Native-speaker teachers` and non-native speaker teachers` preferences for error correction strategies in EFL discourse classes.

Abstract

ABSTRACT Title: Native-speaker teachers' and non-native- speaker teachers' preferences for error correction strategies in EFL discourse classes Author: Melike Tatlioglu Thesis Chairperson: Dr. Arlene Clachar, Bilkent University, MA TEFL Program Thesis Committee Members: Dr. Phyllis L. Lim, Ms. Patricia J. Brenner, Bilkent University, MA TEFL Program This study was designed to determine whether there was a difference between native-speaker teachers' (NSTs) and non-native- speaker teachers' (NNSTs) (Turkish) preferences for correction strategies for grammar and pronunciation errors in English as a foreign language (EFL) discourse classes and to discover to what extent these two groups of subjects' preferences were affected by the proficiency level of learners. There were two parts in the study. In the first part, 10 MA TEFL 1993-1994 students and 10 NSTs of English were employed. These randomly selected participants were asked to rank 12 strategies along an explicit-to- implicit continuum to provide baseline data for later comparison. A total of 40 subjects (20 NSTs and 20 NNSTs of English) were employed in the second part of the study. Although NNSTs were randomly selected, NSTs were selected according to their availability at the time of data collection and their willingness to participate in the study. All subjects were asked to fill out a questionnaire to determine their preferences for 12 error correction strategies for both grammar and pronunciation errors. Subjects indicated their preferences three times: once without considering proficiency level, once for beginning level students, and once for advanced level students.Three types of analyses, t-tests, Spearman rank-order correlations, and MANOVA, were used in order to analyze the data gathered from the responses to the questionnaire. Results indicate that there were differences between NSTs' and NNSTs' overall preferences for 10 out of 12 correction strategies at p_<.05. However, when analyzed separately, the two groups' error correction strategy preferences for beginning level learners showed differences at p_<.05, whereas, no. differences were found between the two groups' correction- strategy preferences for advanced level learners. NNSTs preferred explicit correction strategies for beginning level, implicit, correction strategies for advanced level. NSTs, on the other hand, preferred implicit correction strategies for both proficiency levels. Bear's (1985) study suggests that the Turkish education system may still be affected by the traditional approach, which contains elements of behaviorism. This approach looks upon errors as `bad habits`, which may explain why NNSTs rely on more explicit strategies in EFL teaching than do NSTs.