Home High school EFL teachers’ oral corrective feedback beliefs and practices, and the effects of lesson focus
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

High school EFL teachers’ oral corrective feedback beliefs and practices, and the effects of lesson focus

  • Xuan Van Ha ORCID logo EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: June 6, 2022
International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching
From the journal International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching Volume 61 Issue 4

Abstract

Teachers’ oral corrective feedback (CF) may be influenced by the communication orientation of the lessons, but little research has taken lesson focus into account when examining the relationship between teachers’ CF beliefs and practices. This study explores teachers’ CF beliefs, practices, and the relationship between the two constructs in Vietnamese high school EFL classrooms. The study also compares and contrasts the teachers’ CF practices in relation to two opposing lesson types in terms of communication orientation. The participants were ten experienced EFL teachers from two public high schools. Analysis of audio-recorded in-depth interviews and video and audio-recorded classroom observations (n = 20 lessons, 15 h) showed a strong relationship between the lesson focus and the teachers’ practices in various aspects of feedback provision. The teachers’ beliefs were reflected more consistently in grammar lessons (where the teaching is more form-focused) than in speaking lessons (where the teaching is more meaning-focused). There was also a difference in the teachers’ CF strategies used between the two lesson types. This difference could be explained by the teachers’ background and the difference in the predictability of the learning activities and learner contributions.

Keywords: feedback practices; high school EFL classrooms; lesson focus; oral corrective feedback; teacher beliefs; Vietnamese EFL
Corresponding author: Xuan Van Ha, Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia; and Department of Foreign Languages, Ha Tinh University, Ha Tinh, Vietnam, E-mail:

References

Bao, Rui. 2019. Oral corrective feedback in L2 Chinese classes: Teachers’ beliefs versus their practices. System 82. 140–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.04.004.Search in Google Scholar

Barcelos, Ana Maria Ferreira & Paula Kalaja. 2011. Introduction to beliefs about SLA revisited. System 39(3). 281–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.07.001.Search in Google Scholar

Basturkmen, Helen. 2012. Review of research into the correspondence between language teachers’ stated beliefs and practices. System 40(2). 282–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2012.05.001.Search in Google Scholar

Basturkmen, Helen, Shawn Loewen & Rod Ellis. 2004. Teachers’ stated beliefs about incidental focus on form and their classroom practices. Applied Linguistics 25(2). 243–272. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.243.Search in Google Scholar

Borg, Simon. 2003. Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching 36(02). 81–109. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444803001903.Search in Google Scholar

Borg, Simon. 2015. Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice. London, UK: Bloomsbury Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Borg, Simon. 2017. Teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices. In Peter Garrett & Josep M. Cots (eds.), The Routledge handbook of language awareness, 75–91. New York, US: Routledge.10.4324/9781315676494-5Search in Google Scholar

Brown, Alan V. 2009. Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of effective foreign language teaching: A comparison of ideals. The Modern Language Journal 93(1). 46–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00827.x.Search in Google Scholar

Brown, Dan. 2016. The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research 20(4). 436–458. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814563200.Search in Google Scholar

Choi, Seung-Yi & Shaofeng Li. 2012. Corrective feedback and learner uptake in a child ESOL classroom. RELC Journal 43(3). 331–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688212463274.Search in Google Scholar

Dilāns, Gatis. 2016. Corrective feedback in L2 Latvian classrooms: Teacher perceptions versus the observed actualities of practice. Language Teaching Research 20(4). 479–497. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815584454.Search in Google Scholar

Doughty, Catherine. 2001. Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In Peter Robinson (ed.), Cognition and second language instruction, 206–257. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524780.010Search in Google Scholar

Ellis, Rod. 2009. Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal 1(1). 3–18. https://doi.org/10.5070/l2.v1i1.9054.Search in Google Scholar

Ellis, Rod. 2010. Epilogue: A framework for investigating oral and written corrective feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32(02). 335–349. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263109990544.Search in Google Scholar

