Welcome to another blog post. In this post I am going to examine the subtle art of making corrections and giving feedback.
See, all too often teachers make the mistake of thinking making a correction is the same as teaching. In my opinion, just correcting a student’s mistakes does not equate to teaching. Teaching involves more than that. It involves helping a student grow and develop. It involves helping a student become a more autonomous learner. It involves providing both implicit and explicit feedback (although for different reasons). It requires a teacher to guide and facilitate during the learning process. One way we can achieve some of these aims is by offering the right type of corrective feedback.
From a more personal perspective, I can honestly say that during my first couple of years working as an EFL teacher I was guilty of not really knowing how or why to make corrections. I would just make corrections because I thought that was part of the job. I would make corrections with the belief and hope that it was helping my students. For me, I thought I just needed to correct my students and they would learn. I paid no attention to how I was correcting them or what I hoped to gain from these corrections. I had no idea how often I should correct my students. I had no idea about the different types of correction/feedback techniques available. And on top of this, I didn’t even really know which mistakes to correct - all of them or only the major ones? In short - I was clueless.
But never fear - I am not going to leave you to be as clueless as I was. Instead, I am going to use my firsthand knowledge, research papers, and the insight I garnered from interviewing 30 different teachers on this topic, to help you help your students.
(You know you have wanted to.)
See, all too often teachers make the mistake of thinking making a correction is the same as teaching. In my opinion, just correcting a student’s mistakes does not equate to teaching. Teaching involves more than that. It involves helping a student grow and develop. It involves helping a student become a more autonomous learner. It involves providing both implicit and explicit feedback (although for different reasons). It requires a teacher to guide and facilitate during the learning process. One way we can achieve some of these aims is by offering the right type of corrective feedback.
From a more personal perspective, I can honestly say that during my first couple of years working as an EFL teacher I was guilty of not really knowing how or why to make corrections. I would just make corrections because I thought that was part of the job. I would make corrections with the belief and hope that it was helping my students. For me, I thought I just needed to correct my students and they would learn. I paid no attention to how I was correcting them or what I hoped to gain from these corrections. I had no idea how often I should correct my students. I had no idea about the different types of correction/feedback techniques available. And on top of this, I didn’t even really know which mistakes to correct - all of them or only the major ones? In short - I was clueless.
But never fear - I am not going to leave you to be as clueless as I was. Instead, I am going to use my firsthand knowledge, research papers, and the insight I garnered from interviewing 30 different teachers on this topic, to help you help your students.
(You know you have wanted to.)
Josh’s Lucky 7 Correction & Feedback Techniques.
Note: Although these tips are specifically related to corrective feedback for speaking, they can also be applied (with a slight tweak) to writing (but you should really stay tuned for my post on corrective feedback for writing if you want more specific advice).
1. Explicit correction refers to the act of explicitly providing the student with the correct form/word and explaining why what they said was wrong.
Example:
Student – The mouses are on the floor.
Teacher – Not mouses. Mice. Mice is plural. Mouse is singular. The mice are on the floor.
Pros: Good for explaining mistakes/errors. Good for correcting pronunciation (e.g. Not ‘P.’ - ‘B.’ Squeeze your lips together. ‘B.’). Good for learners who like to be shown their mistakes so they can learn by analyzing them. Good for providing explicit grammar instruction.
Cons: Can be confusing for students at lower levels, especially if the explanation is beyond their current level of comprehension. May detract from the flow of the class (if used too often) as explicit instruction often requires more time than other forms of correction. Not great for students who prefer fluency over accuracy.
2. Recasting is an implicit correction technique that involves the teacher reformulating all or part of a student’s utterance in order to provide an exemplar for the student.
Example:
Student – The mouses are on the floor.
Teacher – The mice are on the floor.
Pros: Recasts are quick and easy for the teacher to use. Good for correcting performance mistakes (i.e. you know the student knows the correct form or word etc., but for some reason they ‘slipped up’). Good for students who have a good ‘ear’ for hearing differences (so they can hear where the implicit correction is). Recasts do not overly detract from the flow of a conversation.
Cons: Not so good for students who cannot distinguish between the subtle differences in the recast (making the recast ineffective). Not so good for helping students understand rules. Students, especially at lower levels, might take your recast to be a direction or question and not understand it as being an implicit correction.
3. Clarification requests are used to indicate that either a student’s utterance has been misunderstood or that the utterance is ill-formed in some way and that a repetition or a reformulation is required.
Example:
Student – I went to go to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Teacher – What do you mean ‘you went to go’?
