In order to provide helpful feedback (trying not to stifle creativity), how and when should teachers respond to speech errors?There is insightful information in chapter "Teaching Speaking"
The first thing that we need to keep in mind is that error-making correction is a very difficult task In which the teacher’s intuition is required in order to treat errors successfully , without stifling the student’s creativity.
Vigil and Oller’s (1976) described an error-making correction model by which the teacher can provide helpful feedback without shut off students’ attempts to communication. This model explains that in order for the feedback to be effective, the teacher should correct some errors that are crucial in the development of communication, but he/she should not correct those mistakes that may not be crucial to the understanding of the message.
Kathleen Bailey refers to some ways that explain how and when the teacher can treat errors without stifling creativity. For instance, the teacher can treat the error immediately, or he/she can wait until the student finish talking, which in my opinion is a better way to correct mistakes. Another way of correcting mistakes without affecting students’ self confidence is to transfer the error to the whole class instead of to the specific learner who made such error.
The text also provides another model for treatment of speech errors which help the teacher determine whether to correct errors or not by taking into account several factors. The factors that I considered more important are: pedagogical focus, communicative context, learner’s affective state, whether the error is local or global, and whether it is mistake or error.
During a lesson, students developed a high-level of dependence on the teacher, for that reason giving a proper feedback when students make some mistakes during an activity is an essential thing, because if you can take benefit of that situation you can develop a good feedback, which is a "must" element to have a successful class.
as we know, dealing with correction of mistakes in a class is very difficult situation, but if you can develop a proper feedback, that don't affect students' imagination and creativity, you can avoid that your lesson sinks like a the titanic.
Virgil and Oller's propose us that, you can correct your students' mistakes while they are producing, without interrupting their speech, because this proposal shows us a very honest feedback that tries to avoid the idea of trying to decode a wrong message, the intention of this model is producing a useful feedback that help the students to produce a comprehensible speech and not let the students produce chopped sentences and assume that those are a proper discourse,in other words the mission here for the student, is trying to produce an optimal speech.
On the other hand, Bailey propose us how and when treat mistakes or error without stiffling students' creativity, about that I think that the best way to correct mistakes during a communicative situation, is when it occurs immediately, because when you correct errors right after those occurs, you can assure a better understanding that when you correct mistakes after the speech, because during the communicative situation, the student is focusing his/her attention on you, and that attention is priceless... but some people could think that interrupt a student while he/she is talking is a very harsh mesaure... but personally it depends of the teacher's attitude, it's all about the level of confidence between the teacher and the students.
to apply some of these correction models you have to take in considaration some very important factors inside the class' environment such as: the affective state of learners (affective filter), or the pedagogical focus, but principally you have to make a difference between the level of the error because it could an small thing (mistake) which can be caused by some external factor or it could be a huge thing (error) which is more related with problems in understand some concepts or words.
As Kathleen Bailey (1985) said, the teachers should correct the mistakes using their intuition and then follow some specific steps that help them to know the importance of the errors in the sentences or phrases.
According to James Hendrickson (1980), a teacher should correct the speech error when she thinks that the mistake is transcendental to the sentence, when she doesn’t understand the idea the student wants to say (global error). If the error is not important (local error) the teacher should not interrupt the learner because she/he would think she has many mistakes and it would the interrupt the learning process. As Michael Long (1977) said “the decision the teacher makes is whether or not to treat it at all”.
Once we have recognized the importance of feedback as a learning-building tool, we should exanimate effective and at the same time appropriate ways to correct our students’ mistakes, otherwise we could make our students lose their confidence and avoid interventions in the class. Unfortunately for the teachers, there is a dilemma regarding students’ correction: correct students’ speech everytime they make a mistake, which can lead to the students’ choice to stop producing output, or simply let them speak with a wide margin of error, thus allowing an incorrect output and leaving students prone to make mistakes more often. I think a student will not be able to elaborate comprehensible output if he is constantly using wrong structures or misspelled words, so feedback is compulsory. Therefore, in order for feedback to happen, some techniques should be carried out. Good examples of them include: waiting till the end of an activity to correct the mistakes, taking notes of one common type of mistake or hinting one student’s mistake and make her/himself realize of what she/he has said/written.
It is worth to highlight the historical difficulty that teachers have had when attempting to correct students’ errors. It is not a matter of telling them that they did bad mentioning an utterance, a word or an idea. Feedback is a key factor to be successful in a language; however, the teacher has to find the precise moment to do it without making the student feel uncomfortable about it. It should be the case of a student who is talking about his strong ideas and the teacher starts correcting his pronunciation problems. This fact makes the student to finally stick. On the other hand, if the teachers don’t communicate mistakes there will be a possible fossilization of that error.
Vigil and Oller’s(1976) model focus on the importance of considering that affective and cognitive feedback affect the message-sending process. This cognitive feedback must be optimal to be effective; however, too much negative cognitive feedback leads learners to shut off their attempts at communication. So they do not feel able to be successful in the language and they have little hope to get anything right.
Michael Long suggested that there is no specific time to treat errors; so the teacher based on his intuition will know when to correct because he knows how to treat his students according to their anxiety level, communicative problems, motivation, self-confidence, etc.
In general, it seems to me that the teachers’ task when finding the right moment to whether interrupt or let students’ normal flow of talking is a difficult one. The students have huge differences among them considering their fears, and concerns so that a teacher who knows his students will be the most appropriate person to encourage them to correct their mistakes when he thinks it is necessary to do it avoiding interfering students’ attempts at communication.
When a pre-intermediate student is speaking English, she probably is going to make many mistakes, speech errors. By reading this article I realize that it is very difficult to know the precise moment to treat students´ errors effectively and that these students do not shut off their attempts at communication. A teacher should develop an appropriate feedback which can not affect the students´ creativity.
Vigil and Oller (1976) suggest a model of how affective and cognitive feedback affects the message-sending process. In this model, they explain that in a speaking process the teacher can correct his/her students´ errors while they are producing; however, the teacher can’t interrupt their speech. The idea is that the teacher provides useful feedback without shutting off students’ attempts at communication.
On the other hand, James Hendrickson (1980) suggests that teachers need to discern the difference between global and local errors because local errors usually need not to be corrected since the message is comprehensible and clear; for that reason, correction might interrupt a student in his/her flow of productive communication. And in the case of global errors, they need to be treated in some way since the message may otherwise remain garbled.
Kathleen Bailey (1985) suggests us how and when teachers can treat errors without stifling students´ creativity. She proposes us seven basic options and eight possible features. It seems to me that teachers have to decide when to treat, who will treat, and how to treat a error because each of the students is different. If the teacher has knowledge about her learner, he is going to know about her anxiety level, confidence, and willingness to accept correction. I think that there are going to be students that can be interrupted while they are talking, and the teacher might tell them their mistakes. However, there are going to be students who are not going to be able to focus their attention to you; therefore, your interruption there it is going to affect students´ self confidence.
Finally, I believe that it is important to reflect on other facts like teacher style, whether it is mistake or error, pedagogical focus, learner’s affective state and other ones in order to decide whether to treat or not the deviation, to correct the mistakes.
Responding to students’ speech errors is a way delicate matter; a bad choice can destroy any good intention of producing useful feedback or shut off students’ attempts to produce language. Although there are many ways or proposals to deal with errors; it will always depend on many factors, such as the error level, the comprehensibility of messages, the level of confidence between teacher and students, the classroom environment, and so forth. For instance, Vigil and Oller’s proposed that teachers should not correct all students’ mistakes, but those which are crucial to the understanding of the message in order not to shut off their attempts to communicate in the target language. I disagree with this opinion in some way because we as students are always paying attention to the corrections and feedback that our teacher makes; therefore, we are expecting that he/she tell us about our mistakes or weaknesses, since we are learning through our errors. In this sense, if teachers are just trying to get the gist of our speech without taking into account the ‘little’ mistakes we make, we would take for granted that we made a great performance, and that is not the idea. Maybe we need to consider the way in which teachers may correct our mistakes. Kathleen Bailey provided very good ways on how to treat errors without stifling students’ creativity or affecting them in some other ways. She suggests that errors could be treated immediately or told to student once he/she has finished talking. From my point of view, this is the best way to make corrections because students can be informed about their mistakes and can receive appropriate feedback, so learning can take place successfully. The other way that the author (Bailey) suggested and I think it is also proper for this order of ideas is the idea that errors can be transferred to the whole class instead of to the student who made such mistake. This idea seems very interesting to me, but it disregards the fact that, maybe, the person that made such error did not recognize their own mistakes when the teacher explains to the whole class; consequently, feedback can be lost. Therefore, I would consider to tell the specific students their own mistakes but in private, without interrupting his/her performance.
The way in that a teacher provides feedback to the students must be optimal in order to be effective. We know that a person who is studying English is going to make mistakes, speech errors when she/he speaks, so here is when the teacher has to provide the correct feedback. According to Vigil and Oller´s model focus on that a teacher has to correct the students´ mistakes while the students are producing, although the teacher can’t interrupt their speech because in this way the learners to shut off their attempts at communication. James Hendrickson discerns the difference between global and local errors. He advised to the teacher not put focus on the local errors, so these errors usually need not be corrected since the message is clear and correction might interrupt a learner in the flow of productive communication. With regards to the global errors, they need to be treated in some way since the message may otherwise remain garbled. On the other hand Kathleen Bailey proposes to the teachers how and when treats mistakes without stifling students' creativity. She gives us seven basic options and eight possible features that are viable modes of error correction in the classroom. I think that every teacher has to know when and how to give feedback but always he/she has to be present that the feedback has to be effective in the learning of the students.
The most important point that I learned and took was now I know what a feedback is in its whole sense. That is to say, feedback is not only to say if something is right or wrong, but also it has to do with the students’ background and the situational context. According to Vigil and Oller´s model, I totally agree we, as future teachers, have to allow students to improve al their skills, especially when they are recently learning or speaking a new language. For that reason, our mission or goal is to accomplish or to improve their attitudes and abilities, not to hamper their performances, independently if they make something well or not.
However, I would like to highlight two important aspects regarding my point of view; first I consider that feedback should be delivered depending on the students’ background, why? Because it is not the same if for instance a student made a mistake that says “she love playing basketball” instead of he says “I do not cannot hear anything”. The second point has to do with the final example since we have to pay attention about what types of mistakes students made. Here it is really necessary to treat it immediately due to the fact that a sentence cannot have two negative forms.
