teachers’ oral corrective feedback on students’ …

122

Upload: others

Post on 15-Jun-2022

7 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

1

Page 2: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

2

Page 3: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

3

Page 4: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

4

ABSTRAK

Septi Maizola (NPM: 12040101), Umpan Balik Guru secara Lisan dalam

Memperbaiki Penampilan Berdialog Siswa pada Kelas Sepuluh di SMA PGRI 1

Padang. Skripsi, Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris STKIP PGRI

Sumatera Barat, Padang, 2016.

Umpan balik lisan merupakan umpan balik yang diberikan oleh guru secara

langsung dalam pembelajaran bahasa Inggris. Pemberian umpan balik secara lisan

kepada siswa bertujuan untuk memperbaiki kesalahan siswa dan memotivasi siswa

untuk memperbaiki kesalahannya sehingga mereka bisa menampilkan yang terbaik di

penampilan selanjutnya. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk melihat tipe umpan balik

secara lisan yang diberikan oleh guru bahasa Inggris. Partisipan penelitian ini adalah

guru kelas sepuluh di SMA PGRI 1 Padang. Guru bahasa Inggris kelas sepuluh di

sekolah ini ada satu orang. Dalam mengumpulkan data peneliti melakukan observasi.

Observasi dilakukan selama proses pembelajaran berlangsung dengan menggunakan

video, observation checklist, and field notes. Peneliti meneliti dua kelas yaitu kelas

X1 dan X2. Peneliti melakukan penelitian selama tiga kali pertemuan dalam satu

kelas. Setelah menganalisis data, dari enam tipe umpan balik yang bisa diberikan oleh

guru, terdapat satu tipe yang digunakan oleh guru kelas sepuluh SMA PGRI 1

Padang. Tipe tersebut adalah recast dan repetition. Recast adalah umpan balik yang

diberikan oleh guru dengan memperbaiki kesalahan siswa secara langsung dengan

memberikan contoh yang benar tanpa memberi tahu terlebih dahulu bahwa siswa

telah mengucapkan kesalahan dalam pengucapannya. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian

dapat disimpulkan bahwa guru bahasa Inggris kelas sepuluh SMA PGRI 1 Padang

menggunakan satu dari enam tipe umpan balik yang bisa diberikan guru secara lisan

dalam memperbaiki penampilan bercakap siswa.

Key words: umpan balik, penampilan berdialog, recast, repetition

i

Page 5: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

5

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Alhamdulillahhirobbil a‟lamiin, praise to Allah S.W.T the almighty

who has given the researcher straight to complete this thesis entitled

“Teachers‟ Oral Corrective Feedback on Students‟ Dialogue Performance at

Tenth Grade Of Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang”. This thesis is aimed as

facilitating of the requirement for the SI Degree of English Department,

STKIP PGRI Padang West Sumatera. Shalawat and salam is also given to the

prophet Muhammad S.A.W as the “huswatun hasanah” for the muslims.

A very special thanks and appreciation from the deepest of my heart to

the advisors, Belinda Analido, M.Pd and Yola Merina, S.S, M.Hum, who

have been kind and willing to give their times, energy, suggestions, and

supports in completing this thesis. Her gratitude is also presented to Elmiati,

M.Pd, Melati Theresia, S.S, M.Hum and Rani Autila, M.Pd as the examiners

who have given the correction and clarification for this thesis. Then, the

researcher‟s appreciation also goes to the head and secretary of English

Department, Armilia Riza, M.Pd and Mayuasti, M.Pd. Then, the researcher‟s

thanks and appreciations to Dra. Yelliza, M. M.Pd as academic advisor who

have gives her advice, time, suggestion and attention. And for all of the

lecturers, and also the students of English Department who have given

motivation for the researcher.

Moreover, the researcher expresses the deepest gratitude to beloved

parents who has given their love, prays, care, attention, etc, for her life. The

researcher wants to say thanks to her sisters and brother who have given their

support, pray, and straight in finishing this thesis. And then, for all friends and

close friends who always support her during finishing this thesis.

ii

Page 6: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

6

The researcher realizes that this thesis is far from greetest and

welcome any comments and suggestions to make this thesis be perfect. The

researcher hopes that this thesis will be useful for education.

Padang, July 2016

The researcher

iii

Page 7: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

7

TABLE OF CONTENT

ABSTRACT ............................................................................................. i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...................................................................... ii

TABLE OF CONTENT .......................................................................... iv

LIST OF APPENDICES ......................................................................... v

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Problem ...................................................... 1

B. Identification of the Problem ..................................................... 3

C. Limitation of the Problem ......................................................... 4

D. Formulation of the Problem ...................................................... 4

E. Research Question ..................................................................... 4

F. Purpose of the Research............................................................. 4

G. Significance of the Research ..................................................... 5

H. Definition of Key Terms ........................................................... 5

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

A. Definition of Performance......................................................... 6

B. Definition of Dialogue .............................................................. 7

C. Oral Corrective Feedback .......................................................... 9

1. Definition of Oral Corrective Feedback ................................ 9

2. Types of Teacher Oral Corrective Feedback ......................... 13

D. Review of Related Findings ...................................................... 20

E. The Conceptual Framework ...................................................... 22

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD

A. Research Design ....................................................................... 25

B. Participant of the Research ........................................................ 25

C. Instrumentation ......................................................................... 26

iv

Page 8: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

8

D. Technique of Data collection .................................................... 31

E. Technique of Data Analysis ...................................................... 31

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDING

A.Data Description ........................................................................ 34

B.Data Analysis ............................................................................. 33

1.Types of Oral Corrective Feedback (from observation

video) .................................................................................. 33

2.Types of Oral Corrective Feedback (from observation

checklist and field notes) ...................................................... 56

3.Types of Oral Corrective Feedback (from interview) .............. 56

C.Findings ..................................................................................... 57

D.Discussion .................................................................................. 63

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

A.Conclusion ................................................................................. 70

B.Suggestion .................................................................................. 71

REFERENCES

APPENDICES

v

Page 9: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Problem

Performance is student oral production to transfer the information to

the listener. In performances, students perform their speaking or produce a

language orally to transfer the information to the listener. The students

explore their ideas from their brain into the sounds of word that meaningful

and make a sentence. Performance can measure student competence in

interaction. Thus, teacher can know students knowledge when performance.

Many performances can be performed by the students in the

classroom. The performances like monologue, dialogue, storytelling, drama,

speech or debate. In their performances they are not always perfect. The

students have mistakes in their performances. There are students mistakes in

performances, like mistake in pronunciation, grammar, and lexical. It is

caused by some factors. The factors are students get nervous, they does not

understand the materials, and they have less knowledge. If they are wrong one

time it is called mistake, but if they do it any times it is called error.

The mistakes are done by the students when performances invite the

responds from the teachers. Teachers respond on students mistake is known as

teacher feedback. Teacher gives feedback to the students to correct the

mistake, such as mistake in grammar, pronunciation, or lexical. The purpose

1

Page 10: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

2

of teacher feedback is to improve students speaking ability and they can know

their mistakes, so they can revise their mistakes in the next performances.

Teacher can gives correction feedback on student performances in two

ways. It is supposed by Jimenez (2013), there are two correction feedback

types. They are written and oral feedback. Written feedback gives in three

ways. They are direct, indirect, and metalinguistic feedback. Direct feedback

gives an indication of the error and provides the correct form. Indirect

feedback gives an indication that an error has been made like underlining the

error, indicating the number of errors in the margin, or inserting error codes in

the text. Metalinguistic feedback provides explanation for the errors that have

been made. Meanwhile, oral corrective feedback is the teacher responds

directly. Teachers directly gives feedback when students performances. Many

ways oral corrective feedback can be given by the teachers to the students. For

example, teachers repeat students mistake, gives the correct answer, asks them

it right or wrong, gives gesture tell it wrong, ask what should add or what

should uses.

Based on the researcher pre-observation at Senior High School PGRI 1

Padang, the researcher saw several phenomena related to the teacher oral

feedback. First, oral feedback given by the teacher‟s in Senior High School

PGRI 1 Padang. Second, teachers gave feedback to the students in different

types of oral feedback. The researcher saw two teachers in pre-observation.

The first teacher seldom used oral feedback to correcting student mistakes in

Page 11: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

3

performance. When performance teacher only asked the students to perform in

front of the class then gives applause and praises about their performance.

Students do not know their mistake and back to their chairs, they busy with

their activity and make noisy. But, the second teacher directly gave them

feedback by correcting when students have mistakes in their performance.