Student – Oh, my…um, I went to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Pros: Good to allow students to think about what might be incorrect. Good to challenge the student to question their own output. Good for involving other students if the original student can’t clarify. Good to show the student that they can, with a little bit of effort, make themselves understood. Good for uncovering gaps in knowledge.
Cons: Can be frustrating for students if they are unaware of their mistake. Not suitable for times when the student does not know the right vocabulary (in these cases you will needed to provide it, or have another student do it for you). Clarification requests might not be good for students with really low levels of proficiency as they might not know how to restructure, or just think that what they said was correct.
4. Meta-linguistic feedback contains either comments, information, or questions related to the well-formedness (or accuracy) of the student’s utterance, without explicitly providing the correct form.
Example:
Student – I did went to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Teacher – Hmmm. Do we say ‘did went’? ... ‘I did went’?
Student – I went. I went to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Pros: Makes the student think about the mistake/error and offer their own solution. Good for uncovering gaps in knowledge (as the student is required to offer a solution).
Cons: Probably not good for lower-level students as they might get frustrated if they are constantly being asked to self-correct but lack the ability.
5. Elicitation aims to elicit the correct form from the student. Three of the most common ways teachers try to elicit output from their students are:
1. Recast with a strategic pause to allow students to “fill in the blank”. (Example below)
2. Teachers ask questions to elicit correct forms (see points 3 and 4).
3. Requesting students to reformulate their utterance (see points 3 and 4). .
Example:
Student – I went to the park. It was funny.
Teacher – It was …
Student – It was fun.
Pros: Elicitation techniques often require the student to think about their output. Elicitation techniques usually make it clear that something was incorrect, therefore allowing the student an opportunity to address this issue. Elicitation techniques encourage the students to speak more.
Cons: Allows the student to guess the answer (Is guessing the same as thinking?). Some elicitation techniques can break the flow of a conversation – especially if it takes the student several attempts to form the correct response.
6. Repetition requires the teacher to repeat the student's error and adjust their intonation to draw attention to it. This is usually done to show the student the error/mistake and encourage them to proffer a correction.
Example:
Student – I did went to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Teacher – I did went to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Student – I went to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Pros: Allows the student to think about the problem. Repetition allows the student to self-correct. Repetition is easy for the teacher to use. Repetition can help uncover gaps in a student’s knowledge. Repetition can be a good tool to encourage other students to offer advice and support.
Cons: Repetition may not be great for students who can’t uncover their own mistakes. Not an ideal method for ‘teaching’ a rule or structure.
7. Exemplar feedback is a type of feedback that is similar to recasting (see point 2), however instead of the teacher making a recast of the student’s erroneous utterance they provide a series of exemplars using the same pattern.
Example:
Student – The boy is run.
Teacher – The boy is run? Hmmm. The boy is swimming. The boy is shopping. The boy is reading. The boy is…
Student – The boy is running.
Pros: Engages the student in listening and figuring out rules/structures. Good for highlighting common forms/structures.
Cons: Does not explicitly teach rules. Not suitable for mistakes that have original or novel forms. Not ideal for uncovering gaps as the student is already given the correct form. Giving exemplars requires the teacher to think on their feet.
In closing I would just like to say that the above ideas are not the only ways to offer corrective feedback – you can also use gestures, mouthing, mime, note taking, or anything else that draws attention to an error or mistake. Just make sure you try to incorporate different strategies to help your students get the most out of your lesson.
I would also like to say that my ideas are just that – ideas. Of course other teachers may disagree with my suggestions (and pros and cons), and that’s great. The point of my list is to get you thinking about correction and feedback techniques – it is not to say that corrective feedback must be implemented in the way I say.
Have a great day,
Josh
Keep English Real!
Note: Although these tips are specifically related to corrective feedback for speaking, they can also be applied (with a slight tweak) to writing (but you should really stay tuned for my post on corrective feedback for writing if you want more specific advice).
1. Explicit correction refers to the act of explicitly providing the student with the correct form/word and explaining why what they said was wrong.
Example:
Student – The mouses are on the floor.
Teacher – Not mouses. Mice. Mice is plural. Mouse is singular. The mice are on the floor.
Pros: Good for explaining mistakes/errors. Good for correcting pronunciation (e.g. Not ‘P.’ - ‘B.’ Squeeze your lips together. ‘B.’). Good for learners who like to be shown their mistakes so they can learn by analyzing them. Good for providing explicit grammar instruction.
Cons: Can be confusing for students at lower levels, especially if the explanation is beyond their current level of comprehension. May detract from the flow of the class (if used too often) as explicit instruction often requires more time than other forms of correction. Not great for students who prefer fluency over accuracy.
2. Recasting is an implicit correction technique that involves the teacher reformulating all or part of a student’s utterance in order to provide an exemplar for the student.