Ellis, Rod. 2017. Oral corrective feedback in L2 classrooms: What we know so far. In Hossein Nassaji & Eva Kartchava (eds.), Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning, 3–18. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.10.4324/9781315621432-2Search in Google Scholar

Ellis, Rod, Helen Basturkmen & Shawn Loewen. 2001. Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning 51(2). 281–318. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00156.Search in Google Scholar

Fanselow, John F. 1977. The treatment of error in oral work. Foreign Language Annals 10(5). 583–593. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1977.tb03035.x.Search in Google Scholar

Fu, Mengxia & Shaofeng Li. 2020. The effects of immediate and delayed corrective feedback on L2 development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 44. 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263120000388.Search in Google Scholar

García Mayo, María del Pilar & Ruth Milla. 2021. Corrective feedback in second versus foreign language contexts. In H. Nassaji & E. Kartchava (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of corrective feedback in language learning and teaching, 473–493. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108589789.023Search in Google Scholar

Ha, Xuan Van. 2021. Oral corrective feedback in Vietnamese EFL classrooms: Effects of awareness-raising activities on teachers’ beliefs and practices. New South Wales, Australia: Macquarie University.Search in Google Scholar

Ha, Xuan Van & Jill C. Murray. 2020. Corrective feedback: Beliefs and practices of Vietnamese primary EFL teachers. Language Teaching Research 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820931897, In press.Search in Google Scholar

Ha, Xuan Van & Jill C. Murray. 2021. The impact of a professional development program on EFL teachers’ beliefs about corrective feedback. System 96. 102405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102405.Search in Google Scholar

Ha, Xuan Van & Loc Tan Nguyen. 2021. Targets and sources of oral corrective feedback in English as a foreign language classrooms: Are students’ and teachers’ beliefs aligned? Frontiers in Psychology 12. 697160. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.697160.Search in Google Scholar

Ha, Xuan Van, Loc Tan Nguyen & Bui Phu Hung. 2021a. Oral corrective feedback in English as a foreign language classrooms: A teaching and learning perspective. Heliyon 7(7). e07550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07550.Search in Google Scholar

Ha, Xuan Van, Nam Giang Tran & Ngoc Hai Tran. 2021b. Teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding assessment in English as a foreign language classrooms in Vietnam. Qualitative Report 26(11). 3457–3475. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2021.5063.Search in Google Scholar

Harmer, Jeremy. 2007. The practice of English language teaching, 4th edn. London, UK: Pearson.Search in Google Scholar

Junqueira, Luciana & YouJin Kim. 2013. Exploring the relationship between training, beliefs, and teachers’ corrective feedback practices: A case study of a novice and an experienced ESL teacher. Canadian Modern Language Review 69(2). 181–206. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.1536.Search in Google Scholar

Kamiya, Nobuhiro. 2016. The relationship between stated beliefs and classroom practices of oral corrective feedback. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 10(3). 206–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2014.939656.Search in Google Scholar

Kartchava, Eva. 2019. Noticing oral corrective feedback in the second language classroom: Background and evidence. London, UK: Lexington Books.Search in Google Scholar

Kartchava, Eva, Elizabeth Gatbonton, Ahlem Ammar & Pavel Trofimovich. 2020. Oral corrective feedback: Pre-service English as a second language teachers’ beliefs and practices. Language Teaching Research 24(2). 220–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818787546.Search in Google Scholar

Lave, Jean & Etienne Wenger. 1991. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511815355Search in Google Scholar

Lee, Eun Jeong Esther. 2013. Corrective feedback preferences and learner repair among advanced ESL students. System 41(2). 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.01.022.Search in Google Scholar

Le, Lam Thi Bich, Toan Thai Tran & Ngoc Hai Tran. 2021. Challenges to STEM education in Vietnamese high school contexts. Heliyon 7(12). e08649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08649.Search in Google Scholar

Li, Shaofeng. 2010. The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning 60(2). 309–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x.Search in Google Scholar