On the other hand, we also have to take care about affective filter since according to Krashen and what Bailey has mentioned before, we, conscious or unconscious, can avoid and stifle students’ creativity and their free development in learning a new language.
Finally, I think that the best time to correct errors will depend on teachers and also when they feel that is a good opportunity to do it, besides they also have to take into account the degree of the mistakes, helping that this process will be less detrimental to students. For me the best conclusion is that there is no time to treat errors, but it is going to depend on teachers intuition, and also all the things that they have learned throughout their lives as teachers to put in practice in those cases.
According to the question and the text "teaching speaking" I support the idea that students should be corrected in the time they have finished speaking. It means that the teachers have to wait until the end of the students'speaking since these ones will complete their ideas and thoughts (through communication) comfortably, on the one hand. On the other one, the teacher would have the opportunity to give some feedback about the mistakes students made This is something I have taken from the author called Kathleen Bailey, when she says the teacher corrects or reinforces errors through intuitions and cognitive feedback. Teachers' responses (feedback) can have a positive result since students can feel confident on what they say and the fluency they demostrate. So, correcting after speaking is something I would practice with my students. I will not interrupt them or stop their fairs to speak in front of their classmates and the teacher, helping them to feel free of communicate whatever they want. Finishing, what I disagree in this topic is to correct students' mistakes while they are speaking (Vigil and Oller) because they could feel they have a barrier in their mind for not success as they want. The idea is to improve their speaking within a nice environment, and not make them feel as if could not fix their own speech.
To be Succesful in second language learning there are many keys, but the most important is the feedback that a lerner receives from others.
As Vigil and Oller`s (1976) proposed. How affective and cognitive feedback affects the messege- sending process. The task of the teacher is correct the students mistakes without interrupting their speech in order to produce a feedback that help students to decode a wrong messege and to create a comprehensible speech.
Kathleen Bailey (1985) propose and explain how and when teachers can correct students errors without stifling creativity. For example: teacher can correct the error at the moment that he/ she heard it or wait until the student finish.
I think that error correction must take place depending on the importance of the error, if it is trascendental to the sentence, teacher must acts immediately or wait, as james Hendrickson (1980) explains. Beacuse to much negative cognitive feedback in the students can produce that they can not getting anything right.
Finally, error- correction is a very difficult task . Teacher`s need to apply all his/ her intuition in order to treat the error correctly.
After reading the text about teaching speaking, I think correction of speech errors is a quite difficult task that requires a high detailed analysis from teachers because it has a great connotation on the development of students’ speech and, as the Vigil and Oller’s model (1976) shows, an excessive negative feedback could produce that students stop to trying to speak and; on the other hand, an excessive positive feedback could produce the reinforcement of errors and the students’ fossilization. There are many factors that the teachers have to take into account at the moment of correction, but I agree with James Hendrickson (1980) who suggested to make a difference between local and global errors. It means that local errors do not make an attempt to the understanding of the message, so it is not necessary to correct them. Nevertheless, global errors need to be treated since these could obstruct the final message. Although Krashen and Terrel’s Natural Approach (1983) does not appear in this text, I remember that they also support the notion of, at the early production stage, students make a lot of errors or mistakes but the teachers have to focus on meaning and not on form, so they have not to make correction unless these are big errors which hinder the comprehension of the message. Summarizing, I think the best way of correcting errors is talking personally and, if it possible, individually with the students and, as I said before, depending on the type or error (local or global), I think it has to be done at the end of the conversation in order to not interrupt and not cause inhibition in the students. I think communication between teacher and students is an essential matter in this case.
First of all many authors like Krashen and Terrell agree with the idea that errors can be corrected only when they do not interrupt the students’ flow of speech because the main purpose is that they speak focusing on meaning rather than form. In this way students feel more comfortable with the target language and they would not be afraid of making errors.
On the other hand, authors like Hendrickson have proposed that depending on the kind of error students’ speech can be interrupted (local errors) or not (global ones).
Personally, I think there is not a final answer whether correcting students’ errors or not. According to my point of view it will depend on the kind of students we have and also in their interest because they generally want errors to be corrected for improving their skills.
In order to explain it better I am going to give an example:
-student: yesterday I eated some cookies -teacher: oh! You ate some cookies! How many did you eat?
The idea is that student realizes on his own that he is making an error but it could not be possible without the teacher’s help or feedback.
It is difficult to know how and when teachers must correct students’ errors in their speeches. fortunately, in the text appears different models of some authors that can help us to choose the right moment to do it base on their own researches and experiences.
One of them is proposing by Vigil and Oller (1976). They presented a model of how affective and cognitive feedback can affect the message-sending process in our students. Also, they suggested that the cognitive feedback must be optimal in order to be effective. Additionally, they said that it is our work to discern when it is optimal or no; it means, that teachers have to find the balance between the positive and the negative cognitive feedback in their learners.additionally, they said that we (teachers)don’t have to correct students’ errors while they are speaking because we could interrupt their reproduction of communication (output).
Other author is Michael Long who suggested that the decision is in the hands of teachers in order to decide whether or not to treat the errors in their students. This decision is relate to the beliefs of the teacher about language and learners.
James Hendrickson (1980) proposed an article on error treatment; in that article he said that teachers are focused on try to discern the differences between global and local errors. The local error can be not correct by teacher because the message given for the student was clear and if teacher correct it he will interrupt the oral production of the student. On the other hand, global error imply the immediate correction for the teacher because the utterance is incomprehensible for him and for the rest of the class; in it case teacher must correct students in order to avoid mistakes in the future.
In my opinion, teachers must correct students’ errors in a subtle way it means, without interrupt the speech of the student. One way of correct it would be after the student finished with his activity. After that moment, the teacher can say some general comments of the student’s activity and then he can do some correction of pronunciation or grammatical mistakes in the activity developing by the student.
As English teachers, one of our mission is to provide constantly feedbacks to our students. However,to provide them through a really helpful way, we have to take into account what kind of students we have: novice, intermediate, or advice. According to that, we can correct. For instance, if we are teaching to novice students, we should not pay too much attention on grammatical competence because they are starting to learn a second language. So, in that case, we as teachers have to correct the coherence mainly.
Besides, if our feedbacks are constant, e.g. every time that student speaks, I correct him/her, I will generate in student low self-esteem due to student will think "well, my spoken performance is bad; thus, it's better to be quiet" will think a child.
On the other hand, if teacher just provides positive feedbacks, ignoring mistakes, he/she can creates on student a stage of fossilization due to student won't feel the necessity of improve; he/she's doing a good job.
Therefore, "cognitive feedback must be optimal in order to be effective", it means that we have to correct, but not in excess, whenever it is necessary. Moreover, we don't have to forget that we're teaching to people that are learning a second language; it is another pattern, pronunciation, culture.
Hendrickson said that it is not necessary to correct local errors, e.g. when a student said "he do exercises" rather than "he does exercises" because we understand what student tries to say and we can interrupt his/her talking. However, if there are global errors that imply misunderstand or incoherence, we have the right and must to correct.
Finally, remember, be patient, everybody does mistake.We as teachers should help to overcome in a friendly way those mistakes on our pupils.
According to the documment there are many views on correcting speech errors. SOme of them were described by my classmates before, but in my view i'd like to say that i agree with James Hendrickson(1980) perspective. He mentions: " Hendrickson recommended that local errors usually need not to be corrected since the message is clear and correction might interrupt a learner in the flow of productive communication. Global errors need to be treated in some way since the message may otherwise remain garbled".
If we want our students to be proficient in speaking ( which is crucial if we're teaching a foreign language) is neccesary to give them the confidence enough to try out the language. At the beginning students will make errors and that's completely natural. We as teachers, we dont need to be so impatient and correct errors inmidiately; It would be recommendable to let students talk...(that's important) and at the end... we should correct some errors by giving the correct feedback.
If we correct inmidiately students' speech errors.. they wont feel confident or the motivation enough to talk in the future... they'll be afraid to make some mistakes again, but we dont want our students to be like that right? So... We should pick up the exact moment to correct them,.. according to my view is at the end.
As a teacher trainee,it is difficult to face the trade of discovering which is the best way to correct students' speech errors. Practicums have given to me the opportunity to have a bigger spectrum of what is going on in schools' realia, and this matter is a very frequent question . In fact, the way you correct errors it's something that must be analized in depth, not only because of the real effectiveness of your performance but also in students' achievement of meaningful learnings. In this way, Vigil and Oller's model (1976) offer us the possibility to imagine the impact that the different error treatment managements available could take. If you constantly interrupt your students and get overt attention to their pronounciation mistakes, you will increase their anxiety and insecurity for sure:it would just lead them to shut off and feel embarrased or frustrated. On the other hand, teachers willing to let students "acquire" errors doing anything to solve it are not reacting so good as well. Speech errors are unavoidable (we also commited them while learning our own mother tongue): that's why teachers should take advantage from them as potential possibilities of meaningful learning. From this perspective, keeping an equilibrium between negative and possitive feedback seems to be a good strategy. Skinner's possitive reinforcement could be useful to make students' internalize correct pronunciation patterns, and in this way, Kathleen Bailey's taxonomy shows viable options to put in practice (from ignoring errors completely to treat them inmediatly).
In conclusion, I consider that intuition is a key tool at the moment of deciding which way is the proper one to be used. Each classroom is a different reality, so these methods must be adapted to students' affective state, the communicative context they are related to, the linguistic complexity that the content demands, and obviously your own teaching style and pedagogical focus.
"... to inject the kinds of corrective feedback that are appropriate for the moment" (Teaching Speaking, pag. 275).
While the more you really understand this kind of notion from a theoretical perspective, the more difficult is to define pragmatically "the moment".
The question has directly to do with identifying this moment both in a general context and a particular sort of student. It's a real-life issue, so there is no panacea for it. Understanding students' particularities and, above all, their social and cultural background would be the stumbling block or touchstone to take into account when you want to apply a given feedback; however, right there you are also the most important benefits and advantages, because it will be possible to contribute to building a really meaningful teaching-learning process, that is to say, with a "sense of authenticity".
In my view and based on every text read so far, I am convinced of the importance of an educational enviroment which may be setting on strong ideas of contextualized strategies, furthermore when you are in a country where it is diffucult to bump into everyday chances to speak English in real situations.
