A Four-Dimensional Evaluation of Teacher-Student Attitudes towards Spoken Error Treatment

Document Type : Original Article


1 The Islamic Azad University Roudehen Branch

2 The University of Tehran

3 The Islamic Azad University, Pishva Branch


Whether negative evidence should be incorporated in or excluded from an SLA or FLA setting has long been a major concern for practitioners and researchers in the SLA and FLA domains. Some (Bowen, Madsen & Hilferty, 1985; Lightbown & Spada, 1990; Fathman & Whalley, 1990; Ferris & Roberts, 2001; Lyster & Ranta, 1997; Askew & Lodge, 2000; and Ashwell, 2000) endorse the use of corrective feedback while others do not (Krashen, 1982; VanPatten, 1988; Dekeyser, 1993; and Truscott, 1996). What these researchers; however, fail to take under advisement in this realm is learners and teachers’ Attitudes towards Error Correction (ATEC). The present experiment wishes to address the issue from this angle, i.e., how teachers and learners’ attitude converge and/or diverge as far as their attitude towards error correction is concerned. Some 410 students and 34 teachers were invited to fill out the questionnaires. Additionally, 45 students and 13 teachers were interviewed to delve into the versatile facets of error treatment qualitatively. The results showed which error treatment techniques the students and the teachers most and/or least favored. Not only does the analysis of the data support Vahdani and Mirsaidi's (2007) claim on students' ATEC, but also data analysis suggests common grounds can be detected between students' attitudes and those of their teachers. It can, therefore, be concluded that corrective feedback has won the favor of learners and teachers and that in their now statistically tenable estimation it should be factored in FLA settings.


Ashwell, T. (2000). Patterns of teacher response to student writing in a multiple-draft composition classroom: Is content feedback followed by form feedback the best method? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9 (3),227-257.
Askew, S., & Lodge, C. (2000).  Gifts, ping-pong, and loops: Linking feedback and learning. In S. Askew (Ed.), Feedback for learning (pp. 1-18). London: Routledge.
Bowen, J. D., Madsen, H., & Hilferty, A. (1985). TESOL Techniques and   Procedures. Massachusetts: New Bury House Publishers, Inc.
Carrol, S., & Swain, M. (1993). Explicit and implicit negative feedback: An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15 (3), 357-386.
Cathcart, R. L., & Olsen, J. E. W. (1976). Teachers' and students' preferences for correction of classroom conversation errors. In J. F. Fanselow, & R. H. Crymes, (Eds.), On TESOL, 76, (pp. 41-53). Washington, D. C.: TESOL.
Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classrooms. Cambridge: CUP.
Corder, S. P. (1981). Error analysis and interlanguage. Oxford: OUP.
Courchêne, R. (1980). The error analysis hypothesis, the contrastive analysis hypothesis, and the correction of error in the second language classroom. TESL Talk, 11 (1), 3-11.
DeKeyser, R. M. (1993). The effect of error correction on L2 grammar knowledge and oral proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 77 (4), 501-514.
Doff, A. (1990). Teach English: A training course for teachers. Teacher's handbook. Cambridge: CUP.
Fanselow, J. F. (1977). The treatment of error in oral work. Foreign Language Annals, 10 (5), 583-593.
Fathman, A., & 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 (pp. 178–190). Cambridge: CUP.
Ferris, D. R., Chaney, S. J., Komura, K., Roberts, B. J., & McKee, S. (2000). Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and long-term effects of written error correction. Colloquium presented at TESOL Convention, Vancouver, BC.
Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes. How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10 (3), 161- 184.
Gipps, C. (1995). Beyond testing: Towards a theory of assessment. London: Falmer Press.
Hadley, A. O. (2003). Teaching language in context, (3rd Ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon Institute of English.
Leki, I., & Carson, J. G. (1994). Students' perceptions of EAP writing instruction and writing needs across the disciplines. TESOL Quarterly, 28 (1), 81-101.
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1990). Focus on form and corrective feedback in communication language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12 (4), 429-448.
Long, M. H., Inagaki, S., & Ortega, L. (1998). The role of implicit negative feedback on Japanese and Spanish. Modern Language Journal, 82 (3), 357-371.
Lyster, R. (1998). Recast, repetition and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20 (1), 51-81.
Lyster, L., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19 (1), 37-66.
McKay, S. L. (2006). Researching second language classrooms. NJ: Erlbaum Associates Publications.
Morris, F. (2005). Child-to-child interaction and corrective feedback in a computer mediated L2 class. Language Learning & Technology,        9 (1), 29-45.
Ping, A., Pin, V. T., Wee, S., & Hwee Nah, H. (2003). Teacher feedback: A Singaporean perspective. ITL, Review of Applied Linguistics, 47-75.
Reid, J. (1998). Responding to ESL student language problems: Error analysis and revision plans. In P. Byrd & J. M. Reid (Eds.), Grammar in the composition classroom: Essay on teaching ESL for college-bound students (pp. 118-137). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.  
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. (2003). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge language teaching library. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46 (2), 327-369.
Tsang, W. K. (2004). Feedback and uptake in teacher-student interaction: An analysis of 18 English lessons in Hong Kong secondary classroom. RELC journal, 34 (2), 187-209.
Vahdani, R., & Mirsaidi. K. (2007, February). Error treatment predicament: Negotiated corrective feedback. In Proceedings of the 1st Regional Conference English Language Teaching and Literature (pp.1-9).  ELT Department, Islamic Azad University Press,   Roudehen Branch.
Van Patten, B. (1988). How juries get hung: Problems with the evidence for focus on form in teaching. Language learning, 38 (2), 243-260.
Walker, J. L. (1973). Opinions of university students about language teaching. Foreign Language Annals, 7 (1), 102-105.
Zacharias, N. T. (2007). Teacher and student attitudes toward teacher feedback. RELC journal, 38 (1), 38-52
Zoble, H. (1995). Converging evidence for the acquisition-learning distinction. Applied Linguistics, 16 (1), 35-56.
Volume 2, Issue 1
April 2013
Pages 1-20
  • Receive Date: 23 November 2018
  • Accept Date: 23 November 2018