Li, Shaofeng & Alyssa Vuono. 2019. Twenty-five years of research on oral and written corrective feedback in System. System 84. 93–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.05.006.Search in Google Scholar

Li, Shaofeng, Yan Zhu & Rod Ellis. 2016. The effects of the timing of corrective feedback on the acquisition of a new linguistic structure. The Modern Language Journal 100(1). 276–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12315.Search in Google Scholar

Lightbown, Patsy M. 1998. The importance of timing in focus on form. In Catherine Doughty & Jessica Williams (eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, 177–196. New York, US: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lochtman, Katja. 2002. Oral corrective feedback in the foreign language classroom: How it affects interaction in analytic foreign language teaching. International Journal of Educational Research 37(3–4). 271–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0883-0355(03)00005-3.Search in Google Scholar

Loewen, Shawn, Shaofeng Li, Fei Fei, Amy Thompson, Kimi Nakatsukasa, Seongmee Ahn & Xiaoqing Chen. 2009. Second language learners’ beliefs about grammar instruction and error correction. The Modern Language Journal 93(1). 91–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00830.x.Search in Google Scholar

Lyster, Roy. 1998. Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning 48(2). 183–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00039.Search in Google Scholar

Lyster, Roy & Hirohide Mori. 2006. Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 28(2). 269–300. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263106060128.Search in Google Scholar

Lyster, Roy, Kazuya Saito & Masatoshi Sato. 2013. Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching 46(1). 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444812000365.Search in Google Scholar

Lyster, Roy & Leila Ranta. 1997. Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19(01). 37–66. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263197001034.Search in Google Scholar

Mackey, Alison & Jaemyung Goo. 2007. Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In Alison Mackey (ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies, 407–453. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Milla, Ruth & María del Pilar García Mayo. 2021. Teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about corrective feedback compared with teachers’ practices in CLIL and EFL. In Kyle Read Talbot, Marie-Theres Gruber & Rieko Nishida (eds.), The psychological experience of integrating content and language, 112–132. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781788924306-012Search in Google Scholar

Nassaji, Hossein. 2015. The interactional feedback dimension in instructed second language learning: Linking theory, research, and practice. London, UK: Bloomsbury Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Nassaji, Hossein. 2016. Interactional feedback in second language teaching and learning: A synthesis and analysis of current research. Language Teaching Research 20(4). 535–562. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816644940.Search in Google Scholar

Nassaji, Hossein & Eva Kartchava. 2020. Corrective feedback and good language teachers. In Carol Griffiths & Zia Tajeddin (eds.), Lessons from good language teachers, 151–163. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108774390.015Search in Google Scholar

Nassaji, Hossein & Eva Kartchava. 2021. The Cambridge handbook of corrective feedback in second language learning and teaching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108589789Search in Google Scholar

Nicholas, Howard, Patsy M. Lightbown & Nina Spada. 2001. Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language Learning 51(4). 719–758. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00172.Search in Google Scholar

Oliver, Rhonda & Rebeca Adams. 2021. Oral corrective feedback. In Hossein Nassaji & Eva Kartchava (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of corrective feedback in second language learning and teaching, 187–206. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108589789.010Search in Google Scholar

Oskoz, Ana & Judith E. Liskin-Gasparro. 2001. Corrective feedback, learner uptake, and teacher’s beliefs: A pilot study. In Xenia Bonch-Bruevich, William J. Crawford, John Hellermann, Christina Higgins & Hanh Nguyen (eds.), The past, present and future of second language research: Selected proceedings of the 2000 second language research forum, 209–228. Madison, US: Cascadilla Press.Search in Google Scholar

Panova, Iliana & Roy Lyster. 2002. Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. Tesol Quarterly 36(4). 573–595. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588241.Search in Google Scholar

Pawlak, Mirosław. 2014. Error correction in the foreign language classroom: Reconsidering the issues. Berlin, Germany: Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-38436-3Search in Google Scholar

Phipps, Simon & Simon Borg. 2009. Exploring tensions between teachers’ grammar teaching beliefs and practices. System 37(3). 380–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.03.002.Search in Google Scholar