But, when you don't stand much chance of speaking in real-life situations, a suitable, appropriate feedback is a very important element to improve skills and, principally, the affective factors, but also the ancient issues related to "accuracy and fluency", both of them at equal level of importance.
With respect to "usage vs. use", an appropriate feedback may be basic to clarify doubts about the kind of structure or register tu use in a given situation, a milieu or a specific context.
Finally, when you pay attention to the deep sense of Twain's quotation (pag. 269): "It's better to keep your mouth closed and have others think you are ignorant than open it and remove all doubt", well, it is clear for you that a helpful feedback on spoken language is not only a matter of "correction", "grammar", "teaching/learning", etcetera, but principally a question of human sensibility to decide "the moment" and also the manner.
After reading , i would like to say my opinion about the importance of feedback in ESL classes.
First of all, as teachers we have to help our students when they make some mistakes in their speech, and correcting their errors using our own intuition, is in my opinion this is a good way to developing a quality feedback.
According to Hendrickson, teachers should correct their students' speech errors when they believe that those mistakes that they're making, are essential. Continuing with Hendrickson's thoughts, When teachers can't understand the main idea of the speech that students' are producing is defined as a global error, and when errors are not too important,it is called a local error. this idea makes think that we can divide mistakes using their importance as a parameter.
In my opinion when those mistakes occur, teachers should not interrupt their students because he or she would feel overwhelmed with "the interruption" and that intermission could cut the learning process of them. but instead of interrupt the students' speech we would create a possitive reinforcement based on a good feedback, which can be more useful and meaningful, because that dinamyc doesn't break students' confidence in his or her speaking skills.
How to treat errors according to Vigil and Oller The model called affective and cognitive feedback says that too much corrections and over attention to malformations sometimes lead learner to eliminate their attempts at communication. On the other hand, let errors go uncorrected help those errors persist.
How and when a teacher should responds to errors according to Kathleen Bailey
She suggests seven ways in which a teacher can correct hi/her students. For example, the teacher can make a choice of whether ignore or treat the error. This treatment could be immediately, after the students make an error or much later. Another way of treatment is transferring the error to the class so as to everyone knows the correction of that error. And the last one is when the own learners initiate error treatment.
There is a model for error treatment that explains in a more detail way how to treat errors also called deviations.
The teacher identifies the type of deviation: grammatical, lexical, local or global, mistake (call for correction) or error (more serious, call for treatment), its source and complexity (too complicated or too easy to explain). The teacher has to know the students’ affective state and in which stages are. In one hand, the teacher’s pedagogical focus will help in deciding to treat or not the deviation and on the other hand, the teacher’s style could affect the way in which students perceive the treatment of deviations. Finally, it is important to consider the communicative context in which the deviation was produced.
The first thing we have to consider when teaching English is that second languague learning is a process in which students make mistakes most of the time. In fact, all people make mistakes when talking, including native speakers; consequently, we as teachers need to understand and manage the way in which we correct mistakes without interfering with the students'.
In my concern, the most important thing is the comunication of ideas using the target language, in other words, it's more important the meaning than the form. It's true that grammar rules are important when we learn a second language, but if we are going to correct structures we need to find ways for correcting mistakes that do not affect the students' motivation. If we correct mistakes interrupting the students' ideas, they may loose their motivation for learning,and we fail teaching the target language because an important issue at the moment of learning is motivation.
So, corrections can be done at the end of the students' speech and it can be done in different ways; for example, in case of intermediate level, the teacher can tell all the mistakes done by the students at the end telling the correct stuctures and the correct pronuncition for words, but in case of novice students, some common mistakes like the use of the final "s" in third person present simple can be corrected in an implicit way; for example, the student says: "My brother play football", so the teacher can say: Your brother plays footbal with some friends, so the student can correct himself without telling him directly that a mistake was made.
As a conclusion, we can say that correcting mistakes can be a difficult task at the moment of teaching; however, it can be done in many ways that do not affect the motivation and self-confidence of students.
Teachers should respond to speech errors so students' creativity is not stifled. Learning a second language is a process in which you should attempt to make mistakes while you learn, and teachers should be awareness of correct those mistakes in order to shape learner’s accuracy.
That’s why teachers should use their instinct to guess when is proper to correct learner’s discourse, as when the main idea of dialogue cannot be (global error), or just ignore it when it’s just a little mistake (local error).
However, the way in which discourse is interrupted can affect learner’s performance. For example; “Immediate correction may interrupt learner's practice and may be disruptive and eventually inhibit learner's willingness to try” (Negative affective feedback in Vigil and Oller's term 1976).
On this case, students’ performance is interrupted by the immediate correction of the teacher, affecting the performer’s anxiety, and improving his/her hesitation about the accuracy of his/her performance. A delayed correction will allow to the student to do not loose his/her performance rhythm. The teacher ought to wait until transitional points of conversation, or some later point of time within the same lesson boundaries for correction.
Willing to get a proper correction of the students, we can choose drawing a problem concerning error treatment just by giving learners’ information of their errors like Long Long's model (1977), or covering learner’s information, and giving remedy and opportunities to practice their mistakes, like Allwright's model says (1975). As a conclusion, if a teacher uses an indirect way of informing learners of their errors, such as repeating a learner's erroneous utterance, it leaves to learners to discover what is wrong with their utterance, how it should be said or written, etc. Of course, language learning process is an active one on the part of learners, but that does not mean that they can discover new rules and modify them on their own without unperceiving or misperceiving them.
feedback as an important element in the production is guiding every student if they are doing well in the output. how we should correct our students errors to provide helpful feedback? in my opinion,it has to do with not to interfere with the comunication process in first instance,because of losing the aim of of what it is saying, i remember one common example the mother correcctig his son when speaking and the son telling the mother, "if you correct me every time, i forget what i'm saying". in second instace, trying not to attack the students self confidence by embarrasing them in front of the class, which results in stop in the output of those students due to the fear to embarras themselves. also has to do with not to correct students at all and every single time but with correct constantly same errors, if a student said: i have two cat, instead of i have two cats, we as teacher can let him figure out this error without threatenig his self confidence by asking, for example, what do you do with your cats? . so we should correct students when anxiety is low also taking into account if the classroom allows students to make mistakes in the output without feeling shame,maybe just little grammatical problems, or wait until the class is over to make he student know about his mistake, these are some of the techniques teachers are able to use. but at the end a student who make constant errors is not going to produce comprehensicble input, so that, is going to be left behind in a conversation.
This is a very difficult topic to teachers because when students make errors in their speaking, the teacher has to correct those errors but sometimes this correction makes that the students lose the self-steem the motivation and their self-confidence, is for this reason that teachers has to find a good way to correct those errors. On the other hand feedback is an important element between teachers and students, feedback is an essential part of education and training programs, it helps learners to maximise their potential at different stages of training, rise their awareness of strenghts and areasfor improvement, and identify actions to be taken to improve performance. It is for this reason that when teachers correct the errors of the students in their speaches they have to be careful with the way in which they correct the students, because the correction has to be in order to improve feedback to the student, but here is the problem how to correct the errors of the students, improving feedback at the same time and giving to the students more self- confidence. Vigil and oller's suggest a model or a way to correct the errors of the students, they say that the teacher has to correct those errors that are crucial in the communication in order to improve a positive feedback, but the teacher doesn't have to correct those errors that are no meaningful or are don't affect the effective communication.
As a conclusion I can say that teachers have to corret the errrors of the students but with the idea of improve postive feedback, without interrupting all the time their speaches because if the teacher do that the students are not going to feel self-confident, so if for this reason that the teacher can correct the errors of the students but those which are important to communication or more meaningful and at the same time improme positive feedback.
First of all, I could say that this is an interesting and complicating question. Vigil and Oller (1976) point out that cognitive feedback must be optimal instead of effective. Many times teachers do not correct on time the students’ mistakes and they leave the students with this bad misunderstanding of some topic. As the text says, in some cases, teacher must change the light to red and must try to reform the bases of students’ knowledge or change the light to red and continue with the themes. Nevertheless, excessess are not good because if teachers put a bandage in their eyes, they can invent a reality and they can say that all is OK (in the case of always put the green light); in the other hand, if teachers make a continuous correction in students’ mistakes, students will not have self confidence enough to continue learning english language (in the case of always put the red light). Teacher must guide to students but not fall in excessess, he/she must “provide enough green lights to encourage continued communication, but no so many that crucial errors go unnoticed; and providing enough red lights to call attention to those crucial errors, but no so many that the learner is discouraged from attempting to speak at all”. We, as future teachers, will not be able to stifle our student’s attempts with corrective feedback. Kathleen Bailey (1985) suggests seven options complemented with eight possible features which can correct mistakes in the classroom. These options and features are intrinsically related with the attention given to the stundent. A good teacher can see the difficulties and easiness of his/her students and can look for possible solutions; thus, teacher and students can grow together. So, teacher must be an intuituve person. He/she must develop her/his inward which can look for the minimal features in the student’ learning. It can be achieved by experience and established theoretical foundations, by ascertaining which option or combination of option are adecuated for each situation.
According to Vigil and Oller's model, it is necessary to correct speech errors, but it is also necessary to know when and how to do it. A teacher should correct errors and mistakes when the meaning of the message is not clear, so that the student can correct and acquire some speech patterns. Teachers also have to reinforce all those patters that where said by the student in a correct way in order to let him or her know that the patter was used correctly. James Hendrickson states that there are two types of errors: Local and Global errors. Those erros can or cannot interfere in the speech. Local errors are those when for example a word is mispronounced "My sister like apples"( sister likes); in this case the error shouldn't be corrected because it doesn't interfere with the final message. On the other hand, global errors are those that make the message incomprehensible, so that the teacher should correct them in order to give the student the correct patter for the wrong sentence. It is very difficult to correct your students because many times they don't feel comfortable when speaking, and less comfortable when the teacher asks for something thay they don't understand. It is very essential to let your students know when they made a mistake or an error and to correct them in a kind way because it will depend on the way you correct the student,if he or she will become part of the class again by producing what we call output.
During a english class, it is very common that students made little mistakes and errors when they are trying to communicate their ideas, feelings or thoughts, but as a future english teachers how to know when correct? in the handout called teaching speaking. Virgil and Oller's propose that we can correct the mistakes of our students durind their performances, but without interrupt their speech or production ir order to create an environment of useful and helpful feedback to our students. this fact would be very effective. if we use in the correct way trying to encourage our students to perform in a better way without they feel embarrased because the idea is to achieve an optimal speech in the development and production of the oral and spoken language.
