International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 1949-4270   |  e-ISSN: 1949-4289

Original article | Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 2019, Vol. 14(1) 144-155

An Analysis of the In-Class Oral Feedback Provided by the Teachers of Turkish as a Foreign Language

Fatma Bolukbas Kaya & Mehmet Yalçın Yılmaz

pp. 144 - 155   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2019.186.8   |  Manu. Number: MANU-1902-16-0003.R1

Published online: March 22, 2019  |   Number of Views: 116  |  Number of Download: 642


Abstract

Feedback can be defined as the act of providing information to the student regarding their behavior throughout the learning process as well as how much progress has been achieved as a result of such behavior. In other words, it is the communicative process that explains how successful or unsuccessful a student is at a given topic, by providing them with the opportunity of self-assessment and correction. The aim of this study is to specify the in-class oral feedback elements provided by the teachers of Turkish as a Foreign Language, along with the analysis of these feedback types and offering suggestions to those who work in the field. Employing the specific case study method among the existing qualitative research methods, this study involves the 4-week observation of the classes given by the instructors of Turkish as a Foreign Language at Istanbul University Language Center at A1, A2, B1, B2 and C1 levels. The oral feedback provided by the instructors throughout the observation sessions has been noted down and compiled. These feedback items were then analyzed in accordance with Schimmel's feedback classification (1988). Accordingly, these feedback items were classified in four groups as confirmation feedback, correct response feedback, explanatory feedback and bug-related feedback. The results of the study has shown that the instructors preferred mostly the confirmation feedback and the correct response feedback, usually used the confirmation feedback and correct response feedback in combination. On the other hand, the frequency of explanatory feedback decreased as the students' language competence level increased, and the least preferred feedback type was found to be the bug-related feedback.

Keywords: Teaching Turkish as a Foreign Language, feedback types, oral feedback.


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Kaya, F.B. & Yilmaz, M.Y. (2019). An Analysis of the In-Class Oral Feedback Provided by the Teachers of Turkish as a Foreign Language . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 14(1), 144-155. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2019.186.8

Harvard
Kaya, F. and Yilmaz, M. (2019). An Analysis of the In-Class Oral Feedback Provided by the Teachers of Turkish as a Foreign Language . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 14(1), pp. 144-155.

Chicago 16th edition
Kaya, Fatma Bolukbas and Mehmet Yalcin Yilmaz (2019). "An Analysis of the In-Class Oral Feedback Provided by the Teachers of Turkish as a Foreign Language ". Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 14 (1):144-155. doi:10.29329/epasr.2019.186.8.

References
  1. Ata, Seda; Yakar, Ali; Karadağ, Orçin (2018). Yabancı Dil Öğretmenlerinin Öğretim Sürecinde Kullandıkları Dönüt Türleri: Erken Çocukluk Dönemi Yabancı Dil Eğitiminde Bir Mikro-Analiz, Turkish Studies Educational Sciences, 13/11, pp.247-268. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bloom, S. Benjamin, (1979). İnsan Nitelikleri ve Okulda Öğrenme, (Çeviren: Durmuş Ali Özçelik), Ankara: Milli Eğitim Basımevi. [Google Scholar]
  3. Brookhart, Susan M. (2008). How to Give to Your Students Effective Feedback, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) Alexandria, Virginia USA. [Google Scholar]
  4. Butler, Deborah; Winne, Philip (1995). Feedback and Self-regulated Learning: A Theoretical Synthesis, Review of Educational Research, 65(3), pp.245-281. [Google Scholar]
  5. Butler, Andrew C.; Godbole, Namrata; Marsh, Elizabeth (2013). Explanation Feedback is Better than Correct Answer Feedback for Promoting Transfer of Learning, Journal of Educational Psychology, 105 (2), pp. 290 –298. [Google Scholar]
  6. Coşgun, Ümit Ç.; Sarı, Mediha (2015). Düşük ve Yüksek Mesleki Öz-Yetkinlik Algısına Sahip Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Dönüt Verme Biçimlerinin İncelenmesi, Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, 5(5), 533-548.  [Google Scholar]
  7. Council of Europe (2001). A Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment–a general guide for users, Strasbourg, Council of Europe.  [Google Scholar]
  8. Cüceloğlu, Doğan (2013). Yeniden İnsan İnsana, İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi. [Google Scholar]
  9. Çimer, Sabiha O.; Bütüner Suphi Ö.; Yiğit, Nevzat (2010). Öğretmenlerin Öğrencilerine Verdikleri Dönütlerin Tiplerinin ve Niteliklerinin İncelenmesi, Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 23 (2), 517-538.  [Google Scholar]
  10. Hattie, John and Timperley, Helen (2007). The Power of Feedback, Review of Educational Research, 77:1, pp. 81-112. [Google Scholar]
  11. Hattie, J.A., and Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on Feedback. In Mayer, R & Alexander, P. (Eds). Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction (pp. 249–271). New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  12. Kangalgil, Murat; Demirhan, Gıyasettin (2009). Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Etkinliklerinde Dönüt Kullanımı, Spor Bilimleri Dergisi Hacettepe J. of Sport Sciences, 20 (1), 24–40.  [Google Scholar]
  13. Kleij, Fabienne; Eggen, Theo; Timmers, Caroline and Veldkamp, Bernard (2011). Effects of Feedback in a Computer-based Assessment for Learning. Computers & Education, 58, 263-272. [Google Scholar]
  14. Lee, Bo-young (2010). Effects of Task and Feedback Types on Korean Adult EFL Learners’ Oral Proficiency, English Teaching, 65(2), pp.101-130. [Google Scholar]
  15. Narciss, Susanne; Huth, Katja (2006). Fostering Achievement and Motivation With Bug-related Tutoring Feedback in a Computer-based Training for Written Subtraction, Learning and Instruction, 16, pp.310-322. [Google Scholar]
  16. Narciss, Susanne. (2012). Feedback in instructional contexts. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the Learning Sciences, Volume F(6), pp. 1285-1289. New York: Springer Science & Business Media, LLC. [Google Scholar]
  17. Narciss, Susanne (2013). Designing and Evaluating Tutoring Feedback Strategies for Digital Learning Environments on the Basis of the Interactive Tutoring Feedback Model. Digital Education Review, Number 23, June 2013.   [Google Scholar]
  18. Nicol, David J.; Macfarlane-Dick, Debra (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.  [Google Scholar]
  19. Peker, Reşat (1992). Geri Bildirimin Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dersindeki Başarısına Etkisi, Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, VII:I.  [Google Scholar]
  20. Ramaprasad, Arkalgud (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28, 4-13.  [Google Scholar]
  21. Sadler, D. Royce (1989) Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems, Instructional Science, 18, 119–144. [Google Scholar]
  22. Schimmel, B. J. (1988). Providing meaningful feedback in courseware. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware (pp. 183-195). Hillsdale, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  23. Slavin, Robert E. (2014). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice, (11th Edition), England Harlow: Pearson Education.  [Google Scholar]
  24. Teaching and Learning Quality Assurance Committee / TALQAC (2014). Providing Effective Feedback to Students, The University of Melbourne.  [Google Scholar]
  25. Tunstall, Pat and Gipps, Caroline (1996). Teacher Feedback to Young Children in Formative Assessment:  A Typology, British  Educational  Research  Journal,  22 (4): 389-404. [Google Scholar]
  26. Yoshida, Reiko (2008) Teachers’ Choice and Learners’ Preference of Corrective Feedback Types, Language Awareness, 17(1), pp. 78-93. [Google Scholar]