Quinn, Paul. 2014. Delayed versus immediate corrective feedback on orally produced passive errors in English. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto.Search in Google Scholar

Rahimi, Muhammad & Lawrence Jun Zhang. 2015. Exploring non-native English-speaking teachers’ cognitions about corrective feedback in teaching English oral communication. System 55. 111–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.09.006.Search in Google Scholar

Ranta, Leila & Roy Lyster. 2007. A cognitive approach to improving immersion students’ oral language abilities: The awareness-practice-feedback sequence. In Robert Dekeyser (ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology, 141–160. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511667275.009Search in Google Scholar

Reynolds, Barry Lee, Sylvia Liu, Xuan Van Ha, Xiaofang Zhang & Chen Ding. 2021. Pre-service teachers learning to teach English as a foreign language to preschool learners in Macau: A longitudinal study. Frontiers in Psychology 12. 720660. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.720660.Search in Google Scholar

Reynolds, Barry Lee, Xuan Van Ha, Chen Ding, Xiaofang Zhang, Sylvia Liu & Xiaoyan Ma. 2022. Pre-service teachers learning to teach English to very young learners in Macau: Do beliefs trump practice? Behavioral Sciences 12(2). 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12020019.Search in Google Scholar

Rolin-Ianziti, Jeanne. 2010. The organization of delayed second language correction. Language Teaching Research 14(2). 183–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168809353874.Search in Google Scholar

Roothooft, Hanne. 2014. The relationship between adult EFL teachers’ oral feedback practices and their beliefs. System 46. 65–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.07.012.Search in Google Scholar

Schulz, Renate A. 1996. Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: Students’ and teachers’ views on error correction and the role of grammar. Foreign Language Annals 29(3). 343–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1996.tb01247.x.Search in Google Scholar

Sheen, Younghee. 2004. Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research 8(3). 263–300. https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168804lr146oa.Search in Google Scholar

Sheen, Younghee & Rod Ellis. 2011. Corrective feedback in language teaching. In Eli Hinkel (ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, 2, 593–610. New York, US: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Shieh, Jin-Jy, Barry Lee Reynolds & Xuan Van Ha. 2022. Oral feedback on pre-service teachers’ English language lesson plans: A Macau case study. In Myint Swe Khine & Yang Liu (eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education, 417–439. Singapore: Springer.10.1007/978-981-16-9785-2_21Search in Google Scholar

Tran, Nam Giang, Xuan Van Ha & Ngoc Hai Tran. 2021. EFL reformed curriculum in Vietnam: An understanding of teachers’ cognitions and classroom practices. RELC Journal 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882211043670, In press.Search in Google Scholar

Tran, Ngoc Hai, Xuan Van Ha, Vinh Anh Le & An Nhu Nguyen. 2021. Principal leadership and teacher professional development in a Vietnamese high school for gifted students: Perspectives into practice. European Journal of Educational Research 10(4). 1839–1851.10.12973/eu-jer.10.4.1839Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Weiqing & Shaofeng Li. 2021. Corrective feedback and learner uptake in American ESL and Chinese EFL classrooms: A comparative study. Language, Culture and Curriculum 34(1). 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2020.1767124.Search in Google Scholar

Yoshida, Reiko. 2010. How do teachers and learners perceive corrective feedback in the Japanese language classroom? The Modern Language Journal 94(2). 293–314. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01022.x.Search in Google Scholar

Yüksel, Doğan, Adem Soruç & Jim McKinley. 2021. Teachers’ beliefs and practices about oral corrective feedback in university EFL classes. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 31. 362–382. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12336.Search in Google Scholar

Yüksel, Doğan, Adem Soruç & Jim McKinley. 2023. The relationship between university EFL teachers’ oral feedback beliefs and practices and the impact of individual differences. IRAL – International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 61(2). 387–414. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2021.0051.Search in Google Scholar
Received: 2021-12-05
Accepted: 2022-05-21
Published Online: 2022-06-06
Published in Print: 2023-11-27