On the other hand, Bailey claims that the better way to correct your students when they made a error is to correct them inmediately after of doing the error because the students can understand in a better way and internalize that they made a mistake, but they already know the correct way of producing that idea because the students are focused on the structure and the corrections made by the teacher.
My personal view. I think that both of these approaches about what a teacher should do in the case of speech errors can be succesful if the teacher know to use them. i mean if the teacher is well-qualified to use that teaching tool in order to become his/her students into procifient speaker in the second language without interrup their learning process as cognitive as emotional. Creating an environment in which they can understand each other getting an optimal feedback and an excellent communication. obviously, thhe teacher focus on the environment and the speech errors and when this happened in order to look for thhe better way to correct them.
I think that we have to provide helpful feedback using, for example, the Vigil and Oller's model, trying to use the "yellow light" as much as possible in order to keeping a balance between the "red light", which limits the students creativity, and in some way makes the teacher forget reciprocity between the affective and cognitive feedback; and green light" or reinforce of errors of speaking-learner, it is important do not over use it because the possible fossilization. Teachers have to be aware about the positive and negative cognitive feedback providing enough green and red lights.
Now, when should we respond to speech errors? According to J. Hendrickson, teachers have to make a difference between Global and Local errors. For instance, if a students make a mistake but what he or she wanted to express still being understandable the error is local and most of the time must not be corrected by the teacher; however, some student want to be corrected, and even isn't very appropriated correct every error, there are some possible ways for do it, like the K. Bailey's taxonomy, that contains Basic Options and Possible Features for making correction in classroom.
Finally, it's necessary that teachers develop intuition for how and in what moment correct an error, and overall they have to remember that every student is different so the deal with a particular learner would be different to the other one.
As Kathleen Bailey (1985) establishes in the chapter “teaching speaking”, it is an option to correct an error or not, to do it early or late, or to test the efficacy of the “antidote” or leave this idea away, but, in spite of this, it is necessary to develop sharp observational and instinctive skills in order to take the right decision when corresponding. By the one hand, providing feedbacks should work as the balancing system between fluency and accuracy, between saying things at a good rhythm and well. By the other hand, it is crucial to provide effective, encouraging and positive feedbacks instead of affective, discouraging, and punitive ones, it means that teachers can be very assertive at the time to use feedbacks as tools to avoid students' frustrations and play as Skinner's positive reinforcers (page 290) to price right responses. So far errors are like simple mistakes and do not affect the comprehensibility of the message (such as simple spelling mistakes or other kind of local errors) the teacher can desert corrections: but if error hardly affect comprehensibility, feedback should take place and play the role of “antidote” against fossilization process (that involves global errors). To finish my comment, I think that it is very important that teachers can be good decision-makers at the time of providing feedbacks and do it indirectly (Krashen & Terrel, 1985) , encouraging the happy optimum classrooms where every single student is willing to adopt the L2.
What we have to take into account when correcting our students is that our methods do not affect their creativity. To deal with this problem we can mention some approaches which may help us.
One of these models is presented by Vigil and Oller (1976) that explain clearly the implications that cognitive and affective feedback has on the message-sending process. This model suggests that feed back is necessary to improve students' skills but teachers should not correct them too much. An excessive number of corrections could prejudice their creativity; but a lack of feedback can lead to fossilization.
James Hendrickson (1980) makes a difference between global and local errors of what we have to do when correcting. He states that local errors can be excluded of being corrected if message is comprehensible and clear. On the other hand, global errors need to be handled immediately because the message could remain distorted.
Another researcher called Kathleen Bailey (1985) proposes different ways to correct students based on the differences that underlie them. She name seven "basic options" that are complemented by "eight possible features" that you can see in the article. In short, Bailey compels us to think about the many situations we can find in the classroom so we can be prepared to use different ways of correction with different kinds of students because everyone has different backgrounds and different styles of learning.
To finalize I can say that we do not have to accept everything we read, that is just theory. If we want to know which is the best way of applying feedback we need to work in a classroom because our students will be all different as Bailey say.
As we already know, to correct speech errors is a complicated teacher task, there are many ways to manage different situations when students start to produce oral communication, so the feedback provided by the teacher in this process is essential for those who are learning a second language, in order to help and guide their performance appropriately. So the teacher intervention plays an important role in this regulation, therefore teacher should identify how to classify errors. According to James Hendrickson (1980) it is very important to discern the difference between global and local errors. On the one hand, local errors are not so relevant and usually need not be corrected in order not to interrupt the learner. On the other hand, global errors need to be treated because affect the comprehensible message. For that reason, as future teachers we should have a balance between positive and negative cognitive feedback, at the same time we need to choose the suitable treatment for students errors. So we have to sustain interaction among students in a friendly and helpful environment, because they need to be comfortable in their oral production process.
According to vigil and Oller´s model, teachers should act appropriately when attempting to correct students´ mistakes. Teachers should neither accept too much negative cognitive feedback nor much positive cognitive feedback because both of them lead students to stop their progress at communication or adopt an incorrect use of the language. Therefore, teachers need to be find a middle ground between the two points mention above, and in that way they will impact positively in students’ ´performance.
It is a little difficult to know “when” teachers should respond to speech errors since every student have different learning strategies. James Hendrickson helps us to know when it is appropriate to correct students’ mistakes. He says that the local errors need not to be corrected because the message is comprehensible, on the hand. And, global errors need to be treated since the message could be cluttered, on the other hand.Otherwise, “When...” it will depend on the student´ English level. For instance, if teachers have beginner students, it will be appropriate to correct their mistakes after they produce their utterances, so that they feel free to say what they want to say. In so far students increase their level teachers have to correct them more continually to reduce those specific errors that affect their development.
To conclude, we have to take into account that there are many external factors that may change the way we answer this question. Theoretically we’ll find specific answers ; pragmatically we’ll find others completely different.
An appropriate feedback from the teacher is essential for students formation.
One important example we can highlight from the document is the error-making correction model(Vigil/Oller)where the teacher gives students feedback but he does not interrupt their communication. I think this model is very important and also can be taken by us as future teachers in order to make our students aware of mistakes but not in a threating way. The interruption of the communicative process could cause several problems in students, for example may cause anxiety, frustation etc.(Krashen's Affective Filter Hypothesis).
Obviously teachers must correct only mistakes they think are critical and students must not repeat again, but if these error are not critical the teacher must not stop interaction. For that reason I think this theory is a good way to manage and control students' learning, and also to measure students competences and abilities by their performance.
In our university we always see some teachers who use this method; teachers who know when to correct and how to do it. Obviously that makes students feel comfortable with what they had learned and also with the relationship they have with their teacher.
Error-making correction is a necessary task in order to help our students. According to Vigil and Oller’s (1976), an error-making correction is the helpful feedback that teachers give their students in order to correct mistakes withour interrupt or stifle their speech or creativity. James Hendrickson (1980) states that a correction must be done just if the mistake is serious and influential in understanding the meaning of a sentence. If the error is not not very important, teacher should not interrupt the student. However, the problem is how and when teachers should respond to these errors. As Michael Long (1977) claims that “the decision the teacher makes is whether or not to treat it at all”. Teachers should take into account when to make the correction and how, because it may harm students’ feeling as Krashen states in Affective Filter Hypothesis. In my opinion, they should be done after the student’s speech in a constructive way.
For teachers there is a dilemma respect to regard learners’ mistakes every time they make them. Certainly, feedback is always necessary to elaborate comprehensible output. Swain said that correcting and interrupting to prod for accuracy tends to shift students’ attention away from the message. According to this, teachers must look for the effective and apropiate ways to correct learners’s mistakes. Eventhough, I agree with what James Hendrickson said respect to make mistakes. I think that it is better to correct trascendental mistakes that really affect the structure of the sentence. Sometimes we know what structure we may use, but because of other factors, such us feel nervous, we just make them. As Krashen said in his Affective Filter Hypothesis, students resist learning when learning is unpleasant, painful, or being attempted in a punitive environment. In other words, the way in which learners are corrected may affect their performance, feedback and learning in general. Vigil and Oller proponed the same statement. They consider to correct those mistakes that are crucial to understand the message. In this case teachers should use other strategies to give feedback and not to interrupt students when they are speaking. Some of those activities are to take note of common mistakes or wait the student end the activity. Also, it would be good for learners to make them aware of their mistakes in order to correct themselves as Krashen said in the Monitor Hypothesis. At this point teachers should use their intuition, as Michael Long, in order to corect in the optimum moment.
First of all, is very important to say that correction f speech errors is a very difficult task for teachers. Teachers have to be very intuitive to correct the student's errors, because the way in which they do that can affect the students' performance.
Vigil and Oller's model says that teachers have to correct students with negative cognitive feedback, but too much of it, for example too many interruptions will mae the studets to stop the communication, and they will forget what they are saying. And on the other hand, teacher should not let the students make a lot of important errors and not correct them. So, teachers have to find the perfect balance between both types of feedback: negative and positive. I think that the best time to correct students' errors is after they stop talking. Why? because we can interrupt the conversation, and also students will feel intimidated, and the result of this ind of feeling is that students will not want to continue their speech.
Students expect that teachers will correct their errors, for that reason is necessary to give them the right way of correction. James Hendrickson mae the difference between global and local errors. He says that local errors usually don't have to be corrected when the message is clear, beacuse an interruption can cut the flow of the conversation or speech. While global errors must be treated, because here the message is unclear.
Finally, is very important to take into account different factors when correcting errors, for example: the communicative context (if the teacher correct just the students who made the mistake or do it in a global way, I mean to the whole class), and also the learners' state we all know that students are different of each other, so they receive the information or in this case the correction in different ways. So,the way in which teachers correct doesn't have to affects the students performance in a bad way.
The first thing that we need to keep in mind is that error-making correction is a very difficult task In which the teacher’s intuition is required in order to treat errors successfully , without stifling the student’s creativity.
ReplyDeleteVigil and Oller’s (1976) described an error-making correction model by which the teacher can provide helpful feedback without shut off students’ attempts to communication. This model explains that in order for the feedback to be effective, the teacher should correct some errors that are crucial in the development of communication, but he/she should not correct those mistakes that may not be crucial to the understanding of the message.
