大学英语课堂教师纠正性反馈研究的综述报告

大学英语课堂教师纠正性反馈研究的综述报告Abstract:ThepurposeofthispaperistoprovideacomprehensivereviewofcorrectivefeedbackinEnglishlanguageclassroomsinhighereducation.Correctivefeedbackconstitutesanimportantcomponentoflanguageteachingandlearning,andhasreceivedconsiderableattentionfromresearchersovertheyears.Thispaperseekstoexaminevarioustypesofcorrectivefeedback,theireffectiveness,andstudents’receptivenesstothem.Thefindingssuggestthatdifferenttypesofcorrectivefeedbackcanbeeffectiveinimprovingstudents’performance,buttheeffectivenessisalsodependentonvariousfactorssuchastiming,frequency,anddelivery.Moreover,studentstendtopreferindirectandpositivefeedbackthatdoesnotthreatentheirface.Implicationsforteachingandfurtherresearcharediscussed.Introduction:Correctivefeedbackreferstothepracticebywhichteachersprovidenecessarycorrectionstostudents’errorsandmistakesinlanguageuse.Itisconsideredavitalcomponentoflanguageteachingatalllevels,includinghighereducation.Correctivefeedbackplaysanimportantrolenotonlyinhelpingstudentsimprovetheirlinguisticaccuracy,butalsoinincreasingtheirawarenessoftheintricaciesofthelanguageandtheirownerrors.Researchoncorrectivefeedbackhasbeenextensiveandhasexploredvariousaspectsofit,includingtypes,effectiveness,andstudents’receptivenesstothem.TypesofCorrectiveFeedback:Therearedifferenttypesofcorrectivefeedbackthatteachersuseintheclassroom,includingdirectfeedback,indirectfeedback,andelicitation.Directfeedbackreferstoexplicitcorrectionofastudent’serrorbytheteacher,whileindirectfeedbackseekstosteerstudentstowardsthecorrectanswerwithoutexplicitlypointingouttheerror.Elicitation,ontheotherhand,encouragesstudentstoself-correctbypromptingthemtorecallthecorrectform.Researchhassuggestedthatdirectfeedbackisthemosteffectivetypeoffeedbackintermsofimmediateerrorcorrection,butitmaynotnecessarilyleadtolong-termretentionofcorrectedlanguageforms.Incontrast,indirectfeedbackislessconfrontingandhasbeenfoundtobeeffectiveinpromotingself-correctionandenhancingstudents’motivationtolearn.Elicitationhasbeenshowntobeaneffectivetoolinencouragingself-reflectionandallowingfortheinternalizationofknowledge.EffectivenessofCorrectiveFeedback:Theeffectivenessofcorrectivefeedbackisdependentonvariousfactorssuchastiming,frequency,anddelivery.Immediatefeedbackhasbeenfoundtobemoreeffectivethandelayedfeedback.Frequentfeedbackhasalsobeenshowntobemoreeffectivethaninfrequentfeedback.Additionally,feedbackdeliveredinapositiveandencouragingmannerhasbeenfoundtobemoreeffectivethannegativefeedback,whichcandemotivatestudentsandthreatentheirface.Researchhasalsoshownthatfeedbackdeliveredinprivateismoreeffectivethanfeedbackgivenpublicly.StudentReceptivenesstoCorrectiveFeedback:Students’receptivenesstocorrectivefeedbackalsoplaysacrucialroleindeterminingitseffectiveness.Researchhassuggestedthatstudentstendtopreferindirectandpositivefeedbackthatdoesnotthreatentheirface.Negativefeedbackcanleadtoadecreaseinmotivationandself-esteem,whilepositivefeedbackcanincreasemotivationandenhanceself-esteem.Studentsalsotendtobemorereceptivetocorrectivefeedbackwhenitisdeliveredinasupportiveandcaringlearningenvironment.ImplicationsforTeaching:Thefindingsdiscussedabovehaveimportantimplicationsforlanguageteachinginhighereducation.Teachersshouldaimtoprovidecorrectivefeedbackinatimely,frequent,andpositivemanner.Theyshouldalsoconsiderstudents’receptivenesstodifferenttypesoffeedbackandprioritizeindirectandpositivefeedbackthatdoesnotthreatentheirface.Additionally,teachersshouldaimtocreateasupportiveandcaringlearningenvironmentthatencouragesself-reflectionandfosterscontinuouslearning.Conclusion:Correctivefeedbackisacrucialcomponentoflanguageteachinginhighereducation.Thispaperhasreviewedvariousaspectsofcorrectivefeedback,includingtypes,effectiveness,andstudents’receptivenesstothem.Thefindingssuggestthatdifferenttypesofcorrectivefeedbackcanbeeffectiveinimprovingstudents’performance,buttheeffectivenessisalsodepen