlanguage performance: The relationship between selected errors, learners’ characteristics and learners’ explanations. Language Learning, 26, 45–66.
Cohen, A. D. (1987). Student processing of feedback on their compositions. In: A. Wenden & J. Rubin (eds.). Learner strategies in language learning. New York: Prentice-Hall, 57–69.
Crawford, K. (2016). The perceived impact of introducing a secure English language test as part of the university of Kurdistan Hewler’s admissions process. Book of Proceedings, 200.
Dobbs, J., & Arnold, D. H. (2009). Relationship Between Preschool Teachers’ Reports of children’s behavior and their behavior toward those children. School Psychology Quarterly, 24(2), 95.
Drost, E. A. (2011). Validity and reliability in social science research. Education Research and Perspectives, 38(1), 105.
Fathman, A. K. & Whalley, E. (1990). Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content. In: B. Kroll (ed.). Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 178-190.
Ferris, D. (1995). Student reactions to teacher response in multiple-draft composition classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 33–35.
Flores, J. G., & Alonso, C. G. (1995). Using focus groups in educational research: Exploring teachers’ perspectives on educational change. Evaluation Review.
Freeman, D., Katz, A., Garcia Gomez, P., & Burns, A. (2015). English-for-teaching: Rethinking teacher proficiency in the classroom. ELT Journal, 69(2), 129-139.
Gliem, J. A., & Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education.
Hendrickson, J. M. (1978). Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research, and practice. Modern Language Journal, 62, 387–398.
Hernández Méndez, E., Cruz, R., & del Rosario, M. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions about oral corrective feedback and their practice in EFL classrooms. Profile Issues in Teachers Professional Development, 14(2), 63-75.
Khowaja, A., Gul, R., Lakhani, A., Rizvi, N., & Saleem, F. (2014). Practice of written feedback in nursing degree programmes in Karachi: the students’ perspective. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan, 24(4), 241.
Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. Bmj, 311(7000), 299-302.
Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24(3), 203–218.
Lochtman, K. (2002). Oral corrective feedback in the foreign language classroom: How it affects interaction in analytic foreign language teaching. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3), 271-283.
Mendez, E. H. and Cruz, M. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions about oral corrective feedback and their practice in EFL classrooms. Profile Issues in Teachers` Professional Development, 14(2), 63-75.
Núñez, J. C., Suárez, N., Rosário, P., Vallejo, G., Cerezo, R., & Valle, A. (2015). Teachers’ feedback on homework, homework-related behaviors, and academic achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 108(3), 204-216.
Palys, T. (2008). Purposive sampling. The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, 2(1), 697-8.
Riege, A. M. (2003). Validity and reliability tests in case study research: a literature review with “hands-on” applications for each research phase. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 6(2), 75-86.
Salim, S. K. (2018). Learning style preferences of Kurdish graduate students at the Language Centre. International Journal of Kurdish Studies, 4(2), 309-321.
Salteh, M. A., & Sadeghi, K. (2015). Teachers’ and students’ attitudes toward error correction in L2 writing. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 12(3), 1-31.
Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23(1), 103-110.
Siewert, L. (2011). The effects of written teacher feedback on the academic achievement of fifth-grade students with learning challenges. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 55(1), 17-27.
Tongco, M. D. C. (2007). Purposive sampling as a tool for informant selection. Ethnobotany Research and Applications, 5, 147-158.
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327-369.
Voelkel, S., & Mello, L. V. (2014). Audio feedback better feedback? Bioscience Education, 22(1), 16-30.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies
International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies applies the
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic Licence (CC BY-NC 2.0)