Sometimes the teachers asked students to repeat again before giving the

feedback, appropriate the students‟ mistake. When teacher gave correction or

feedback, students gave attention to the feedback and repair their mistake in

performance.

B. Identification of the Problem

Problems that found in the teachers corrective feedback are the ways

teacher gave the feedback. How teacher gives feedback on students

performance. Teachers can give feedback to students in two ways. They are

written and oral feedback. Teachers can give feedback directly when students

performance or write the feedback.

Next, not all the teachers can use the best feedback. So, students who

do not get the feedback from the teachers although they do the mistakes in

performances will be busy with their activity and they do not revise their

mistake. They will think that they do not doing the mistakes. Different with

students who get feedback from the teacher will know and understand their

mistake so they can encourage their speaking.

Page 12: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

4

C. Limitation of the Problem

Related to the identification of the problems above, the researcher

limits the problem by focusing on teacher oral corrective feedback used by the

teachers on student dialogue performances. It will be done by looking at

students‟ performance which has been given feedback by the teacher.

D. Formulation of the Problem

Based on limitation of the problem above the researcher will formulate

the problem into “how are oral corrective feedback used by the teachers on

student dialogue performance?”.

E. Research Question

Based on the formulation of the problem above, the problem of the

research will be formulated in the following research question: “what are

types of teachers‟ oral corrective feedback on students‟ dialogue performances

at Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang?.

F. Purpose of the Research

Based on the research questions above, the purposes of this research is

to describe and to analyze the types of teachers‟ oral corrective feedback used

on student dialogue performance at Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang.

Page 13: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

5

G. Significance of the Research

By doing this research, the researcher expects that this research will

give contribution to the researcher herself, the teacher and the library.

Through this research, the researcher and the teacher hope that they will have

much knowledge about students‟ error in dialogue performance. They also

will be able to know types of teacher feedback on students‟ speaking

performance. If the teacher is known the types of feedback in speaking

performance so, the teacher can know the better feedback that should be given

in teaching activity especially in dialogue performances.

Besides to the researcher herself and the teacher, this research can give

many advantages to the library. In the library, this research can be a source of

teaching material especially about teachers‟ feedback on students‟ dialogue

performance. The reader can read this research in the library to improve their

speaking skill and to seek teaching material.

H. Definition of Key Terms

1. Dialogue is communication between two or more students in classroom

when performance.

2. Performance is the students‟ condition in speaking when they were

responded the teacher commands to speak and when they were speaking.

3. Feedback is teacher‟s responds or correction toward students‟ mistake.

Page 14: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

6

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter is devoted to review the related literature of the present

study. These reviews are expected to serve important background information

to support the study and the discussion of the findings.

A. Definition of Performance

Performance can measure someone competence in speaking. To know

someone capacity in produce language or how they do interaction can do by

performance. They can show their competence to make an interaction with

someone and the listener can assess their competence of performance. Student

competence will explore directly when students explain the sentence when

their produce a language. According to Steinberg, Nagata, and Alice

(2001:327), performance means explain sentence production. Which is how

speaker take ideas and render them into speech sounds, and explain sentences

comprehension, which is how speaker on receiving speech sounds, recover

ideas from those sounds. It means that, performance is someone production or

how someone show their spoken. They explain their sentence in produce a

language. Speaking performance is student oral production to transfer the

information or argument to the listener. Speaking performances is student

perform their speaking or produce a language orally to transfer the

information to the listener.

6

Page 15: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

7

In performance, the students should confident to speak fluently.

Confidence give big contributes to success in speaking. Confident in

communication play an important role in determining the students willingness

to communication. MacIntyre et al in Park and Lee (2004:199), self confident

significantly contributes to the learners‟ willingness to communicate in a

foreign language. In other word, students must confident to communicate with

other in English to make their confident be better than before and they can

success in their performance. It cause confident is the important role in fluent

and success in communication when performance.

In summary, researcher concludes that dialogue performances is the

ways speaker explores their opinion or argument in their brain into a sentence

that has a meaning. Many aspects of speaking performance should be

considered by the student to make their performance be meaningful.

Performance can show student competence in speaking and understand what

talking about. It is the way of students deliver their argument orally and

instantly, it seems like speaking in daily activity.

B. Definition of Dialogue

There are student mistakes in performances. In performances students

not always perfect. They have mistakes in their performances, like mistakes in

pronunciation, grammar, and lexical. It is caused by some factors. The factors

are students get nervous, they do not understand the materials, and they have

less knowledge. If they are wrong one time it is called mistake, but if they do

Page 16: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

8

it any times it is called error. Many performances can be performs by the

students in the classroom. The performances like monologue, dialogue,

storytelling, drama, speech or debate.

Dialogue is a kind of performances in teaching learning process.

Dialogue involves two or more people using language for interactional and

transactional purpose. It means that there are two process of communication

and in communication there are two or more people. These are as a speaker

and as a listener. The speaker transfer the information to the listener and the

listener give response about the speaker information. If the listener gives the

response it means that the listener understands about the information. It is

happen if the speaker be able to make a good communication in dialogue.

Walton in Winter (2011:94), a dialogue is a conversation between two

parties who take turns at exchanging verbal messages. It means that, the

person communicate with others to share the messages or information. In

other word, dialogue is a process of communication between two persons. The

speaker has the turn to share the information then the listener has the turn to

response the information gets from the listener. The information not only from

the speaker but the listener also can give information to the speaker and gives

the response about it.

Page 17: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

9

According to Piwek (2015), dialogue is a literary work in the form of a

conversation between two or more persons, in which opposing or contrasting

views are imputed to the participant. It means that dialogue is a conversation

between two or more persons. It can be three, four, five, and etc. The persons

in the conversation can share the information to the others and also can get the

information from others. The listener can be more understand if the

information gives verbally or directly such as in the dialogue than send the

information in written. So, the information that sharing can be more effective.

Referring to all of expert explanation above, dialogue is the

communication between two or more persons in transferring the information

from the speaker to the listener with the purpose is to get intention to be

recognized by speaker and the listener can process the statements in order to

recognize speaker intention. It will be meaningful if the speaker can perform

clearly and fluently and the listener can get the point of the speaker talking

about. It shows that, dialogue can show student speaking and performing then

invite many responses from teacher and listener to improve their mistake in

performance.

C. The Oral Corrective Feedback

1. Definition of Oral Corrective Feedback

Feedback is teacher respond or correction toward student mistake or

error. The correction of the mistake is called corrective feedback. The teacher

Page 18: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

10

corrective feedback is one of the important ways to revise in speaking process,

because it can be appreciation from teachers that students expect for their

effort. In other word feedback is teacher judgment about student error,

mistake or performance. According to Askew (2000:6), feedback in other

word as “a judgment about the performance of another with the intentions to

close a gap in knowledge and skills”. It means that teacher gives judge or

correction when student performs and doing correction if student have

mistakes. The purpose is having intention to be recognized by the teacher and

the student can process the statements in order to recognize their intentions

when performs.

Sprouls (2011:33), feedback can be positive and negative. Positive

feedback relays the information to indicate that a behavior should continue if

a behavior or task is demonstrated correctly. Positive feedback is defined as

verbal, nonverbal, or tangible feedback, which could include praise, behavior

points, or award. It means that, positive feedback is a feedback gives by the

teacher when the students success in their task or performance. Teacher can

give the positive feedback by praise student performances or gives award

because they can success in their performances. Negative feedback indicates

that a behavior or task was not performed correctly, thus indicated that a

change of behavior is needed to demonstrate successive behaviors toward a

goal. It means that, negative feedback is teacher correction if the students

Page 19: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

11

make the mistakes in their performance. The teacher corrects the student

mistakes and change to the correct form.

Corrective feedbacks are teacher response to the learner utterance that

contains an error. According to Ellis (2006:28), corrective feedback (CF) has

been defined simply as „response to the learner utterances containing an

error‟. It means that corrective feedback is teacher response to a learner error

such as comment of the error. So, corrective feedback refers to teacher and

peer responses to learner production. Teacher gives correction to the students

to improve student knowledge about their mistake in performances. When

students perform and do the mistakes, teacher comment student mistake

directly.

Then, Russel and Spada (2006:134), corrective feedback refers to any

feedback provide to a learner, from any sources, that contains evidence of

learner error of language form. It means that corrective feedbacks are

teachers‟ responses to the learner utterance that contain an error. In other

word, corrective feedback as any indication to the student‟s that their use of

the target language is incorrect. The teacher gives information to the students

when students have made an error or mistakes in their performances. So,

students know what their mistakes during the teacher corrects their mistakes

directly.

