Exploratory Practice of Supportive Error Correctionin Interactive EFL Classroom 第2页
10.F2: Not shy.
11.T: Ok, very good. and here, “not the slightest bit” contains the negative meaning “ not at all”, so “not the slightest bit shy” means
12.F2: Not shy at all.
13.T: Exactly. So you see you are capable of guessing the unfamiliar words form the context! And next time when you meet some difficult words in reading, just try this way, ok?
14.F2: Ok.
In excerpt 1, when the student made an error (turn 6), I first acknowledged that “Good, the meaning is right”, then I corrected her errors to remind her of the difference between her hypothesis and target language (turn 7). After she realized the gap (turn 8), I gave her a positive feedback to reinforce the correct one as well as to prevent her form being discouraged by the negative feedback before (turn 9).
Besides, the whole process of excerpt 1 can be regarded as a “positive- negative-positive” one: when the student failed to answer the questions for twice, I helped her to control the frustration by telling her it was due to the complexity of the phrase rather than her English level (turn 5) , then I scaffolded her to overcome the difficulty by providing her more clues (turns 5, 7, 9, 11), and at last I gave her the praise to encourage her to try this way to solve the problem by herself in the future. Therefore, the supportive feedbacks in the whole process created a positively affective environment for the students to produce the correct answer, develop cognition and become more confident in solving the problem independently in the future.
Another method to avoid the negative effect of error correction is to provide error correction in an implicit way.
B. Implicit but tactic correction of students’ errors can avoid negative effect while helping L2 learning.
As mentioned above, too many negative evaluations can lead to the frustration among students and influence their efforts to attempt revision of their production, so the teacher may correct the errors in a more implicit way to withhold overt negative evaluation of linguistic form. For example,
Excerpt 2
1.T: Do you have any wishes on your birthday today?
2.F15: Yes, I wish I will pass pass CET-6.
3.T: Ok, you wish you would [stressed and paused], pass CET-6. good, ambitious. What else?
4.F15 I wish, I would be happy everyday.
5.T: Ok, that’s very good, I hope so, happy birthday and happy everyday.
6.F15: Thank you.
This example is a teacher correction in an implicit way, in which I corrected the student’s error by recast, that is, I repeated her original meaning with changed form (turn 3) and I responded to the content (by saying “good” and “ambitious” in turn3),withholding the explicit comment on the grammatical form. This implicit correct proved to be effective in this example: the student produced the correct response (turn 5). While reformulating the students utterance (turn 3), I stressed the changed part to get the student to notice the gap between her interlanguage form and the target form, and gave a positive feedback for the content of her utterance to prevent the student from feeling frustrated at her attempt to use the target language. After that, I asked “what else” to get her to produce more utterance within the similar topic, which actually gave her opportunity to modify her utterance. Through this supportive way, the interaction was sustained and the student was encouraged to modify her ‘transitional’ rules of her developing grammar, which would facilitate her language learning and enhance her affect as well.
Besides the teacher-correction method, teacher can also ask students to correct their own errors.
C. The teacher plays an important role as scaffolder to encourage students to correct their own errors.
By encouraging students to correct errors by themselves, teacher can invite students’ active participation in the problem solving process so that students will produce more output and feel more confident in controlling of their errors. During this process, teacher plays a crucial role because they have to assist the students’ self-correcting in an appropriate way. Teachers can ask students to correct the errors in an explicit but non-threatening way or they can achieve by some implicit methods. One common way for indirect method is simply asking the students to repeat his or her own utterance. However, sometimes the general questioning will not elicit the correct one, so the teacher needs to act as a “scaffolder” by indicating the location or the nature of the error. Excerpt 3 shows teacher’s indication through a half-said sentence.
Excerpt 3
1.T: What's your New Year's resolution?
2.M13: I hope I can pass all the exams.
3.T: Ok, good, what else?
4.M13: Then second, en.. I , I will try my best to let our class become, become more and more better .
5.T: What?
6.M13: En, As a monitor, I think I will try best to let our class become more and more better.
7.T: Become more and more
8.M13: Better, oh. no, er, better and better.
In this example, the student failed to correct the error at first ( turn 6) as he took my implicit correction (turn 5) for making the meaning clearly. So I scaffolded him to locate the error by repeating part of his wrong utterance. Then through his own repetition of the rest of the error, he noticed the difference between his erroneous form and the target form and finally modified his speech by himself.