Kathleen Bailey refers to some ways that explain how and when the teacher can treat errors without stifling creativity. For instance, the teacher can treat the error immediately, or he/she can wait until the student finish talking, which in my opinion is a better way to correct mistakes. Another way of correcting mistakes without affecting students’ self confidence is to transfer the error to the whole class instead of to the specific learner who made such error.
The text also provides another model for treatment of speech errors which help the teacher determine whether to correct errors or not by taking into account several factors. The factors that I considered more important are: pedagogical focus, communicative context, learner’s affective state, whether the error is local or global, and whether it is mistake or error.
During a lesson, students developed a high-level of dependence on the teacher, for that reason giving a proper feedback when students make some mistakes during an activity is an essential thing, because if you can take benefit of that situation you can develop a good feedback, which is a "must" element to have a successful class.
ReplyDeleteas we know, dealing with correction of mistakes in a class is very difficult situation, but if you can develop a proper feedback, that don't affect students' imagination and creativity, you can avoid that your lesson sinks like a the titanic.
Virgil and Oller's propose us that, you can correct your students' mistakes while they are producing, without interrupting their speech, because this proposal shows us a very honest feedback that tries to avoid the idea of trying to decode a wrong message, the intention of this model is producing a useful feedback that help the students to produce a comprehensible speech and not let the students produce chopped sentences and assume that those are a proper discourse,in other words the mission here for the student, is trying to produce an optimal speech.
On the other hand, Bailey propose us how and when treat mistakes or error without stiffling students' creativity, about that I think that the best way to correct mistakes during a communicative situation, is when it occurs immediately, because when you correct errors right after those occurs, you can assure a better understanding that when you correct mistakes after the speech, because during the communicative situation, the student is focusing his/her attention on you, and that attention is priceless... but some people could think that interrupt a student while he/she is talking is a very harsh mesaure... but personally it depends of the teacher's attitude, it's all about the level of confidence between the teacher and the students.
to apply some of these correction models you have to take in considaration some very important factors inside the class' environment such as: the affective state of learners (affective filter), or the pedagogical focus, but principally you have to make a difference between the level of the error because it could an small thing (mistake) which can be caused by some external factor or it could be a huge thing (error) which is more related with problems in understand some concepts or words.
Victor Gaete F.
As Kathleen Bailey (1985) said, the teachers should correct the mistakes using their intuition and then follow some specific steps that help them to know the importance of the errors in the sentences or phrases.
ReplyDeleteAccording to James Hendrickson (1980), a teacher should correct the speech error when she thinks that the mistake is transcendental to the sentence, when she doesn’t understand the idea the student wants to say (global error). If the error is not important (local error) the teacher should not interrupt the learner because she/he would think she has many mistakes and it would the interrupt the learning process. As Michael Long (1977) said “the decision the teacher makes is whether or not to treat it at all”.
Tania Figueroa
Once we have recognized the importance of feedback as a learning-building tool, we should exanimate effective and at the same time appropriate ways to correct our students’ mistakes, otherwise we could make our students lose their confidence and avoid interventions in the class. Unfortunately for the teachers, there is a dilemma regarding students’ correction: correct students’ speech everytime they make a mistake, which can lead to the students’ choice to stop producing output, or simply let them speak with a wide margin of error, thus allowing an incorrect output and leaving students prone to make mistakes more often. I think a student will not be able to elaborate comprehensible output if he is constantly using wrong structures or misspelled words, so feedback is compulsory. Therefore, in order for feedback to happen, some techniques should be carried out. Good examples of them include: waiting till the end of an activity to correct the mistakes, taking notes of one common type of mistake or hinting one student’s mistake and make her/himself realize of what she/he has said/written.
ReplyDeletePedro Inostroza Cáceres
It is worth to highlight the historical difficulty that teachers have had when attempting to correct students’ errors. It is not a matter of telling them that they did bad mentioning an utterance, a word or an idea. Feedback is a key factor to be successful in a language; however, the teacher has to find the precise moment to do it without making the student feel uncomfortable about it. It should be the case of a student who is talking about his strong ideas and the teacher starts correcting his pronunciation problems. This fact makes the student to finally stick. On the other hand, if the teachers don’t communicate mistakes there will be a possible fossilization of that error.
ReplyDeleteVigil and Oller’s(1976) model focus on the importance of considering that affective and cognitive feedback affect the message-sending process. This cognitive feedback must be optimal to be effective; however, too much negative cognitive feedback leads learners to shut off their attempts at communication. So they do not feel able to be successful in the language and they have little hope to get anything right.
Michael Long suggested that there is no specific time to treat errors; so the teacher based on his intuition will know when to correct because he knows how to treat his students according to their anxiety level, communicative problems, motivation, self-confidence, etc.
In general, it seems to me that the teachers’ task when finding the right moment to whether interrupt or let students’ normal flow of talking is a difficult one. The students have huge differences among them considering their fears, and concerns so that a teacher who knows his students will be the most appropriate person to encourage them to correct their mistakes when he thinks it is necessary to do it avoiding interfering students’ attempts at communication.
Paula Adasme Alvarez
When a pre-intermediate student is speaking English, she probably is going to make many mistakes, speech errors. By reading this article I realize that it is very difficult to know the precise moment to treat students´ errors effectively and that these students do not shut off their attempts at communication. A teacher should develop an appropriate feedback which can not affect the students´ creativity.
ReplyDeleteVigil and Oller (1976) suggest a model of how affective and cognitive feedback affects the message-sending process. In this model, they explain that in a speaking process the teacher can correct his/her students´ errors while they are producing; however, the teacher can’t interrupt their speech. The idea is that the teacher provides useful feedback without shutting off students’ attempts at communication.
On the other hand, James Hendrickson (1980) suggests that teachers need to discern the difference between global and local errors because local errors usually need not to be corrected since the message is comprehensible and clear; for that reason, correction might interrupt a student in his/her flow of productive communication. And in the case of global errors, they need to be treated in some way since the message may otherwise remain garbled.
Kathleen Bailey (1985) suggests us how and when teachers can treat errors without stifling students´ creativity. She proposes us seven basic options and eight possible features. It seems to me that teachers have to decide when to treat, who will treat, and how to treat a error because each of the students is different. If the teacher has knowledge about her learner, he is going to know about her anxiety level, confidence, and willingness to accept correction. I think that there are going to be students that can be interrupted while they are talking, and the teacher might tell them their mistakes. However, there are going to be students who are not going to be able to focus their attention to you; therefore, your interruption there it is going to affect students´ self confidence.
Finally, I believe that it is important to reflect on other facts like teacher style, whether it is mistake or error, pedagogical focus, learner’s affective state and other ones in order to decide whether to treat or not the deviation, to correct the mistakes.
Cecilia Alarcón Rojas
Responding to students’ speech errors is a way delicate matter; a bad choice can destroy any good intention of producing useful feedback or shut off students’ attempts to produce language. Although there are many ways or proposals to deal with errors; it will always depend on many factors, such as the error level, the comprehensibility of messages, the level of confidence between teacher and students, the classroom environment, and so forth. For instance, Vigil and Oller’s proposed that teachers should not correct all students’ mistakes, but those which are crucial to the understanding of the message in order not to shut off their attempts to communicate in the target language. I disagree with this opinion in some way because we as students are always paying attention to the corrections and feedback that our teacher makes; therefore, we are expecting that he/she tell us about our mistakes or weaknesses, since we are learning through our errors. In this sense, if teachers are just trying to get the gist of our speech without taking into account the ‘little’ mistakes we make, we would take for granted that we made a great performance, and that is not the idea. Maybe we need to consider the way in which teachers may correct our mistakes. Kathleen Bailey provided very good ways on how to treat errors without stifling students’ creativity or affecting them in some other ways. She suggests that errors could be treated immediately or told to student once he/she has finished talking. From my point of view, this is the best way to make corrections because students can be informed about their mistakes and can receive appropriate feedback, so learning can take place successfully. The other way that the author (Bailey) suggested and I think it is also proper for this order of ideas is the idea that errors can be transferred to the whole class instead of to the student who made such mistake. This idea seems very interesting to me, but it disregards the fact that, maybe, the person that made such error did not recognize their own mistakes when the teacher explains to the whole class; consequently, feedback can be lost. Therefore, I would consider to tell the specific students their own mistakes but in private, without interrupting his/her performance.
ReplyDeleteMayra Flores
The way in that a teacher provides feedback to the students must be optimal in order to be effective.
ReplyDeleteWe know that a person who is studying English is going to make mistakes, speech errors when she/he speaks, so here is when the teacher has to provide the correct feedback.
According to Vigil and Oller´s model focus on that a teacher has to correct the students´ mistakes while the students are producing, although the teacher can’t interrupt their speech because in this way the learners to shut off their attempts at communication.
James Hendrickson discerns the difference between global and local errors. He advised to the teacher not put focus on the local errors, so these errors usually need not be corrected since the message is clear and correction might interrupt a learner in the flow of productive communication. With regards to the global errors, they need to be treated in some way since the message may otherwise remain garbled.
On the other hand Kathleen Bailey proposes to the teachers how and when treats mistakes without stifling students' creativity. She gives us seven basic options and eight possible features that are viable modes of error correction in the classroom.
I think that every teacher has to know when and how to give feedback but always he/she has to be present that the feedback has to be effective in the learning of the students.
The most important point that I learned and took was now I know what a feedback is in its whole sense. That is to say, feedback is not only to say if something is right or wrong, but also it has to do with the students’ background and the situational context. According to Vigil and Oller´s model, I totally agree we, as future teachers, have to allow students to improve al their skills, especially when they are recently learning or speaking a new language. For that reason, our mission or goal is to accomplish or to improve their attitudes and abilities, not to hamper their performances, independently if they make something well or not.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I would like to highlight two important aspects regarding my point of view; first I consider that feedback should be delivered depending on the students’ background, why? Because it is not the same if for instance a student made a mistake that says “she love playing basketball” instead of he says “I do not cannot hear anything”. The second point has to do with the final example since we have to pay attention about what types of mistakes students made. Here it is really necessary to treat it immediately due to the fact that a sentence cannot have two negative forms.
On the other hand, we also have to take care about affective filter since according to Krashen and what Bailey has mentioned before, we, conscious or unconscious, can avoid and stifle students’ creativity and their free development in learning a new language.
