Discrepancies in Teachers’ Perceptions and Reported Practices: The Case of Written Feedback in an EFL Context

IF 0.8 Q3 LINGUISTICS
Hooman Saeli, A. Cheng
{"title":"Discrepancies in Teachers’ Perceptions and Reported Practices: The Case of Written Feedback in an EFL Context","authors":"Hooman Saeli, A. Cheng","doi":"10.1515/eujal-2019-0033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract As Ferris (2014) states, teachers have received insufficient research attention regarding their perceptions and practices of feedback. This study, therefore, was an attempt to qualitatively explore Iranian EFL teachers’ feedback-related perceptions and practices. In addition, the discrepancies between the reported perceptions and practices were examined. The data collection consisted of qualitative interviews with 14 teachers. The data analysis (i. e., data coding using the grounded theory approach) helped develop a coding scheme in which a number of thematic categories and subcategories were delineated with regard to feedback. The findings, accordingly, revealed some noteworthy discrepancies between the teachers’ perceptions and practices. For instance, although the teachers valued peer-feedback and selective correction, they reported providing teacher-generated feedback and comprehensive commentary on grammatical errors, respectively. Also, the teachers were aware of the importance of indirect methods of correction (e. g., to promote learner autonomy), but mostly gave explicit feedback on their students’ grammatical issues. Overall, we showed that these discrepancies primarily resulted from students’ expectations. We also discussed the findings in light of sociocultural considerations and the tenets of learner engagement with feedback.","PeriodicalId":43181,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/eujal-2019-0033","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2019-0033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract As Ferris (2014) states, teachers have received insufficient research attention regarding their perceptions and practices of feedback. This study, therefore, was an attempt to qualitatively explore Iranian EFL teachers’ feedback-related perceptions and practices. In addition, the discrepancies between the reported perceptions and practices were examined. The data collection consisted of qualitative interviews with 14 teachers. The data analysis (i. e., data coding using the grounded theory approach) helped develop a coding scheme in which a number of thematic categories and subcategories were delineated with regard to feedback. The findings, accordingly, revealed some noteworthy discrepancies between the teachers’ perceptions and practices. For instance, although the teachers valued peer-feedback and selective correction, they reported providing teacher-generated feedback and comprehensive commentary on grammatical errors, respectively. Also, the teachers were aware of the importance of indirect methods of correction (e. g., to promote learner autonomy), but mostly gave explicit feedback on their students’ grammatical issues. Overall, we showed that these discrepancies primarily resulted from students’ expectations. We also discussed the findings in light of sociocultural considerations and the tenets of learner engagement with feedback.
教师认知和报告实践的差异:英语语境下书面反馈的案例
Ferris(2014)指出,教师对反馈的认知和实践的研究关注不足。因此,本研究试图定性地探讨伊朗英语教师与反馈相关的认知和实践。此外,还审查了所报告的看法和做法之间的差异。数据收集包括对14名教师的定性访谈。数据分析(即使用扎根理论方法进行数据编码)有助于制定一种编码方案,其中划定了关于反馈的若干主题类别和子类别。因此,调查结果揭示了教师的认知和实践之间存在一些值得注意的差异。例如,尽管教师重视同伴反馈和选择性纠正,但他们报告说,他们分别提供了教师生成的反馈和对语法错误的全面评论。此外,教师也意识到间接纠正方法的重要性(例如,促进学习者的自主性),但大多对学生的语法问题给出明确的反馈。总的来说,我们发现这些差异主要是由学生的期望造成的。我们还根据社会文化因素和学习者参与反馈的原则讨论了研究结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信