Example:
Student – The mouses are on the floor.
Teacher – The mice are on the floor.
Pros: Recasts are quick and easy for the teacher to use. Good for correcting performance mistakes (i.e. you know the student knows the correct form or word etc., but for some reason they ‘slipped up’). Good for students who have a good ‘ear’ for hearing differences (so they can hear where the implicit correction is). Recasts do not overly detract from the flow of a conversation.
Cons: Not so good for students who cannot distinguish between the subtle differences in the recast (making the recast ineffective). Not so good for helping students understand rules. Students, especially at lower levels, might take your recast to be a direction or question and not understand it as being an implicit correction.
3. Clarification requests are used to indicate that either a student’s utterance has been misunderstood or that the utterance is ill-formed in some way and that a repetition or a reformulation is required.
Example:
Student – I went to go to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Teacher – What do you mean ‘you went to go’?
Student – Oh, my…um, I went to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Pros: Good to allow students to think about what might be incorrect. Good to challenge the student to question their own output. Good for involving other students if the original student can’t clarify. Good to show the student that they can, with a little bit of effort, make themselves understood. Good for uncovering gaps in knowledge.
Cons: Can be frustrating for students if they are unaware of their mistake. Not suitable for times when the student does not know the right vocabulary (in these cases you will needed to provide it, or have another student do it for you). Clarification requests might not be good for students with really low levels of proficiency as they might not know how to restructure, or just think that what they said was correct.
4. Meta-linguistic feedback contains either comments, information, or questions related to the well-formedness (or accuracy) of the student’s utterance, without explicitly providing the correct form.
Example:
Student – I did went to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Teacher – Hmmm. Do we say ‘did went’? ... ‘I did went’?
Student – I went. I went to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Pros: Makes the student think about the mistake/error and offer their own solution. Good for uncovering gaps in knowledge (as the student is required to offer a solution).
Cons: Probably not good for lower-level students as they might get frustrated if they are constantly being asked to self-correct but lack the ability.
5. Elicitation aims to elicit the correct form from the student. Three of the most common ways teachers try to elicit output from their students are:
1. Recast with a strategic pause to allow students to “fill in the blank”. (Example below)
2. Teachers ask questions to elicit correct forms (see points 3 and 4).
3. Requesting students to reformulate their utterance (see points 3 and 4). .
Example:
Student – I went to the park. It was funny.
Teacher – It was …
Student – It was fun.
Pros: Elicitation techniques often require the student to think about their output. Elicitation techniques usually make it clear that something was incorrect, therefore allowing the student an opportunity to address this issue. Elicitation techniques encourage the students to speak more.
Cons: Allows the student to guess the answer (Is guessing the same as thinking?). Some elicitation techniques can break the flow of a conversation – especially if it takes the student several attempts to form the correct response.
6. Repetition requires the teacher to repeat the student's error and adjust their intonation to draw attention to it. This is usually done to show the student the error/mistake and encourage them to proffer a correction.
Example:
Student – I did went to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Teacher – I did went to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Student – I went to my brother-in-law’s house yesterday.
Pros: Allows the student to think about the problem. Repetition allows the student to self-correct. Repetition is easy for the teacher to use. Repetition can help uncover gaps in a student’s knowledge. Repetition can be a good tool to encourage other students to offer advice and support.
Cons: Repetition may not be great for students who can’t uncover their own mistakes. Not an ideal method for ‘teaching’ a rule or structure.
7. Exemplar feedback is a type of feedback that is similar to recasting (see point 2), however instead of the teacher making a recast of the student’s erroneous utterance they provide a series of exemplars using the same pattern.
Example:
Student – The boy is run.
Teacher – The boy is run? Hmmm. The boy is swimming. The boy is shopping. The boy is reading. The boy is…
Student – The boy is running.
Pros: Engages the student in listening and figuring out rules/structures. Good for highlighting common forms/structures.
Cons: Does not explicitly teach rules. Not suitable for mistakes that have original or novel forms. Not ideal for uncovering gaps as the student is already given the correct form. Giving exemplars requires the teacher to think on their feet.
In closing I would just like to say that the above ideas are not the only ways to offer corrective feedback – you can also use gestures, mouthing, mime, note taking, or anything else that draws attention to an error or mistake. Just make sure you try to incorporate different strategies to help your students get the most out of your lesson.
I would also like to say that my ideas are just that – ideas. Of course other teachers may disagree with my suggestions (and pros and cons), and that’s great. The point of my list is to get you thinking about correction and feedback techniques – it is not to say that corrective feedback must be implemented in the way I say.
Have a great day,
Josh
Keep English Real!
RSS Feed