There are many ways in giving feedback to student error or mistake.

Teachers should also look at the ways of giving feedback without losing the

Page 20: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

12

students. The teacher corrective feedback is one of the important ways to

revise in speaking process, because it can be appreciation from teachers that

students expect for their effort. Corrective feedback can be given in written

and oral form to the students.

Oral feedback is particular type of correction feedback that is

employed by the teachers. Oral feedback is teacher correction directly when

students make mistakes and teacher gives information to the student to revise

their mistake and make their speaking better than before. It also makes

students known where their mistake when speaking performance. Many

feedbacks can be given by the teacher to improve student performances

especially in performances. In the case, many experts use oral feedback to

improve student speaking in performances.

According to Brookhart (2008:4), oral feedback is interactive feedback

which the teacher can talk with the students. It means that oral feedback is a

conversation between teacher and students about students speaking

performance. When perform, teacher gives the feedback about students

mistakes. Students can get clear information about their mistake in speaking

performance. With the feedback students can improve their ability in speaking

when performances.

In summary, oral corrective feedback is teacher correction or response

to the learner utterances containing an error directly when student have

mistake or error and teacher gives information to the student to revise their

Page 21: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

13

mistakes or error. Students can improve their knowledge based on teacher

correction on their mistakes. The knowledge they get from the teacher can

improve their ability in speaking especially in performances.

2. Types of Teacher Oral Corrective Feedback

Oral feedback given by the teacher consists of several types of oral

feedback. According to Lightbown & Spada in Rydahl (2005:5), four major

types of corrective feedback: clarification requests, recasts, elicitation, and

metalinguistic feedback. Clarification requests is where the teacher indicates

to the learner that an utterance has been misunderstood or that there is an error

in it and that a repetition or a reformulation is needed. Clarification request

includes phrases such as pardon me. It may also include a repetition of the

error as what do you mean by …..?. Then, recasts is where the teacher repeats

a student‟s utterance, using correct forms where student has made an error,

but does not draw attention to the error and maintains a central focus on

meaning. Next, elicitation is where the teacher uses questions to elicit

completion of students‟ utterances, asks questions to elicit correct forms, or

asks students to reformulate their utterances. The last is metalinguistic

feedback. Metalinguistic feedback is where the teacher points to the nature of

the error by commenting on, or providing information about, the well-

formedness of a student‟s utterance.

Then, Lyster and Ranta in Yoshida (2009:23), six types of oral

feedback: explicit correction, recast, clarification requests, metalinguistic

Page 22: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

14

feedback, elicitation, and repetition. Explicit correction means the teacher

explicit provision of the correct form. Recast includes the teachers‟

reformulation of all or part of a students‟ utterance, minus the error.

Clarification request means the teacher uses of phrase such as pardon me to

ask for clarification of the learner utterance. Metalinguistic feedback involves

„either comment, information, or question related to the well-formedness of

the students‟ utterance, without explicitly providing the correct form‟.

Elicitation means the teachers‟ techniques to elicit a students‟ utterance, for

example, by „strategically pausing to allow students‟ to fill in the blanks or by

repeating the students‟ error. And repetition means the teachers‟ repetition, in

isolation, of the students ‟erroneous utterance.

For example students‟ make an erroneous utterance such he has dog.

Teachers‟ can responds students‟ utterances by (1) recast, with reformulating

it: a dog. (2) Explicit correction with alerting the learner to the error and

providing the correct form: no, you should say “a dog”. (3) Clarification

request by asking for clarification: sorry?.(4) Metalinguitic feedback with

making a metalinguistic comment: you need an indefinite article. (5)

Elicitation, eliciting the correct form he has…?. And (6) repetition with

repeating the wrong sentence: he has dog?.

Meanwhile, Ellis (2009:9) there is six types of teacher feedback. First

is recast. Recast is the corrector incorporates the content words of the

Page 23: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

15

immediately preceding incorrect utterance and changes and corrects the

utterance in some way.

For example:

Student: I went there two times.

Teacher: you‟ve been. You‟ve been there twice as a group?

Second is repetition. The corrector repeats the learner utterance highlighting

the error by means of emphatic stress.

Student: I will showed you.

Teacher: I will SHOWED you.

Student: I will show you.

Third is clarification request. The corrector indicates that he/she has not

understood what the learner said.

Student: what do you spend with your wife?

Teacher: what?

Fourth is explicit correction. The corrector indicates an error has been

committed, identifies the error and provides the correction.

Student: on May.

Teacher: not on May, in May. We say, „it will start in May‟

The next is elicitation. The corrector repeats part of the learner utterance but

not the erroneous part and uses rising intonation to signal the learner should

complete it.

Student: I‟ll come if it will not rain.

Page 24: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

16

Teacher: I will come if it …..?

And the last is paralinguistic signal. The corrector uses a gesture or facial

expression to indicate that the learner has made an error.

For example:

Student: yesterday I go cinema.

Teacher: “(gestures with right forefinger over left shoulder to indicate

past)”.

Sheen and Ellis (2011:594), two broad corrective feedback categories:

reformulations and prompts. Reformulation includes conversational recasts,

didactic recasts, explicit correction, and explicit correction with metalinguistic

explanation. Prompts include clarification request, repetition, paralinguistic

signal, elicitation, and metalinguistic clue. Prompts include a variety of signal

other than reformulations that push learners to self-repair.

In addition, Wannemacker et al (2011:13), six types of oral corrective

feedback. They are: first, explicit feedback, recast, clarification request,

metalinguistic feedback, elicitation, and repetition. Whereas explicit feedback

is the teacher provides the correct form and clearly indicates that what the

students said was incorrect. Recast is the teacher formulates all of part of

students‟ utterances, minus the error. Clarification request is the teachers‟

formulate the question indicating that utterance has been unclear and that

repetition and reformulation is required. Metalinguistic feedback is the teacher

response contains either comments, information, or question related to well-

Page 25: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

17

formedness of the students utterances, without explicitly providing the correct

form. Elicitation is the teachers try to elicit the correct form by asking for

completion of a sentence, or asking question, or asking for a reformulation.

Then, repetition is the teacher repeats the erroneous utterances isolation.

In summary, recast is the teacher feedback without directly indicating

that the student‟s utterance was incorrect. The teacher implicitly reformulates

the student‟s error, or provides the correction. Then, repetition is the teacher‟s

repeats the student‟s error and adjust intonation to draw student attention to it.

Elicitation is the teacher directly elicits the correct form from the student by

asking questions, by pausing to allow the student to complete the teacher‟s

utterance or by asking students to reformulate the utterance. Explicit

correction is the teacher clearly indicating that the student‟s utterance was

incorrect, the teacher provides the correct form. Metalinguistic clues is teacher

gives feedback without providing the correct form, the teacher poses questions

or provides comments or information related to the formation of the student‟s

utterance. Clarification request is teacher gives feedback by using phrases and

the teacher indicates that the message has not been understood or that the

student‟s utterance contained some kind of mistake and that a repetition or a

reformulation is required. The last, paralinguistic signal is the teacher uses a

gesture or facial expression to indicate that the learner has made an error.

In short, the researcher concludes there are six types of corrective

feedback uses by the teacher in respond student performance. The researcher

Page 26: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

18

chooses types of teacher corrective feedback by Ellis (2009). So, the teacher

oral corrective feedbacks are recast, repetition, clarification request, explicit

correction, elicitation, and paralinguistic signal. It can be seen clearly in the

following table:

No Types of oral

feedback

Indicator Sub indicator Example

1 Recast The corrector

incorporates the

content words of

the immediately

preceding

incorrect

utterance and

changes and

corrects the

utterance in

some way

Teacher not use

phrases such as

„you mean . . .‟

or „you should

say...‟ Teacher

focus on one

word and

grammatical

modification.

Student: “I

went there two

times”.

Teacher:

“you‟ve been.

You‟ve been

there twice as a

group?”

2 Repetition The corrector

repeats the

learner utterance

highlighting the

error by means

of emphatic

stress

Teacher adjusts

their intonation

so as to

highlight the

error.

Student: “I will

showed you”.

Teacher: “I

will SHOWED

you”. Student:

“I will show

you”

3 Clarification

request

The corrector

indicates that

he/she has not

understood what

the learner said.

Teacher use

word „excuse

me‟, „what‟,

„sorry‟, „pardon

me‟, or „I don‟t

understand‟.

Student: “what

do you spend

with your

wife?”

Teacher:

“what?”

Page 27: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

19

4 Explicit

correction

The corrector

indicates an error

has been

committed,

identifies the

error and

provides the

correction.

