Keywords
corrective feedback
language-related episodes
second language acquisition
disciplinary literacy
How to Cite
Number of views: 387
Number of downloads: 560
Abstract
To date, very limited research interest has been given to the strategies English-medium instruction (EMI) teachers or lecturers deploy to provide corrective feedback (CF) on the language use to their students during class interaction. In other words, when EMI teachers incidentally focus on students’ problematic language use, how do they correct it – providing explicit correction or using recast or elicitation? This article reports on a study that examined CF types EMI teachers and lecturers used during classroom discourse, drawing on data collected from classroom observations and recordings of six different EMI classes in high school and university settings in Korea. The frequency and types of CF used in reactive language-related episodes (LREs) were identified in the EMI classes and compared between the two settings and across disciplines (social science, mathematics, and computer science). Findings showed that all the EMI teachers and lecturers offered CF to their students but with different frequency; the schoolteachers offered CF more frequently than the university lecturers. Also, the schoolteachers used more various types of CF than the lecturers. In both settings, CF occurred most frequently in mathematics compared to the other two disciplines. This article ends with suggestions for ways the findings of this study can be used to raise EMI teachers’ awareness of various options for providing CF on students’ linguistic errors during their incidental teaching practices.
References
Aguilar, M. (2017). Engineering lecturers’ views on CLIL and EMI. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 20(6), 722-735. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2015.1073664
Airey, J. (2012). “I don’t teach language.” The linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden. AILA Review, 25, 64-79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.25.05air
An, J., Macaro, E., & Childs, A. (2019). Language focused episodes by monolingual teachers in English medium instruction science lessons. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 7(2), 166-191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.18019.an
An, J., Macaro, E., & Childs, A. (2021). Classroom interaction in EMI high schools: Do teachers who are native speakers of English make a difference? System, 98, 102482. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102482
Bao, R. (2019). Oral corrective feedback in L2 Chinese classes: Teachers’ beliefs versus their practices. System, 82, 140-150. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.04.004
Basturkmen, H., & Shackleford, N. (2015). How content lecturers help students with language: An observational study of language-related episodes in interaction in first year accounting classrooms. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 87-97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.08.001
Costa, F. (2012). Focus on form in ICLHE lectures in Italy: Evidence from English-medium science lectures by native speakers of Italian. AILA Review, 25(1), 30-47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.25.03cos
Coyle, D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543-562. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2167/beb459.0
Doiz, A., & Lasagabaster, D. (2021). Analysing EMI teachers’ and students’ talk about language and language use. In Lasagabaster, D. & Doiz, A. (Eds.), Language use in English-medium instruction at university: International perspectives on teacher practice (pp. 34-55). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003134534-3
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51(2), 281-318. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00156
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2002). Doing focus-on-form. System, 30(4), 419-432. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00047-7
Hong, J. (2021a). Attention to language in English-medium instruction in high school and university settings in South Korea (Doctoral dissertation, ResearchSpace@ Auckland).
Hong, J. (2021b). Incidental attention to language during disciplinary teaching: An observation study of LREs in a first-year EMI computer programming lecture. Asia-Pacific LSP & Professional Communication Association News, 3, 9-12.
Hong, J. (2022). A study of language-related episodes in online English-medium instruction classes in high schools in South Korea. English for Specific Purposes, 67, 65-75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2022.05.001
Hong, J., & Basturkmen, H. (2020). Incidental attention to academic language during content teaching in two EMI classes in South Korean high schools. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 48, 100921. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100921
Jacobson, D. M. (2015). Oral error feedback for English learners in the cotaught content classroom. TESOL Journal, 6(4), 659-679. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.180
Li, L. (2014). Corrective feedback in classrooms at different proficiency levels: A case study of Chinese as a foreign language. Journal of the National Council of Less Commonly Taught Languages, 16, 2-32.
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309-365. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x
Llinares, A., & Lyster, R. (2014). The influence of context on patterns of corrective feedback and learner uptake: A comparison of CLIL and immersion classrooms. The Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 181-194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.889509
Loewen, S. (2002). Attention to grammar in incidental focus on form (Doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand).
Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). Academic Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012589042-7/50015-3
Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.18
Lyster, R., & Mori, H. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 269-300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060128
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37-66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001034
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 265-302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990520
Macaro, E. (2018). English medium instruction. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30687/978-88-6969-227-7/001
Margić, B. D., & Vodopija-Krstanović, I. (2017). Uncovering English-medium instruction: Glocal issues in higher education. Peter Lang.
Martinez, R., Machado, P., & Palma, C. (2021). An exploratory analysis of language related episodes (LREs) in a Brazilian EMI context: Lecturers’ and students’ perspectives. In R. Martinez, P. Machado, & C. Palma (Eds.), Language use in English-medium instruction at university (pp. 11-33). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003134534-2
Milla, R., & Mayo, M. P. G. (2014). Corrective feedback episodes in oral interac-tion: A comparison of a CLIL and an EFL classroom. International Journal of English Studies, 14(1), 1-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/14/1/151841
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417-528. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00136
Panova, I., & Lyster, R. (2002). Patterns of corrective feedback and uptake in an adult ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 36(4), 573-595. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3588241
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003
Schuitemaker-King, J. (2013). Giving corrective feedback in CLIL and EFL classes. Levende Talen Tijdschrift, 14(2), 3-10.
Seedhouse, P. (2001). The case of the missing “no”: The relationship between pedagogy and interaction. Language Learning, 51, 347-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.2001.tb00021.x
Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8(3), 263-300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168804lr146oa
Sheen, Y., & Ellis, R. (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (Vol. 2, pp. 593-610). Routledge.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics (pp. 125-144). Oxford University Press.
Williams, J. (2001). The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System, 29(3), 325-340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00022-7
Yüksel, D., Soruç, A., & McKinley, J. (2021). Teachers’ beliefs and practices about oral corrective feedback in university EFL classes. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 31(3), 362-382. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12336
Zhao, S. Y., & Bitchener, J. (2007). Incidental focus on form in teacher-learner and learner-learner interactions. System, 35(4), 431-447. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.04.004
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.