Finally, I think that the best time to correct errors will depend on teachers and also when they feel that is a good opportunity to do it, besides they also have to take into account the degree of the mistakes, helping that this process will be less detrimental to students. For me the best conclusion is that there is no time to treat errors, but it is going to depend on teachers intuition, and also all the things that they have learned throughout their lives as teachers to put in practice in those cases.
Luis Campos
According to the question and the text "teaching speaking" I support the idea that students should be corrected in the time they have finished speaking. It means that the teachers have to wait until the end of the students'speaking since these ones will complete their ideas and thoughts (through communication) comfortably, on the one hand. On the other one, the teacher would have the opportunity to give some feedback about the mistakes students made This is something I have taken from the author called Kathleen Bailey, when she says the teacher corrects or reinforces errors through intuitions and cognitive feedback.
ReplyDeleteTeachers' responses (feedback) can have a positive result since students can feel confident on what they say and the fluency they demostrate. So, correcting after speaking is something I would practice with my students. I will not interrupt them or stop their fairs to speak in front of their classmates and the teacher, helping them to feel free of communicate whatever they want.
Finishing, what I disagree in this topic is to correct students' mistakes while they are speaking (Vigil and Oller) because they could feel they have a barrier in their mind for not success as they want. The idea is to improve their speaking within a nice environment, and not make them feel as if could not fix their own speech.
To be Succesful in second language learning there are many keys, but the most important is the feedback that a lerner receives from others.
ReplyDeleteAs Vigil and Oller`s (1976) proposed. How affective and cognitive feedback affects the messege- sending process. The task of the teacher is correct the students mistakes without interrupting their speech in order to produce a feedback that help students to decode a wrong messege and to create a comprehensible speech.
Kathleen Bailey (1985) propose and explain how and when teachers can correct students errors without stifling creativity. For example: teacher can correct the error at the moment that he/ she heard it or wait until the student finish.
I think that error correction must take place depending on the importance of the error, if it is trascendental to the sentence, teacher must acts immediately or wait, as james Hendrickson (1980) explains. Beacuse to much negative cognitive feedback in the students can produce that they can not getting anything right.
Finally, error- correction is a very difficult task . Teacher`s need to apply all his/ her intuition in order to treat the error correctly.
Mara Lopez Castañeda
After reading the text about teaching speaking, I think correction of speech errors is a quite difficult task that requires a high detailed analysis from teachers because it has a great connotation on the development of students’ speech and, as the Vigil and Oller’s model (1976) shows, an excessive negative feedback could produce that students stop to trying to speak and; on the other hand, an excessive positive feedback could produce the reinforcement of errors and the students’ fossilization.
ReplyDeleteThere are many factors that the teachers have to take into account at the moment of correction, but I agree with James Hendrickson (1980) who suggested to make a difference between local and global errors. It means that local errors do not make an attempt to the understanding of the message, so it is not necessary to correct them. Nevertheless, global errors need to be treated since these could obstruct the final message. Although Krashen and Terrel’s Natural Approach (1983) does not appear in this text, I remember that they also support the notion of, at the early production stage, students make a lot of errors or mistakes but the teachers have to focus on meaning and not on form, so they have not to make correction unless these are big errors which hinder the comprehension of the message.
Summarizing, I think the best way of correcting errors is talking personally and, if it possible, individually with the students and, as I said before, depending on the type or error (local or global), I think it has to be done at the end of the conversation in order to not interrupt and not cause inhibition in the students. I think communication between teacher and students is an essential matter in this case.
Marian Zurita A.
First of all many authors like Krashen and Terrell agree with the idea that errors can be corrected only when they do not interrupt the students’ flow of speech because the main purpose is that they speak focusing on meaning rather than form. In this way students feel more comfortable with the target language and they would not be afraid of making errors.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, authors like Hendrickson have proposed that depending on the kind of error students’ speech can be interrupted (local errors) or not (global ones).
Personally, I think there is not a final answer whether correcting students’ errors or not. According to my point of view it will depend on the kind of students we have and also in their interest because they generally want errors to be corrected for improving their skills.
In order to explain it better I am going to give an example:
-student: yesterday I eated some cookies
-teacher: oh! You ate some cookies! How many did you eat?
The idea is that student realizes on his own that he is making an error but it could not be possible without the teacher’s help or feedback.
María José Acevedo P.
It is difficult to know how and when teachers must correct students’ errors in their speeches. fortunately, in the text appears different models of some authors that can help us to choose the right moment to do it base on their own researches and experiences.
ReplyDeleteOne of them is proposing by Vigil and Oller (1976). They presented a model of how affective and cognitive feedback can affect the message-sending process in our students. Also, they suggested that the cognitive feedback must be optimal in order to be effective. Additionally, they said that it is our work to discern when it is optimal or no; it means, that teachers have to find the balance between the positive and the negative cognitive feedback in their learners.additionally, they said that we (teachers)don’t have to correct students’ errors while they are speaking because we could interrupt their reproduction of communication (output).
Other author is Michael Long who suggested that the decision is in the hands of teachers in order to decide whether or not to treat the errors in their students. This decision is relate to the beliefs of the teacher about language and learners.
James Hendrickson (1980) proposed an article on error treatment; in that article he said that teachers are focused on try to discern the differences between global and local errors. The local error can be not correct by teacher because the message given for the student was clear and if teacher correct it he will interrupt the oral production of the student. On the other hand, global error imply the immediate correction for the teacher because the utterance is incomprehensible for him and for the rest of the class; in it case teacher must correct students in order to avoid mistakes in the future.
In my opinion, teachers must correct students’ errors in a subtle way it means, without interrupt the speech of the student. One way of correct it would be after the student finished with his activity. After that moment, the teacher can say some general comments of the student’s activity and then he can do some correction of pronunciation or grammatical mistakes in the activity developing by the student.
As English teachers, one of our mission is to provide constantly feedbacks to our students. However,to provide them through a really helpful way, we have to take into account what kind of students we have: novice, intermediate, or advice. According to that, we can correct. For instance, if we are teaching to novice students, we should not pay too much attention on grammatical competence because they are starting to learn a second language. So, in that case, we as teachers have to correct the coherence mainly.
ReplyDeleteBesides, if our feedbacks are constant, e.g. every time that student speaks, I correct him/her, I will generate in student low self-esteem due to student will think "well, my spoken performance is bad; thus, it's better to be quiet" will think a child.
On the other hand, if teacher just provides positive feedbacks, ignoring mistakes, he/she can creates on student a stage of fossilization due to student won't feel the necessity of improve; he/she's doing a good job.
Therefore, "cognitive feedback must be optimal in order to be effective", it means that we have to correct, but not in excess, whenever it is necessary. Moreover, we don't have to forget that we're teaching to people that are learning a second language; it is another pattern, pronunciation, culture.
Hendrickson said that it is not necessary to correct local errors, e.g. when a student said "he do exercises" rather than "he does exercises" because we understand what student tries to say and we can interrupt his/her talking. However, if there are global errors that imply misunderstand or incoherence, we have the right and must to correct.
Finally, remember, be patient, everybody does mistake.We as teachers should help to overcome in a friendly way those mistakes on our pupils.
According to the documment there are many views on correcting speech errors. SOme of them were described by my classmates before, but in my view i'd like to say that i agree with James Hendrickson(1980) perspective. He mentions: " Hendrickson recommended that local errors usually need not to be corrected since the message is clear and correction might interrupt a learner in the flow of productive communication. Global errors need to be treated in some way since the message may otherwise remain garbled".
ReplyDeleteIf we want our students to be proficient in speaking ( which is crucial if we're teaching a foreign language) is neccesary to give them the confidence enough to try out the language. At the beginning students will make errors and that's completely natural. We as teachers, we dont need to be so impatient and correct errors inmidiately; It would be recommendable to let students talk...(that's important) and at the end... we should correct some errors by giving the correct feedback.
If we correct inmidiately students' speech errors.. they wont feel confident or the motivation enough to talk in the future... they'll be afraid to make some mistakes again, but we dont want our students to be like that right? So... We should pick up the exact moment to correct them,.. according to my view is at the end.
Camila Gutiérrez M.
Section 1
As a teacher trainee,it is difficult to face the trade of discovering which is the best way to correct students' speech errors. Practicums have given to me the opportunity to have a bigger spectrum of what is going on in schools' realia, and this matter is a very frequent question . In fact, the way you correct errors it's something that must be analized in depth, not only because of the real effectiveness of your performance but also in students' achievement of meaningful learnings.
ReplyDeleteIn this way, Vigil and Oller's model (1976) offer us the possibility to imagine the impact that the different error treatment managements available could take. If you constantly interrupt your students and get overt attention to their pronounciation mistakes, you will increase their anxiety and insecurity for sure:it would just lead them to shut off and feel embarrased or frustrated. On the other hand, teachers willing to let students "acquire" errors doing anything to solve it are not reacting so good as well.
Speech errors are unavoidable (we also commited them while learning our own mother tongue): that's why teachers should take advantage from them as potential possibilities of meaningful learning. From this perspective, keeping an equilibrium between negative and possitive feedback seems to be a good strategy.
Skinner's possitive reinforcement could be useful to make students' internalize correct pronunciation patterns, and in this way, Kathleen Bailey's taxonomy shows viable options to put in practice (from ignoring errors completely to treat them inmediatly).
In conclusion, I consider that intuition is a key tool at the moment of deciding which way is the proper one to be used. Each classroom is a different reality, so these methods must be adapted to students' affective state, the communicative context they are related to, the linguistic complexity that the content demands, and obviously your own teaching style and pedagogical focus.
Sofía Herrera Escobar
Section 2
"... to inject the kinds of corrective feedback that are appropriate for the moment" (Teaching Speaking, pag. 275).
ReplyDeleteWhile the more you really understand this kind of notion from a theoretical perspective, the more difficult is to define pragmatically "the moment".
The question has directly to do with identifying this moment both in a general context and a particular sort of student. It's a real-life issue, so there is no panacea for it. Understanding students' particularities and, above all, their social and cultural background would be the stumbling block or touchstone to take into account when you want to apply a given feedback; however, right there you are also the most important benefits and advantages, because it will be possible to contribute to building a really meaningful teaching-learning process, that is to say, with a "sense of authenticity".
In my view and based on every text read so far, I am convinced of the importance of an educational enviroment which may be setting on strong ideas of contextualized strategies, furthermore when you are in a country where it is diffucult to bump into everyday chances to speak English in real situations.