Teacher use

„you should say

...‟or „we say...‟

Student: “on

May”.

Teacher: “not

on May, in

May. We say,

„it will start in

May‟.”

5 Elicitation The corrector

repeats part of

the learner

utterance but not

the erroneous

part and uses

rising intonation

to signal the

learner should

complete it.

„no, not that‟,

„it‟s a...‟ or just

repeat the

error‟.

Student: “I‟ll

come if it will

not rain”.

Teacher: “I

will come if it

…..?”

6 Paralinguistic

signal

The corrector

uses a gesture or

facial expression

to indicate that

the learner has

made an error.

Teacher use

facial

expression,

body

positioning and

movements,

and hand

gesture

Student:

“yesterday I go

cinema”.

Teacher:

“(gestures with

right forefinger

over left

shoulder to

indicate past)”.

Source. Ellis (2009:9)

In conclusion, there are six types of corrective feedback adapted by

Elis. Every type has different way in corrective students‟ error in

performances. They are recast, repetition, clarification request, explicit

correction, elicitation, and paralinguistic signal. The researcher chooses Ellis

oral corrective types because the types from Ellis (2009) more complete than

another experts. Ellis has one type that different with the types from other

Page 28: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

20

experts. The type is paralinguistic signal. In paralinguistic signal, the teacher

uses gestures in correcting students‟ error in performances.

D. Review of Related Findings

The teaching speaking will not be complete without including ways of

helping the students develop their performance. This case discuss about

teacher feedback on student performance. The last stage of the teaching-

speaking cycle is where the teacher gives corrective feedback can be given in

written and oral form to the students.

Actually, there are three findings related to this research. First, the

research conducted by Milla and Mayo (2013) who conducted the research

about “corrective feedback episodes in oral interaction: A comparison of

a CLIL and an EFL classroom”. This research used the theory by Lyster

and Mori 2006 and Sheen 2004. The methods of this research are procedure,

setting and participants, data collection, and data analysis. This research was

investigating what type of corrective feedback teacher provide to learners‟

error in oral interaction. And also want to know how learner reacts to the

different types of feedback in the two contexts examined and is the

instructional context an intervening factor in the effectiveness of corrective

feedback. Based on this research, different types of oral correction feedback

can give different reacts on students. The result also shows that learner error

can provide the different corrective feedback from the teacher.

Page 29: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

21

Furthermore, the second finding related to this research proposed by

Faqeih et al (2014). The title is “Oral Corrective Feedback and Learning of

English Modals”. This research used the theory by Li, Spada & Lightbown,

and Ellis et al. The methods of this research are target structure, design of

study and group size, interventional materials and testing instrument, exit and

attitudinal questionnaires. The result of the research inform that types of

corrective feedback in language classes where meaningful interactive

activities and also provided concrete support for the significant roles of recast

and metalinguistic information corrective feedback techniques in second

language development.

The last related research found from Rahimi and Sobhani (2015)

entitile: “Teachers’ different types of feedback on Iranian EFL Learners’

speaking errors and their impact on the students’ uptake of the correct

forms”. This research used the theory by Lyster and Ranta (1997), Mackey,

Gass, and MacDonough (2000), Lochman (2000), Sheen (2004), Sheen

(2006), Kennedy (2010), Lyster and Saito (2010), and Li (2010). The methods

of this research are participants and setting, instruments, coding definitions,

design, data collection, and data analysis. This research find out different

types of feedback used by English teacher to responds student speaking errors.

The result of this research is to investigate the types and distribution of

corrective feedback moves and their impact on the learners‟ uptake. The types

of corrective feedback in this research are recast, elicitation, explicit

Page 30: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

22

correction, clarification request, repetition, and metalinguistic feedback. The

result of this research showed that recast in spite of being the most frequently

used feedback type, followed by explicit correction. The most effective

feedback methods were elicitation and clarification.

Concerning on some related research finding above, this research

focuses on the oral corrective feedback used by the teacher in speaking

performances at Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang. The researcher wants to

identify types of teacher oral corrective feedback used by teacher and how

teachers use the oral corrective feedback on student speaking performances.

Similar with the related research finding above, this research concerns

with types of teacher oral corrective feedback and how teacher gives the

feedback, but different with the research finding above that focus on the

impact on students uptake of the correct form, in oral interaction, and the

relationship with learning of English modals, this research focuses on types of

teacher oral corrective feedback on students speaking performance.

F. The Conceptual Framework

Based on explanation above, the conceptual framework as follows:

Page 31: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

23

Figure 1 Conceptual Framework

Reffering to the conceptual framework above, it can be explained that the

researcher wants to know about how the oral corrective feedback used by the teacher

on students dialogue performance.. The researcher wants to analyze types of oral

corrective feedback given by the teacher. Through this conceptual framework, this

research is going to analyze the types of English teacher oral corrective feedback and

Teacher Feedback

Teacher Oral Corrective Feedback

Types of Teacher Oral Corrective Feedback

1. Recast

2. Repetition

3. Clarification Request

4. Explicit Correction

5. Elicitation

6. Paralinguistic signal

7.

Analysis

Page 32: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

24

how oral corrective feedback given by English teacher at Senior High School PGRI 1

Padang.

Page 33: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

25

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHOD

In this chapter the researcher is going to talk about research design,

participant of the research, instrumentation, technique of data collection and

technique of data analysis.

A. Research Design

The design of this research was descriptive research. According to Gay

and Airasian (2000:275), descriptive research determined and described the

way things are. It means that in descriptive study we determined and

described our research. The researcher described the types of teacher oral

corrective feedback used by the teacher to improve student dialogue

performance.

B. Participant of the Research

To get the data, the researcher needs participant of the research. The

researcher should know the appropriate participants. According to Gay and

Airasian (2000:281), selected participant must be able to provide the desire

information and willing to provide it to the researcher. Considered with the

criteria of participant above, the researcher chooses 2 teachers who are teach

in English class at Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang as the participant in

this research. Although many English teachers teach in Senior High School

PGRI 1 Padang, but only 2 English teachers who teach in tenth and eleventh

25

Page 34: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

26

grade of Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang. The researcher observed both

teacher three times in one week to get the clear data. The researcher observed

the teachers three times because in this school the students learn English five

hours in a week. In the first meeting in a week, they learn English two hours.

The second meeting in a week, they also learn English two hours. Then, in the

last meeting in a week they learn one hour. The researcher chooses 2 English

teachers because the researcher wanted to observed teachers‟ oral corrective

feedback on students‟ dialogue performance at tenth grade level of Senior

High School.

C. Instrumentation

In descriptive research, there were some instruments that could be

used by the researcher in order to collect the data. Gay and Airasian

(2000:210), descriptive data are usually collected through observation,

interviews, personal and official documents, photographs, recordings,

drawings, e-mails, and informal conversations. The researcher used

observation and interview as the instrument of this research.

Table. 1 The Instrument of the Research

Objective

Instrument

Observation Interview

1. To describe how teacher

feedback on student

performance at Senior High

√ √

Page 35: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

27

School PGRI 1 Padang

2. To find out what types of

teacher feedback on students

performance at Senior High

School PGRI 1 Padang

√ √

Source. Gay and Airasian (2000:210)

1. Observation

Patton in Cohen et al (2000:305), observational data should enable the

researcher to enter and understand the situation that is being described. In

other word, researcher should understand the situation to describe something

that observed. The researcher should collect the data in actual situation. In

other word, observation was kind of instruments to collect the data in the

field. The researcher collected the data based on the actual situation. The

researcher used observation to know what the types of teacher feedback used

by the English teacher.

The researcher used observation checklist as a tools in observation

process. The researcher also used field note. A note is a tool to make some

information during observation. According to Ary (2010:435) field not is the

most common method of recording the data collected during the observation.

The researcher made a brief notes during observation. In this research, the

researcher used a note to make a note about how oral corrective feedback used

by the teacher on students dialogue performance. The researcher also used

video record to save the data during the process of observation if the

researcher loses the data when the researcher was checklist the document

Page 36: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

28

checklist.

In this research, for the observation checklist the researcher used

indicator based on indicator that proposed by Ellis (2009:9) to identify the

types of oral corrective feedback used by the English teacher.

Table 2. Indicators Types of Oral Feedback

No Types of oral

feedback

Indicator Sub indicator Example

1 Recast The corrector

incorporates the

content words of

the immediately

preceding

incorrect

utterance and

changes and

corrects the

utterance in

some way

Teacher not use

phrases such as

„you mean...‟ or

„you should

say...‟ Teacher

focus on one

word and

grammatical

modification.