The teacher can also indicate the nature of the error made to help the students to notice the gap, for example, in excerpt 3, the teacher could also tell the student “here should be the subjunctive mood” to ask the students to correct the error.
D. Students’ individualities and ZPD should be concerned
So far as concerned, different methods of error correction scaffolds students linguistically and affectively in their language performance. However, teachers should also take Students’ individualities into consideration when they decide which method is the appropriate to choose.
For example, the positive feedbacks in “sandwich” method are especially useful for low-achieving students and shy students; but it is also easily devalued through overuse for some students. As Ur (1996, 248) points out, learners have different opinions on feedback, “a teacher correction that seems to an observer a humiliating ‘put-down’ may not be perceived as such by the learner to whom it was addressed; or an apparently gentle, tactful one may give offence.”
While adopting the implicit correction strategies, teachers also have to be careful to consider students’ individualities and ZDP. For example, F15 in excerpt 2 is an introvert, careful and sensitive girl who works hard in English and usually performs well in classroom. So recast was appropriately used here to create a comfortable environment for her, in which she could quickly “notice” the information in my feedback and her cognition was successfully activated. But in another case, a lower-achieving student just ignored my recast, just as follows:
Excerpt 4
1.T: What did you do in the party?
2.F1: We danced and we we drink.
3.T: You drank? Really? That's crazy.
4.F1:Yes, and we eat a lot.
Though I gave a recast in turn 3, the student seemed not to have noticed it, as she continued with another turn containing the same error. This result is consistent with the results of the studies by some researchers (e.g. Mackey & Philp, 1998) who suggest that recasts may allow more advanced learners to infer negative evidence but may pass unnoticed by less advanced learners. According to Vygotsky (1978), the extent to which mediation can facilitate learning is constrained by learner’s ZPD. Therefore, teachers should give students appropriate ways concerning their ZPD and individualities. For example, teachers can provide more assistance for students who find it hard to correct errors by themselves and sometimes even use explicit but supportive teacher-correction to simplify the task and ease their cognitive processing pressure. For students who are capable of self-correction, teachers can encourage them to apply the rule they’ve learned to correct their own errors, thus finally “enable them to become independent thinkers and problem-solvers” (Williams & Burden, 2000: 68).
5. Conclusion
Error correction not only involves learners’ linguistic competence, but also their affect, which plays a crucial part in language acquisition. Therefore, teachers should adopt appropriate strategies to create a supportive environment for error correction. The results of the research will hopefully shed light on future pedagogical decisions and improvements for error correction to play a more effective and facilitative role in learners’ language acquisition and their affect in general.
【References】
[1] Allwright, D. & R. Lenzuen，1997. Exploratory Practice: Work at the Cultura Inglesa, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Language Teaching Research. 1: 73.
[2] Ellis, R. 1994 .The Study of Second Language Acquisition. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社.
[3] Krashen, S. D. 1985. The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. New York: Longman Group.
[4] Long, M. H. 1985. Input and Second Language Acquisition Theory. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (eds).Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
[5] Long, M. H. 1996. The Role of the Linguistic Environment in Second Language Acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (eds.). Handbook of Second
[6] Mackey. A. & Philp. J. 1998. Conversational Interaction and Second Language Development: Recasts, Responses and Red Herrings? The Modern Language Journal. 82: 338-356.
[7] Swain, M. 1985. Communicative Competence: Some Roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible Output in Its Development. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.). Input in Second Language Acquisition.Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
[8] Swain, M. 1995. Three Functions of Output in Second Language Learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (eds.), Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics. Studies in Honour of H. G. Widdowson. 上海：上海外语教育出版社.
[9] Ur, P. 吴一安（导读）.1996. A Course in Language Teaching: Practice and Theory. 北京：外语教学与研究出版社.
[10] Vygotsky, L. 1978. Mind and Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
[11] Williams, M., & Burden, R. L. 刘学惠（导读）. 2000. Psychology for language teachers: A social constructivist approach. 北京：外语教学与研究出版社.
[12] Wood, D.Bruner and G. Ross. 1976. The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 17: 89 – 100.