But, when you don't stand much chance of speaking in real-life situations, a suitable, appropriate feedback is a very important element to improve skills and, principally, the affective factors, but also the ancient issues related to "accuracy and fluency", both of them at equal level of importance.
With respect to "usage vs. use", an appropriate feedback may be basic to clarify doubts about the kind of structure or register tu use in a given situation, a milieu or a specific context.
Finally, when you pay attention to the deep sense of Twain's quotation (pag. 269): "It's better to keep your mouth closed and have others think you are ignorant than open it and remove all doubt", well, it is clear for you that a helpful feedback on spoken language is not only a matter of "correction", "grammar", "teaching/learning", etcetera, but principally a question of human sensibility to decide "the moment" and also the manner.
Reinaldo
After reading , i would like to say my opinion about the importance of feedback in ESL classes.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, as teachers we have to help our students when they make some mistakes in their speech, and correcting their errors using our own intuition, is in my opinion this is a good way to developing a quality feedback.
According to Hendrickson, teachers should correct their students' speech errors when they believe that those mistakes that they're making, are essential. Continuing with Hendrickson's thoughts, When teachers can't understand the main idea of the speech that students' are producing is defined as a global error, and when errors are not too important,it is called a local error. this idea makes think that we can divide mistakes using their importance as a parameter.
In my opinion when those mistakes occur, teachers should not interrupt their students because he or she would feel overwhelmed with "the interruption" and that intermission could cut the learning process of them. but instead of interrupt the students' speech we would create a possitive reinforcement based on a good feedback, which can be more useful and meaningful, because that dinamyc doesn't break students' confidence in his or her speaking skills.
. . . Fran Castro!
How to treat errors according to Vigil and Oller
ReplyDeleteThe model called affective and cognitive feedback says that too much corrections and over attention to malformations sometimes lead learner to eliminate their attempts at communication. On the other hand, let errors go uncorrected help those errors persist.
How and when a teacher should responds to errors according to Kathleen Bailey
She suggests seven ways in which a teacher can correct hi/her students. For example, the teacher can make a choice of whether ignore or treat the error. This treatment could be immediately, after the students make an error or much later. Another way of treatment is transferring the error to the class so as to everyone knows the correction of that error. And the last one is when the own learners initiate error treatment.
There is a model for error treatment that explains in a more detail way how to treat errors also called deviations.
The teacher identifies the type of deviation: grammatical, lexical, local or global, mistake (call for correction) or error (more serious, call for treatment), its source and complexity (too complicated or too easy to explain). The teacher has to know the students’ affective state and in which stages are. In one hand, the teacher’s pedagogical focus will help in deciding to treat or not the deviation and on the other hand, the teacher’s style could affect the way in which students perceive the treatment of deviations. Finally, it is important to consider the communicative context in which the deviation was produced.
The first thing we have to consider when teaching English is that second languague learning is a process in which students make mistakes most of the time. In fact, all people make mistakes when talking, including native speakers; consequently, we as teachers need to understand and manage the way in which we correct mistakes without interfering with the students'.
ReplyDeleteIn my concern, the most important thing is the comunication of ideas using the target language, in other words, it's more important the meaning than the form. It's true that grammar rules are important when we learn a second language, but if we are going to correct structures we need to find ways for correcting mistakes that do not affect the students' motivation. If we correct mistakes interrupting the students' ideas, they may loose their motivation for learning,and we fail teaching the target language because an important issue at the moment of learning is motivation.
So, corrections can be done at the end of the students' speech and it can be done in different ways; for example, in case of intermediate level, the teacher can tell all the mistakes done by the students at the end telling the correct stuctures and the correct pronuncition for words, but in case of novice students, some common mistakes like the use of the final "s" in third person present simple can be corrected in an implicit way; for example, the student says: "My brother play football", so the teacher can say: Your brother plays footbal with some friends, so the student can correct himself without telling him directly that a mistake was made.
As a conclusion, we can say that correcting mistakes can be a difficult task at the moment of teaching; however, it can be done in many ways that do not affect the motivation and self-confidence of students.
Teachers should respond to speech errors so students' creativity is not stifled. Learning a second language is a process in which you should attempt to make mistakes while you learn, and teachers should be awareness of correct those mistakes in order to shape learner’s accuracy.
ReplyDeleteThat’s why teachers should use their instinct to guess when is proper to correct learner’s discourse, as when the main idea of dialogue cannot be (global error), or just ignore it when it’s just a little mistake (local error).
However, the way in which discourse is interrupted can affect learner’s performance. For example; “Immediate correction may interrupt learner's practice and may be disruptive and eventually inhibit learner's willingness to try” (Negative affective feedback in Vigil and Oller's term 1976).
On this case, students’ performance is interrupted by the immediate correction of the teacher, affecting the performer’s anxiety, and improving his/her hesitation about the accuracy of his/her performance.
A delayed correction will allow to the student to do not loose his/her performance rhythm. The teacher ought to wait until transitional points of conversation, or some later point of time within the same lesson boundaries for correction.
Willing to get a proper correction of the students, we can choose drawing a problem concerning error treatment just by giving learners’ information of their errors like Long Long's model (1977), or covering learner’s information, and giving remedy and opportunities to practice their mistakes, like Allwright's model says (1975).
As a conclusion, if a teacher uses an indirect way of informing learners of their errors, such as repeating a learner's erroneous utterance, it leaves to learners to discover what is wrong with their utterance, how it should be said or written, etc. Of course, language learning process is an active one on the part of learners, but that does not mean that they can discover new rules and modify them on their own without unperceiving or misperceiving them.
feedback as an important element in the production is guiding every student if they are doing well in the output.
ReplyDeletehow we should correct our students errors to provide helpful feedback? in my opinion,it has to do with not to interfere with the comunication process in first instance,because of losing the aim of of what it is saying, i remember one common example the mother correcctig his son when speaking and the son telling the mother, "if you correct me every time, i forget what i'm saying". in second instace, trying not to attack the students self confidence by embarrasing them in front of the class, which results in stop in the output of those students due to the fear to embarras themselves. also has to do with not to correct students at all and every single time but with correct constantly same errors, if a student said: i have two cat, instead of i have two cats, we as teacher can let him figure out this error without threatenig his self confidence by asking, for example, what do you do with your cats? .
so we should correct students when anxiety is low also taking into account if the classroom allows students to make mistakes in the output without feeling shame,maybe just little grammatical problems, or wait until the class is over to make he student know about his mistake, these are some of the techniques teachers are able to use. but at the end a student who make constant errors is not going to produce comprehensicble input, so that, is going to be left behind in a conversation.
This is a very difficult topic to teachers because when students make errors in their speaking, the teacher has to correct those errors but sometimes this correction makes that the students lose the self-steem the motivation and their self-confidence, is for this reason that teachers has to find a good way to correct those errors. On the other hand feedback is an important element between teachers and students, feedback is an essential part of education and training programs, it helps learners to maximise their potential at different stages of training, rise their awareness of strenghts and areasfor improvement, and identify actions to be taken to improve performance. It is for this reason that when teachers correct the errors of the students in their speaches they have to be careful with the way in which they correct the students, because the correction has to be in order to improve feedback to the student, but here is the problem how to correct the errors of the students, improving feedback at the same time and giving to the students more self- confidence.
ReplyDeleteVigil and oller's suggest a model or a way to correct the errors of the students, they say that the teacher has to correct those errors that are crucial in the communication in order to improve a positive feedback, but the teacher doesn't have to correct those errors that are no meaningful or are don't affect the effective communication.
As a conclusion I can say that teachers have to corret the errrors of the students but with the idea of improve postive feedback, without interrupting all the time their speaches because if the teacher do that the students are not going to feel self-confident, so if for this reason that the teacher can correct the errors of the students but those which are important to communication or more meaningful and at the same time improme positive feedback.
Alicia Grillo
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I could say that this is an interesting and complicating question.
ReplyDeleteVigil and Oller (1976) point out that cognitive feedback must be optimal instead of effective. Many times teachers do not correct on time the students’ mistakes and they leave the students with this bad misunderstanding of some topic. As the text says, in some cases, teacher must change the light to red and must try to reform the bases of students’ knowledge or change the light to red and continue with the themes. Nevertheless, excessess are not good because if teachers put a bandage in their eyes, they can invent a reality and they can say that all is OK (in the case of always put the green light); in the other hand, if teachers make a continuous correction in students’ mistakes, students will not have self confidence enough to continue learning english language (in the case of always put the red light). Teacher must guide to students but not fall in excessess, he/she must “provide enough green lights to encourage continued communication, but no so many that crucial errors go unnoticed; and providing enough red lights to call attention to those crucial errors, but no so many that the learner is discouraged from attempting to speak at all”.
We, as future teachers, will not be able to stifle our student’s attempts with corrective feedback. Kathleen Bailey (1985) suggests seven options complemented with eight possible features which can correct mistakes in the classroom. These options and features are intrinsically related with the attention given to the stundent. A good teacher can see the difficulties and easiness of his/her students and can look for possible solutions; thus, teacher and students can grow together.
So, teacher must be an intuituve person. He/she must develop her/his inward which can look for the minimal features in the student’ learning. It can be achieved by experience and established theoretical foundations, by ascertaining which option or combination of option are adecuated for each situation.
Sherezada Ruz
According to Vigil and Oller's model, it is necessary to correct speech errors, but it is also necessary to know when and how to do it.
ReplyDeleteA teacher should correct errors and mistakes when the meaning of the message is not clear, so that the student can correct and acquire some speech patterns.
Teachers also have to reinforce all those patters that where said by the student in a correct way in order to let him or her know that the patter was used correctly.
James Hendrickson states that there are two types of errors: Local and Global errors. Those erros can or cannot interfere in the speech. Local errors are those when for example a word is mispronounced "My sister like apples"( sister likes); in this case the error shouldn't be corrected because it doesn't interfere with the final message.
On the other hand, global errors are those that make the message incomprehensible, so that the teacher should correct them in order to give the student the correct patter for the wrong sentence.
It is very difficult to correct your students because many times they don't feel comfortable when speaking, and less comfortable when the teacher asks for something thay they don't understand.
It is very essential to let your students know when they made a mistake or an error and to correct them in a kind way because it will depend on the way you correct the student,if he or she will become part of the class again by producing what we call output.
During a english class, it is very common that students made little mistakes and errors when they are trying to communicate their ideas, feelings or thoughts, but as a future english teachers how to know when correct?