Student: “I

went there

two times”.

Teacher:

“you‟ve

been. You‟ve

been there

twice as a

group?”

2 Repetition The corrector

repeats the

learner utterance

highlighting the

error by means

of emphatic

stress.

Teacher adjusts

their intonation

so as to highlight

the error.

Student: “I

will showed

you”.

Teacher: “I

will

SHOWED

you”.

Student: “I

will show

you”

3 Clarification

request

The corrector

indicates that

he/she has not

understood what

the learner said.

Teacher use

word „excuse

me‟, „what‟,

„sorry‟, „pardon

me‟, or „I don‟t

understand‟.

Student:

“what do you

spend with

your wife?”

Teacher:

“what?”

4 Explicit

correction

The corrector

indicates an error

has been

Teacher use „you

should say ...‟or

„we say...‟

Student: “on

May”.

Teacher: “not

Page 37: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

29

committed,

identifies the

error and

provides the

correction.

on May, in

May. We

say, „it will

start in

May‟.”

5 Elicitation The corrector

repeats part of

the learner

utterance but not

the erroneous

part and uses

rising intonation

to signal the

learner should

complete it.

„no, not that‟,

„it‟s a...‟ or just

repeat the error‟.

Student: “I‟ll

come if it

will not

rain”.

Teacher: “I

will come if

it …..?”

6 Paralinguistic

signal

The corrector

uses a gesture or

facial expression

to indicate that

the learner has

made an error.

Teacher use

facial

expression,

body

positioning and

movements, and

hand gesture

Student:

“yesterday I

go cinema”.

Teacher:

“(gestures

with right

forefinger

over left

shoulder to

indicate

past)”.

Source. Ellis (2009:9)

2. Interview

The researcher used interview as the instrument in this research in

order to get the clear data about the teacher oral corrective feedback used

by the teacher in Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang on student dialogue

performances. According to Channel in Cohen et al (2000:269), interview

is two person‟s conversation initiated by the interviewer for the specific

purpose of obtaining research-relevant information and focus on content

Page 38: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

30

specified by research objective of systematic description, prediction, or

explanation and to find hidden information which the data. It means that,

the researcher did interview with the teacher to get the data and to make

clear the data got from observation. The researcher gave question to the

teacher about the research to get the information. According to Gay and

Airasian (2000:219), there were three kinds of interview. They are

nonstructural interview, structural interview, and combination interview.

Nonstructural interview is the process of interview where is the

interviewer inexpressibly doing question-answer, direct question, appear

based on the participant‟s answer first question. It means that, the

researcher can give the question based on the participant‟s answer.

Structural interview is interview that is using guide question. The

interviewer asked the question that had been prepare before. And

combination interview is collaboration both non structural and structural

interview.

In this research, the researcher used non structural interview to get the

accurate data and to support the data from observation about types of

teacher oral corrective feedback used by the English teachers‟ on students

dialogue performances at Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang. The

researcher asked the first question and after the teacher answer, the

researcher asked the next question based on the teacher answer.

Page 39: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

31

D. Technique of Data Collection

In gathering the data in the field, the researcher did some steps. The

research prepared a tool that can be used for observation, such as observation

checklist, field note and video record. The first is the researcher did

observation to the teachers who teaching in English class by using field note

and observation checklist to find the types of teacher oral feedback. Second,

the researcher used video record to save the data if the researcher checklist the

document or note teacher feedback then the researcher lost the data. So, the

researcher can review for watching the video to get the data. The last, the

researcher interview the teacher to make sure the types oral corrective

feedback used by the teachers in correcting students dialogue performances.

E. Technique of Data Analysis

After collected the data, the researcher analyzed the data. The data

analysis based on the techniques of analyzing qualitative data research by

Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2012:467) there are four steps in analyzing the data

of the research: reading/memoing, describing, classifying, and interpreting.

1. Reading/memoing.

Reading/memoing is the process becoming familiar with the data and

identifying potential themes. Reading/memoing is the first step the researcher

analyzed the data. The researcher found a quiet place and plan to spend a few

hours at a time reading through the data. The researcher read and wrote

Page 40: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

32

memos about all field notes, observation checklist, and the researcher watched

the video recording to get an initial sense of the data.

2. Describing the data.

The next step is the researcher examining the data in depth to provide

detailed descriptions of the setting, participants, and activity. So, the

researcher had an understanding of the context in which the research was

taking place because the context influences participants‟ actions and

understanding. In this time, the researcher described the teachers‟ oral

corrective feedback on students‟ dialogue performances at tenth grade level

after the researcher reading the results of observation.

3. Classifying the data.

Classifying is categorizing and coding pieces of data and grouping

them into themes. A category is a classification of ideas or concepts;

categorization, then, is grouping the data into themes. When concepts in the

data are examined and compared to one another and connections are made,

categories are formed. The researcher classifies the data by seen the result of

field note, observation checklist, and video recording and the researcher

categorized them based on teachers‟ oral corrective feedback on students‟

performance that has been explained by experts.

4. Interpreting the data.

The researcher interpreted and synthesized the data to organize the

data into general understanding. Next, the researcher got the data. The

Page 41: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

33

researcher interpreted the data based on the teachers‟ oral corrective feedback

on students‟ dialogue performances.

Page 42: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

34

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDING

In this part the researcher discuss about data description, data analysis,

findings, and discussion.

A. Data Description

In this part, the researcher described the data description connected to

the English teacher types in give feedback on student dialogue performances

at Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang. This school located at Koto Tinggi

Street, Padang. The participants of the research were the English teachers at

that school. The researcher took the English teachers who taught at the tenth

and eleventh grade of Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang. The researcher

chooses 2 teachers who are teach in English class at Senior High School PGRI

1 Padang as the participant in this research. Although many English teachers

teach in Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang, but only 2 English teachers who

teach in tenth and eleventh grade of Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang. The

data was oral corrective feedback used by English teachers Senior High

School PGRI 1 Padang.

Connected to the explanations on chapter II, there were six types of

oral corrective feedback given by the teacher on students dialogue

performances. They were: recast, repetition, clarification request, explicit

correction, elicitation, and paralinguistic signal. In collecting the data, the

researcher used observation as the instrument. In observation, the researcher

34

Page 43: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

35

used three tools in collecting the data. They were: observation checklist, field

notes, and video recording.

The observation process was done until the researcher got the data that

needed. The researcher did the observation three times for each class. During

the observation, the researcher used observation checklist and took some notes

to make sure that all data could be gotten optimally. From the observation

checklist and field notes the researcher found teacher A used recast and

teacher B used recast and repetition in correcting student utterance when the

student dialogue performance.

The researcher also used video recording to save the data during the

process of observation if the researcher loses the data when the researcher was

doing checklist the document checklist. From the video recording, the

researcher also found the teachers‟ used recast and repetition in correcting

student utterance. Teacher A used recast and teacher B used two types of

teacher oral corrective feedback, there is recast and repetition used by teacher

B when student dialogue performance and have the incorrect utterance.

The researcher also interviewed both teacher to valid the data from

observation. From the interview with teacher A the researcher found teacher

A mostly used recast when correcting student utterance, meanwhile teacher B

used recast and repetition when correcting student utterance in dialogue

performance. After the researcher got the data from observation, and valid the

Page 44: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

36

data with interviewed the teacher‟s, the researcher stopped the observation

process.

B. Data Analysis

In this part, the researcher would analyze the data in order to answer

the question of this research. The research question was “what are types of

teachers‟ oral corrective feedback on students‟ dialogue performances at

Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang?. The researcher analyzed the data that

had been gotten through observation used observation checklist, field notes,

interview and video recording. Then, the explanation about the data analysis

could be seen as follow:

1. Types of Oral Corrective Feedback ( from observation video )

The researcher did observation on 13th

, 16th

, and 18th

May 2016 for the

teacher A and 29th

July 2016 for teacher B by using observation checklist,

field notes, video recording and interview during dialogue performance in

English teaching learning process. It was aimed to find out the clear data

is needed in this research. In this observation, the observation had been

done by the researcher three times for each teacher because the data of

English oral corrective feedback had been same. The researcher observed

two classes in teacher A because only one teacher at tenth grade and

taught in different classes that had been observed by the researcher. And

then, the researcher observed teacher B three times at eleventh class.