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Research Articles
  3. Investigating the impact of task complexity on uptake and noticing of corrective feedback recasts
  4. Consequences of the comparative fallacy for the acquisition of grammatical aspect in Spanish
  5. Incorporating peer feedback in writing instruction: examining its effects on Chinese English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) learners’ writing performance
  6. Listener engagement: the missing link in research on accented speech
  7. Enhancing English spatial prepositions acquisition among Spanish learners of English as L2 through an embodied approach
  8. Lexical and grammatical collocations in beginning and intermediate L2 argumentative essays: a bigram study
  9. When concept-based language instruction meets cognitive linguistics: teaching English phrasal verbs with up and out
  10. Validation of a multiple-choice implicature test: insights from Chinese EFL learners’ cognitive processes
  11. A longitudinal study of topic continuity in Chinese EFL learners’ written narratives
  12. Miscommunicated referent tracking in L2 English: a case-by-case analysis
  13. Rule-based or efficiency-driven processing of expletive there in English as a foreign language
  14. When are performance-approach goals more adaptive for Chinese EFL learners? It depends on their underlying reasons
  15. Teaching L2 Spanish idioms with semantic motivation: should this be done proactively or retroactively?
  16. Role of individual differences in incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition through listening to stories: metacognitive awareness and motivation
  17. Measuring and profiling Chinese secondary school English teachers’ language mindsets: an exploratory study of non-native teachers’ perceived L2 proficiency loss
  18. The role of working memory in the effects of models as a written corrective strategy
  19. Comparing motivational features between feedback givers and receivers in English speaking class
  20. Examining resilience in EFL contexts: a survey study of university students in China
  21. High school EFL teachers’ oral corrective feedback beliefs and practices, and the effects of lesson focus
  22. L3 acquisition of aspect: the influence of structural similarity, analytic L2 and general L3 proficiency
https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2021-0213
Keywords for this article
feedback practices; high school EFL classrooms; lesson focus; oral corrective feedback; teacher beliefs; Vietnamese EFL

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Research Articles
  3. Investigating the impact of task complexity on uptake and noticing of corrective feedback recasts
  4. Consequences of the comparative fallacy for the acquisition of grammatical aspect in Spanish
  5. Incorporating peer feedback in writing instruction: examining its effects on Chinese English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) learners’ writing performance
  6. Listener engagement: the missing link in research on accented speech
  7. Enhancing English spatial prepositions acquisition among Spanish learners of English as L2 through an embodied approach
  8. Lexical and grammatical collocations in beginning and intermediate L2 argumentative essays: a bigram study
  9. When concept-based language instruction meets cognitive linguistics: teaching English phrasal verbs with up and out
  10. Validation of a multiple-choice implicature test: insights from Chinese EFL learners’ cognitive processes
  11. A longitudinal study of topic continuity in Chinese EFL learners’ written narratives
  12. Miscommunicated referent tracking in L2 English: a case-by-case analysis
  13. Rule-based or efficiency-driven processing of expletive there in English as a foreign language
  14. When are performance-approach goals more adaptive for Chinese EFL learners? It depends on their underlying reasons
  15. Teaching L2 Spanish idioms with semantic motivation: should this be done proactively or retroactively?
  16. Role of individual differences in incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition through listening to stories: metacognitive awareness and motivation
  17. Measuring and profiling Chinese secondary school English teachers’ language mindsets: an exploratory study of non-native teachers’ perceived L2 proficiency loss
  18. The role of working memory in the effects of models as a written corrective strategy
  19. Comparing motivational features between feedback givers and receivers in English speaking class
  20. Examining resilience in EFL contexts: a survey study of university students in China
  21. High school EFL teachers’ oral corrective feedback beliefs and practices, and the effects of lesson focus
  22. L3 acquisition of aspect: the influence of structural similarity, analytic L2 and general L3 proficiency
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 20.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/iral-2021-0213/html?lang=en
Scroll to top button