ReplyDeletein the handout called teaching speaking. Virgil and Oller's propose that we can correct the mistakes of our students durind their performances, but without interrupt their speech or production ir order to create an environment of useful and helpful feedback to our students. this fact would be very effective. if we use in the correct way trying to encourage our students to perform in a better way without they feel embarrased because the idea is to achieve an optimal speech in the development and production of the oral and spoken language.
On the other hand, Bailey claims that the better way to correct your students when they made a error is to correct them inmediately after of doing the error because the students can understand in a better way and internalize that they made a mistake, but they already know the correct way of producing that idea because the students are focused on the structure and the corrections made by the teacher.
My personal view. I think that both of these approaches about what a teacher should do in the case of speech errors can be succesful if the teacher know to use them. i mean if the teacher is well-qualified to use that teaching tool in order to become his/her students into procifient speaker in the second language without interrup their learning process as cognitive as emotional. Creating an environment in which they can understand each other getting an optimal feedback and an excellent communication. obviously, thhe teacher focus on the environment and the speech errors and when this happened in order to look for thhe better way to correct them.
I think that we have to provide helpful feedback using, for example, the Vigil and Oller's model, trying to use the "yellow light" as much as possible in order to keeping a balance between the "red light", which limits the students creativity, and in some way makes the teacher forget reciprocity between the affective and cognitive feedback; and green light" or reinforce of errors of speaking-learner, it is important do not over use it because the possible fossilization. Teachers have to be aware about the positive and negative cognitive feedback providing enough green and red lights.
ReplyDeleteNow, when should we respond to speech errors? According to J. Hendrickson, teachers have to make a difference between Global and Local errors. For instance, if a students make a mistake but what he or she wanted to express still being understandable the error is local and most of the time must not be corrected by the teacher; however, some student want to be corrected, and even isn't very appropriated correct every error, there are some possible ways for do it, like the K. Bailey's taxonomy, that contains Basic Options and Possible Features for making correction in classroom.
Finally, it's necessary that teachers develop intuition for how and in what moment correct an error, and overall they have to remember that every student is different so the deal with a particular learner would be different to the other one.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAs Kathleen Bailey (1985) establishes in the chapter “teaching speaking”, it is an option to correct an error or not, to do it early or late, or to test the efficacy of the “antidote” or leave this idea away, but, in spite of this, it is necessary to develop sharp observational and instinctive skills in order to take the right decision when corresponding.
ReplyDeleteBy the one hand, providing feedbacks should work as the balancing system between fluency and accuracy, between saying things at a good rhythm and well.
By the other hand, it is crucial to provide effective, encouraging and positive feedbacks instead of affective, discouraging, and punitive ones, it means that teachers can be very assertive at the time to use feedbacks as tools to avoid students' frustrations and play as Skinner's positive reinforcers (page 290) to price right responses.
So far errors are like simple mistakes and do not affect the comprehensibility of the message (such as simple spelling mistakes or other kind of local errors) the teacher can desert corrections: but if error hardly affect comprehensibility, feedback should take place and play the role of “antidote” against fossilization process (that involves global errors).
To finish my comment, I think that it is very important that teachers can be good decision-makers at the time of providing feedbacks and do it indirectly (Krashen & Terrel, 1985) , encouraging the happy optimum classrooms where every single student is willing to adopt the L2.
What we have to take into account when correcting our students is that our methods do not affect their creativity. To deal with this problem we can mention some approaches which may help us.
ReplyDeleteOne of these models is presented by Vigil and Oller (1976) that explain clearly the implications that cognitive and affective feedback has on the message-sending process. This model suggests that feed back is necessary to improve students' skills but teachers should not correct them too much. An excessive number of corrections could prejudice their creativity; but a lack of feedback can lead to fossilization.
James Hendrickson (1980) makes a difference between global and local errors of what we have to do when correcting. He states that local errors can be excluded of being corrected if message is comprehensible and clear. On the other hand, global errors need to be handled immediately because the message could remain distorted.
Another researcher called Kathleen Bailey (1985) proposes different ways to correct students based on the differences that underlie them. She name seven "basic options" that are complemented by "eight possible features" that you can see in the article. In short, Bailey compels us to think about the many situations we can find in the classroom so we can be prepared to use different ways of correction with different kinds of students because everyone has different backgrounds and different styles of learning.
To finalize I can say that we do not have to accept everything we read, that is just theory. If we want to know which is the best way of applying feedback we need to work in a classroom because our students will be all different as Bailey say.
As we already know, to correct speech errors is a complicated teacher task, there are many ways to manage different situations when students start to produce oral communication, so the feedback provided by the teacher in this process is essential for those who are learning a second language, in order to help and guide their performance appropriately. So the teacher intervention plays an important role in this regulation, therefore teacher should identify how to classify errors. According to James Hendrickson (1980) it is very important to discern the difference between global and local errors. On the one hand, local errors are not so relevant and usually need not be corrected in order not to interrupt the learner. On the other hand, global errors need to be treated because affect the comprehensible message. For that reason, as future teachers we should have a balance between positive and negative cognitive feedback, at the same time we need to choose the suitable treatment for students errors. So we have to sustain interaction among students in a friendly and helpful environment, because they need to be comfortable in their oral production process.
ReplyDeleteIsrael Navarrete
Section 2
According to vigil and Oller´s model, teachers should act appropriately when attempting to correct students´ mistakes. Teachers should neither accept too much negative cognitive feedback nor much positive cognitive feedback because both of them lead students to stop their progress at communication or adopt an incorrect use of the language. Therefore, teachers need to be find a middle ground between the two points mention above, and in that way they will impact positively in students’ ´performance.
ReplyDeleteIt is a little difficult to know “when” teachers should respond to speech errors since every student have different learning strategies. James Hendrickson helps us to know when it is appropriate to correct students’ mistakes. He says that the local errors need not to be corrected because the message is comprehensible, on the hand. And, global errors need to be treated since the message could be cluttered, on the other hand.Otherwise, “When...” it will depend on the student´ English level. For instance, if teachers have beginner students, it will be appropriate to correct their mistakes after they produce their utterances, so that they feel free to say what they want to say. In so far students increase their level teachers have to correct them more continually to reduce those specific errors that affect their development.
To conclude, we have to take into account that there are many external factors that may change the way we answer this question. Theoretically we’ll find specific answers ; pragmatically we’ll find others completely different.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAn appropriate feedback from the teacher is essential for students formation.
ReplyDeleteOne important example we can highlight from the document is the error-making correction model(Vigil/Oller)where the teacher gives students feedback but he does not interrupt their communication. I think this model is very important and also can be taken by us as future teachers in order to make our students aware of mistakes but not in a threating way. The interruption of the communicative process could cause several problems in students, for example may cause anxiety, frustation etc.(Krashen's Affective Filter Hypothesis).
Obviously teachers must correct only mistakes they think are critical and students must not repeat again, but if these error are not critical the teacher must not stop interaction. For that reason I think this theory is a good way to manage and control students' learning, and also to measure students competences and abilities by their performance.
In our university we always see some teachers who use this method; teachers who know when to correct and how to do it. Obviously that makes students feel comfortable with what they had learned and also with the relationship they have with their teacher.
Mario Vial Aliaga
Error-making correction is a necessary task in order to help our students. According to Vigil and Oller’s (1976), an error-making correction is the helpful feedback that teachers give their students in order to correct mistakes withour interrupt or stifle their speech or creativity. James Hendrickson (1980) states that a correction must be done just if the mistake is serious and influential in understanding the meaning of a sentence. If the error is not not very important, teacher should not interrupt the student.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the problem is how and when teachers should respond to these errors. As Michael Long (1977) claims that “the decision the teacher makes is whether or not to treat it at all”. Teachers should take into account when to make the correction and how, because it may harm students’ feeling as Krashen states in Affective Filter Hypothesis.
In my opinion, they should be done after the student’s speech in a constructive way.
José Barrios Barrios
For teachers there is a dilemma respect to regard learners’ mistakes every time they make them. Certainly, feedback is always necessary to elaborate comprehensible output. Swain said that correcting and interrupting to prod for accuracy tends to shift students’ attention away from the message. According to this, teachers must look for the effective and apropiate ways to correct learners’s mistakes. Eventhough, I agree with what James Hendrickson said respect to make mistakes. I think that it is better to correct trascendental mistakes that really affect the structure of the sentence. Sometimes we know what structure we may use, but because of other factors, such us feel nervous, we just make them. As Krashen said in his Affective Filter Hypothesis, students resist learning when learning is unpleasant, painful, or being attempted in a punitive environment. In other words, the way in which learners are corrected may affect their performance, feedback and learning in general. Vigil and Oller proponed the same statement. They consider to correct those mistakes that are crucial to understand the message. In this case teachers should use other strategies to give feedback and not to interrupt students when they are speaking. Some of those activities are to take note of common mistakes or wait the student end the activity. Also, it would be good for learners to make them aware of their mistakes in order to correct themselves as Krashen said in the Monitor Hypothesis. At this point teachers should use their intuition, as Michael Long, in order to corect in the optimum moment.
ReplyDeleteLizette Aliaga Castro
First of all, is very important to say that correction f speech errors is a very difficult task for teachers. Teachers have to be very intuitive to correct the student's errors, because the way in which they do that can affect the students' performance.
ReplyDeleteVigil and Oller's model says that teachers have to correct students with negative cognitive feedback, but too much of it, for example too many interruptions will mae the studets to stop the communication, and they will forget what they are saying. And on the other hand, teacher should not let the students make a lot of important errors and not correct them. So, teachers have to find the perfect balance between both types of feedback: negative and positive. I think that the best time to correct students' errors is after they stop talking. Why? because we can interrupt the conversation, and also students will feel intimidated, and the result of this ind of feeling is that students will not want to continue their speech.
Students expect that teachers will correct their errors, for that reason is necessary to give them the right way of correction. James Hendrickson mae the difference between global and local errors. He says that local errors usually don't have to be corrected when the message is clear, beacuse an interruption can cut the flow of the conversation or speech. While global errors must be treated, because here the message is unclear.
Finally, is very important to take into account different factors when correcting errors, for example: the communicative context (if the teacher correct just the students who made the mistake or do it in a global way, I mean to the whole class), and also the learners' state we all know that students are different of each other, so they receive the information or in this case the correction in different ways. So,the way in which teachers correct doesn't have to affects the students performance in a bad way.
Cinthya Rosales