Page 45: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

37

According to Ellis (2009:9), there are six types of oral corrective

feedback. They are recast, repetition, clarification request, explicit

correction, elicitation, and paralinguistic signal. Recast is the teacher

feedback without directly indicating that the student‟s utterance was

incorrect. The teacher implicitly reformulates the student‟s error, or

provides the correction. Teacher does not uses phrases such as you mean

or you should say. Teachers focus on one word and grammatical

modification. Repetition is teacher repeats the learner utterance

highlighting the error by means of emphatic stress. Teacher adjusts their

intonation so as to highlight the error. Clarification request is teacher

indicates that he/she has not understood what the learner said. Teacher

uses word excuse me, what, sorry, pardon me, or I don‟t understand.

Explicit correction is teacher indicates an error has been committed,

identifies the error and provides the correction. Teacher uses you should

say ...or we say...Elicitation is teacher repeats part of the learner utterance

but not the erroneous part and uses rising intonation to signal the learner

should complete it. Teacher says no, not that, it‟s a... or just repeat the

error. The last paralinguistic signal is teacher uses a gesture or facial

expression to indicate that the learner has made an error. For example

teacher uses facial expression, body positioning and movements, and hand

gesture. After watching the videos, the researcher found the types of oral

corrective feedback used by English teacher is recast and repetition.

Page 46: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

38

1) Teacher A

a. Observation I

In class X2 teacher gives feedback to the student when the

student dialogue performance. Based on the types of teacher oral

corrective feedback according Ellis (2009:9), teacher used recast in

correcting students in dialogue performance. In recast teacher does not

use phrases such as you mean or you should say. Teacher focuses on

one word and grammatical modification.

It can be seen in the dialogue below:

Student A : Hey, what‟s up?

Student B : Nothing really.

Student A : I‟m throwing a party on Friday.

Student B : I did I . . .

Teacher : I didn‟t

Student B : I didn‟t realize /rilij/ that.

Teacher : Realize /ri:ǝlaiz/.

Student B : I didn‟t realize /ri:ǝlaiz/ that.

Student A : You did not?

Student B : Nobody has told me anything about your party.

Student A : Did you want to go?

Student B : When does it start?

Student A : At 8:00 p.m

Student B : I will be there.

Student A : Thank you.

Page 47: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

39

In the dialogue above, teacher used recast as oral corrective

feedback on student utterance to correct the student speaking. It can

indicate because teacher only focuses to one word student utterance.

The teacher directly changes the word into the correct form. In the

dialogue, the student B utterance realize /rilij/ that directly changed by

the teacher by saying Realize /ri:ǝlaiz/. It means that teacher directly

changes student utterance without directly indicating that the student‟s

utterance was incorrect. So, with the characteristic above it can

conclude that the teacher used recast in correcting student dialogue

performance.

In class X1 teacher also used oral corrective feedback in

correcting student in dialogue performance. Teacher used recast in

correcting student when student performance. According to Ellis

(2009:9), recast is the teacher feedback without directly indicating that

the student‟s utterance was incorrect. The teacher implicitly

reformulates the student‟s error, or provides the correction. Teacher

does not use phrases such as you mean or you should say. Teachers

focus on one word and grammatical modification.

It can be seen in the dialogue below:

Student A : Hi Rafiul. They will be a great film tonight.

Teacher : There will be

Page 48: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

40

Student A : There will be a great film tonight. Would you like to

go to the movie with me?

Teacher : It‟s about . . . .?

Student A : It‟s about vampire. Would you like to go to the movie

with me?

Student B : Yes, I‟d like to very much. When will you pick me

up?

Student A : I‟ll pick you at 07.00. Be ready. Ok!

Student B : Alright

In the dialogue above teacher also used recast in correcting

student performance. Teacher focuses on one word and grammatical

modification. In the dialogue above teacher focuses on grammatical

modification. When the student A said They will be a great film

tonight which of the sentence were incorrect in that case, the teacher

implicitly corrected become There will be a great film tonight. It caan

see the student incorrect in pronounce word they. Actually the teacher

asked the student to make a dialogue, after that, the students performs

the dialogue in front of the class. In the students script, they wrote

there will be a great film tonight, but in performs the student

pronounce they will be a great film tonight. So, the student incorrect in

used subject in the sentence. The teacher directly changed to the

correct one. So, with that characteristic can identify the teacher used

recast in correcting student performance because teacher changed

Page 49: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

41

directly student utterance without directly indicating that the student‟s

utterance was incorrect.

b. Observation II

In the second observation on class X1, the researcher found the

teacher still used recast as an oral corrective feedback on student

dialogue performance. According to Ellis (2009:9), in recast teacher

does not use phrases such as you mean or you should say. Teacher

focuses on one word and grammatical modification.

It can be seen in the dialogue below:

Student A : Are you doing anything tonight?

Student B : Not really. Why?

Student A : I‟m to go a movie tonight

Teacher : I‟m going to a movie tonight.

Student A : I‟m going to a movie tonight. I wonder if you want

Teacher : To come with me?

Student A : I‟m going to a movie tonight. I wonder if you want to

come with me?

Student B : No, thanks. I don‟t like movie.

Student A : How about dinner? My mother is going to go to

Jakarta with my father tonight. I can‟t /ken-not/ cook.

Teacher : I can‟t /kǣnt/ cook.

Student A : I can‟t /kǣnt/ cook.

Student B : Oh, sure. Sound good.

Page 50: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

42

Student A : Okay. I‟ll pick you up at your house at seven.

Student B : Okay, see you then.

In the dialogue above, teacher focuses on one word student

utterance. Teacher directly changes student utterance without

directly indicating that the student‟s utterance was incorrect. For

example, student A said I can‟t /ken-not/ cook, teacher directly

gives correction to the utterance with saying I can‟t /kǣn/) cook. It

called recast because the teacher used the characteristic that identify

the teacher used recast. According to Ellis (2009:9), recast is the

teacher feedback without directly indicating that the student‟s

utterance was incorrect. The teacher implicitly reformulates the

student‟s error, or provides the correction. Teacher does not use

phrases such as you mean or you should say. Teachers focus on one

word and grammatical modification. In the dialogue above teacher

focuses on one word student utterance and directly correct it into

the correct form. So, in the dialogue above teacher used recast in

correcting student utterance in dialogue performance.

In the second observation on class X2, the researcher found

the teacher still used the same types of oral corrective feedback.

The type is recast. In this observation the teacher still focuses to one

word student utterance and directly changes it to the correct form.

Page 51: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

43

Teacher does not asks the student or tell the student if the utterance

was incorrect.

It can be seen in the dialogue below:

Student A : Hello

Student B : Hi, Aura. This is Tika

Student A : Hi, how are you?

Student B : Alright, thanks.

Student A : Would you like to go out tonight?

Student B : Sorry, I can‟t /kent/.

Teacher : Sorry, I can‟t /kǣnt/.

Student B : Sorry, I can‟t /keint/.

Teacher : Sorry, I can‟t /kǣnt/.

Student B : Sorry, I can‟t /keint/.

Teacher : Sorry, I can‟t /kǣnt/.

Student B : Sorry, I can‟t /kǣnt/. I have many matters to settle

down.

Student A : Well, how about tomorrow night? Are you still busy?

Student B : I guess /gues/ not.

Teacher : I guess /ges/ not.

Student B : I guess /ges/ not.

Student A : Well, would you like to go to a concert?

Student B : Sure, I‟d love to.

Student A : Ok. Thank you.

Page 52: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

44

In the dialogue above, there are no another types of oral

corrective feedback used by the teacher in this second observation

in class X1. In the dialogue above teacher used recast in correcting

student utterance. It can see from the teacher correction only

focuses to one word student utterance. For example, student B said

Sorry, I can‟t /kent/, then teacher directly correct became Sorry, I

can‟t /kǣnt/, but student B still repeats the error utterance until

twice with saying Sorry, I can‟t /keint/, and then teacher correct

again with saying Sorry, I can‟t /kǣnt/, until the student correct in

their utterance. After that, still in the dialogue above, student B has

incorrect utterance again with saying I guess /gues/ not, teacher

directly changes with I guess /ges/ not. With those examples it can

identify the teacher used recast in correcting student utterance in

their performance. Teacher directly changes to the correct form

without indicating the student was incorrect in their utterance.

c. Observation III

In the third observation on class X1, teacher also used recast as

oral corrective feedback in correcting student utterance in speaking

performance. Student still incorrect in their utterance and teacher

directly corrected student utterance into the correct form without

indicated the student was incorrect.

Page 53: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

45

It can be seen in the dialogue below:

Student A : Hello Tika

Student B : Hello Yuni

Student A : What are you doing?

Student B : I‟m reading a novel.

Student A : Can you come to my birthday party tomorrow?

Student B : Of course, I can /kant/. Thanks for the invitation.

Teacher : I can /ken/.

Student B : Of course, I can /ken/. Thanks for the invitation.

Student A : You are welcome.

In the dialogue above, it can see the teacher used recast again

in corrected student utterance. The teacher found the student was

incorrect in pronounced can, Student B says I can /kant/, student

utterance /kant/ was incorrect, the teacher not asked the student the

correct pronounce but the teacher directly corrected it by saying I can

/ken/. And the student repeats the teacher with saying the correct

utterance. In this case, the teacher does not high her intonation in

student utterance error to indicate the student was incorrect or asks the

student to revise it. It called recast because the teacher only focuses on

one word student utterance without indicating the student incorrect in

their utterance. Teacher also not asked the student is it the utterance is

Page 54: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

46

correct or not. So, the teacher used recast in correcting student

utterance in dialogue performance.

In the third observation on class X2, teacher used recast.

Teacher used recast in correcting student utterance with directly

changes the incorrect utterance into the correct utterance without

indicated the student was incorrect in their utterance. Teacher does not

ask the student what are the correct one but directly changes it to the

correct one.

It can be seen in the dialogue below:

Student A : I have a dream . . . a song to sing.

Student B : Hi, Brigit! It must be west life ( lef) song.

Teacher : West life ( laif) song.

Student B : It must be west life ( laif) song.

Student A : One hundred for you! I plan to watch west life concert

tonight. Why don‟t you join me?

Student B : Wow . . . that‟s a great idea.

Student A : Of course.

In the third observation, teacher also used recast in corrected

students‟ utterance. The student utterance “It must be west life ( lef)

song”, teacher directly corrected by saying “West life ( laif) song”. It

is indicated that the teacher did not tell the incorrect one, but directly

Page 55: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

47

say the correct one by repeating them by directly changed them with

the correct one. So, it called recast as oral corrective feedback used by

the teacher in correcting student utterance in dialogue performance.

Teacher does not use phrases such as you mean or you should say.

Teachers focus on one word and grammatical modification. So, it

related with the characteristic of recast by Ellis (2009:9). In

conclusion, teacher used recast in correcting student utterance in

dialogue performance.

2) Teacher B

a. Observation I

In the class, teacher gives oral corrective feedback to the

student when dialogue performance. Based on the types of teacher oral

corrective feedback according Ellis (2009:9), teacher used recast and

repetition in correcting students in dialogue performance. In recast

teacher does not use phrases such as you mean or you should say.

Teacher focuses on one word and grammatical modification. And in

repetition the teacher repeats the learner utterance highlighting the

error by means of emphatic stress. Teacher adjusts their intonation so

as to highlight the error.

It can be seen in the dialogue below:

Student A : Hi Iqbal, what‟s up? /wasap/. You look so sad.

Page 56: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

48

Teacher : /wasap/?

Student A : Hi Iqbal, what‟s up? /wasap/.

Teacher : What‟s up. /wat’s ap/.

Student A : Hi Iqbal, what‟s up? /wat’s ap/. You look so sad.

Student B : It is killing me.

Student A : Why?

Student B : I‟m really so sad because I‟m broken heart.

Student A : Ouch it is really painful.

In the dialogue above, teacher used repetition and recast as oral

corrective feedback on student utterance to correct the student

speaking. It can indicate because teacher only focuses to one word

student utterance. The teacher directly changes the word into the

correct form. In the dialogue, the student A utterance what‟s up?

/wat’s ap/. Teacher repeat student utterance what‟s up? /wat’s ap/ by

highlight the utterance to indicate the student was error in pronounce

what‟s up?. But, students not revise the utterance and repeat again the

incorrect utterance. After that, teacher directly changed by saying

what‟s up. /wat’s ap/. It means that teacher directly changes student

utterance without directly indicating that the student‟s utterance was

incorrect. So, with the characteristic above it can conclude that the

teacher used recast in correcting student dialogue performance. So, in

Page 57: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

49

the dialogue above the teacher used two types of oral corrective

feedback. They are repetition and recast.

In the other student performances, teacher also used oral

corrective feedback in correcting student in dialogue performance.

Teacher used recast in correcting student when student performance.

According to Ellis (2009:9), recast is the teacher feedback without

directly indicating that the student‟s utterance was incorrect. The

teacher implicitly reformulates the student‟s error, or provides the

correction. Teacher does not use phrases such as you mean or you

should say. Teachers focus on one word and grammatical

modification.

It can be seen in the dialogue below:

Student A : Do you bring a food?

Student B : Yes I bring a food.

Student C : No, I don‟t bring a food.

Student B : Do you want to try my food?

Student A : Yes, I want to try /trei/ your food.

Teacher : I want to try /traI/

Student A : Yes, I want to try /traI/ your food.

Student C : I like it.

Student B : Really?

Student A : Yeah, that‟s good

Page 58: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

50

Student C : Fantastic, so yummy

Student B : I‟m so happy.

In the dialogue above teacher also used recast in correcting

student performance. Teacher focuses on one word and grammatical

modification. In the dialogue above teacher focuses on student

pronunciation error. In the dialogue above the students have one

pronounce error. it can see when the student A said I want to try /trei/

your food which of the sentence were incorrect in that case, the teacher

implicitly corrected become I want to try /traI/. And then, the student

pronounced the correct utterance. It can see the student incorrect in

pronounce word try. The teacher directly changed to the correct one.

So, with that characteristic can identify the teacher used recast in

correcting student performance because teacher changed directly

student utterance without directly indicating that the student‟s

utterance was incorrect.

b. Observation II

In observation II, after teacher repeat the material that has been

explained last week to remember the student about the material, the

teacher asked the students some questions related to the topic. After

that, teacher asked the students to make a short conversation and

perform in front of the class. In student dialogue performance, teacher

Page 59: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

51

gives oral corrective feedback to corrected students utterance. The

first, teacher used repetition with gives the high intonation to the

student utterance, but the students still incorrect in pronounce it, so

teacher used recast with directly give the correct form to the students.

It can be seen in the dialogue below:

Student A : Tika, how is your new job? Do you like it?

Student B : No, it doesn‟t seem like what I imagine /imagin/

before, how about you?

Teacher : /imagin/?

Student B : /imagin/

Teacher : /I’mǣdƷIn/

Student B : No, it doesn‟t seem like what I imagine /I’mǣdƷIn/

before, how about you?

Student A : I‟m delighted! My boss is very kind person. appreciate

my work even though it is bad.

Student B : You are a lucky girl.

In the dialogue above, it can see the student incorrect in

pronounce imagine, and the teacher repeat the student incorrect

utterance with highlight the intonation when saying imagine. It‟s mean

that teacher used repetition in correcting that utterance. It can know

because repetition is the teacher repeats the learner utterance

highlighting the error by means of emphatic stress. In other word,

teacher adjusts their intonation so as to highlight the error. But, after

the teacher repeat the student incorrect utterance, the students still

Page 60: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

52

pronounced it in incorrect utterance, so, the teacher directly gives the

correct utterance to the students with saying /I’mǣdƷIn/. Directly

changed the student utterance with the correct one it calls recast.

According to Ellis (2009), recast is the teacher incorporates the content

words of the immediately preceding incorrect utterance and changes

and corrects the utterance in some way. Teacher does not use phrases

such as you mean or you should say. Teachers focus on one word and

grammatical modification.

In the other student performances, teacher also used recast and

repetition in corrected student incorrect utterance.

It can be seen in the dialogue below:

Student A : I‟m very worried /wor it/ that it will be rain tomorrow.

I don‟t have an umbrella.

Teacher : I‟m very worried /’wɅrid/

Student A : I‟m very worried /’wɅrid/ that it will be rain

tomorrow. I don‟t have an /an/ umbrella.

Teacher : I don‟t have an /ǝn/ umbrella.

Student A : I don‟t have an /ǝn/ umbrella.

Student B :Don‟t worry, it will be sunny tomorrow. I saw the

weather forecast for tomorrow. And it will turn out

good.

Student C : Oh, what‟s a relief /relif/

Teacher : What‟s a relief /relif/?

Student C : What‟s a relief /relif/

Page 61: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

53

Teacher : What‟s a relief /rI’li:f/

Student C : What‟s a relief /rI’li:f/

In the dialogue above, teacher also used recast and repetition in

corrected student utterance. The student incorrect in pronounce

worried, an and relief. The first, when the student incorrect in

pronounce worried with saying /wor it/, the teacher directly changed

that incorrect utterance with saying worried /’wɅrid/. When the

teacher directly changed with gives the correct utterance without

indicating the student was incorrect it calls recast. Based on the theory

adopted by Ellis recast is the teacher incorporates the content words of

the immediately preceding incorrect utterance and changes and

corrects the utterance in some way. Teacher does not use phrases such

as you mean or you should say. Teachers focus on one word and

grammatical modification. So, recast is the first types of oral

corrective feedback used in the dialogue above. But still in the

dialogue above, the student still have incorrect utterance in saying an

/an/. Teacher also directly changed to the correct utterance with saying

an /ǝn/. So, the teacher also used recast. When the student said relief

/relif/, teacher repeated the student utterance with saying relief /rI’li:f/

in high intonation. The teacher asked the student with repeat that word

in highlight intonation. When the teacher repeat the student incorrect

utterance and use the high intonation it called repetition. Repetition is

Page 62: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

54

the teacher repeats the learner utterance highlighting the error by

means of emphatic stress. In other word, teacher adjusts their

intonation so as to highlight the error. So, the second types of oral

corrective feedback used by the teacher in corrected student utterance

in dialogue above is repetition

c. Observation III

In observation III, teacher gives oral corrective feedback to the

student when dialogue performance. Based on the types of teacher oral

corrective feedback according Ellis (2009:9), teacher used recast and

in correcting students in dialogue performance. In recast teacher does

not use phrases such as you mean or you should say. Teacher focuses

on one word and grammatical modification.

It can be seen in the dialogue below:

Student A : Hello, whom I am speaking to?

Student B : Hello, I am Intan

Student A : Anything I could do Intan?

Student B : I just wanna say many thanks for you

Student A : For what Intan?

Student B : It is about your gift /gef/. I have opened it and I really

love it.

Teacher : /gIft/

Student B : /gIft/. It is about your gift /gIft/. I have opened it and I

really love it.

Page 63: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

55

Student A : I am so happy to hear that. I hope it will be useful for

you.

Student B : It is so useful for me. It is my pleasure to call you

Intan. See you soon.

It can be seen in dialogue above teacher used recast in

correcting student utterance in dialogue performance. Recast is the

teacher feedback without directly indicating that the student‟s

utterance was incorrect. The teacher implicitly reformulates the

student‟s error, or provides the correction. Teacher does not use

phrases such as you mean or you should say. Teachers focus on one

word and grammatical modification. In the dialogue, student B

incorrect in pronounced gift, the student said It is about your gift /gef/.

After listen that incorrect utterance, the teacher directly changed the

student incorrect utterance by saying gift /gIft/. The teacher not

indicated the student was incorrect in the utterance. The teacher only

focused to the student one word utterance. It means that teacher

directly changed, so it called recast.

In conclusion, teacher B used different types of teacher oral

corrective feedback. In the observation I, II, and III the researcher

found the teacher used two types of teacher oral corrective feedback.

The feedback was recast and repetition. It can know the teacher used

recast because teacher directly changed with the correct utterance and

Page 64: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

56

only focused to one word student utterance. According to Ellis (2009)

recast is the teacher feedback without directly indicating that the

student‟s utterance was incorrect. The teacher implicitly reformulates

the student‟s error, or provides the correction. Teacher does not use

phrases such as you mean or you should say. Teachers focus on one

word and grammatical modification. For example, when the student

utterances, What‟s up. /wasap/. . . I want to try /trei/ your food . . .

imagine /imagin/. . . I‟m very worried /wor it/ . . . I don‟t have an /an/

umbrella . . .teacher directly changed by saying What‟s up. /wat’s ap/.

. . I want to try /traI/ your food . . . imagine /I’mǣdƷIn/. . . I‟m very

worried /’wɅrid/. . . I don‟t have an /ǝn/ umbrella. In repetition, the

teachers highlight the utterance to the student utterance. The teacher

repeats the learner utterance highlighting the error by means of

emphatic stress. In other word, teacher adjusts their intonation so as to

highlight the error. For example, imagine /imagine/? . . . what‟s relief

/relif/?. Teacher repeated the student utterance with high intonation to

invite the student to changes to the correct utterance. So, it can

conclude teacher B used recast and repetition in correcting student

utterance in dialogue performances.

Page 65: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

57

2. Types of Oral Corrective Feedback (from observation checklist and

field notes)

The observation checklist and field notes has purposes to find out

the types of oral corrective feedback used by the English teacher at Senior

High School PGRI 1 Padang. In observation checklist and field notes the

researcher wrote checklist and field note related to the indicators of oral

corrective feedback types. For example, the researcher wrote the teacher

directly change students utterance such as student utterance in pronounced

/rilij/ so teacher directly changed with /ri:ǝlaiz/, so, the researcher

checklist the column of recast in observation checklist. Then, the teacher

repeat the student utterance like /imagin/?, the researcher wrote that in

field notes and checklist the column repetition in observation checklist.

The result of observation checklist and field notes from the English

teacher who were observed was recast and repetition. The teacher used

recast and repetition in corrected student utterance directly with the

correct form. The teacher directly corrected the student utterance without

indicating the student utterance was incorrect. And teacher repeats the

student error to tell the student they were incorrect.

In the observation, the teacher focuses on one word student

utterance and grammatical modification. In recast the teacher gives the

correct form without asked the student about their utterance is correct or

Page 66: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

58

not. So, the teacher used recast and repetition in corrected student

utterance in dialogue performance. The conclusion of observation

checklist and field notes the researcher found both of teacher used recast

and repetition.

3. Types of Oral Corrective Feedback (from interview)

The researcher did interview to support the data from observation.

The researcher used non structural interview whereas the question of the

interview could be elaborated based on the interview answer. There were

two teachers who had interviewed each teacher in different time. In

interview section, the researcher asked the question, and gave the next

question based on the teacher answer. Based on the interview with teacher

A who teach at tenth grade usually used direct feedback with using recast

to the student because teacher A believe that student at tenth grade who

performed in front of the class have a big confident, and to avoid that

teacher A very appreciated it with directly give feedback if student

incorrect in their utterance so, the student does not anxiety with their

performance without think about teacher question when their performs.

Based on the interview with teacher B who teach at eleventh grade,

the teacher choose the feedback related to the student when their

performed. It can be the student incorrect in their utterance, grammar or

Page 67: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

59

lexical. In the classroom teacher B mostly repeat student utterance and

directly change to the correct one.

After did the interview, the researcher got the result that the

teachers used oral corrective feedback on student dialogue performance in

different ways based on the students themselves. The teachers mostly

corrected the pronunciation of student performances, and the other was

seldom to be corrected. Teacher A used recast in correcting student

utterance in dialogue performance, and teacher B used recast and

repetition in corrected student utterance in performance.

C. Findings

The purposes of this research to analyzed the types of oral corrective

feedback on students‟ dialogue performance. In this case, the researcher

wanted to know the types of oral corrective feedback used by the teacher on

students‟ dialogue performance at Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang. This

purpose can answer the research question “what are types of oral corrective

feedback used by the teacher on students‟ dialogue performance”. Based on

the data above, the researcher found types of oral corrective feedback used by

the English teacher on students‟ dialogue performances at Senior High School

PGRI 1 Padang. The researcher found the oral corrective feedback used by

English teacher at this school was recast and repetition. It can be seen from

the table below:

Page 68: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

60

No Participants

Types of Oral

Corrective

Feedback

Utterances

1 Teacher A Recast Student : I didn‟t realize

(rilij) that.

Teacher : Realize ( ri:ǝlaiz).

Student : I didn‟t realize (

ri:ǝlaiz) that.

Student : Hi Rafiul. They will

be a great film tonight.

Teacher: There will be

Student : There will be a great

film tonight. Would you like to go

to the movie with me?

Student : How about dinner?

My mother is going to go to

Jakarta with my father tonight. I

can‟t (ken-not) cook.

Teacher : I can‟t (kǣnt) cook.

Student : I can‟t (kǣnt) cook.

Student : Sorry, I can‟t

(kent).

Teacher: Sorry, I can‟t (kǣnt).

Student : I guess (gues) not.

Teacher: I guess (ges) not.

Student : Of course, I can

(kant). Thanks for the invitation.

Teacher : I can (ken).

Student : Hi, Brigit! It must be

west life ( lef) song.

Page 69: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

61

Teacher : West life ( laif)

song.

Student : It must be west life (

laif) song.

2

Teacher B

Recast

Student A : Hi Iqbal, what‟s up?

/wasap/.

Teacher : What‟s up. /wat’s

ap/.

Student A : Hi Iqbal, what‟s up?

/wat’s ap/. You look so sad.

Student A : Yes, I want to try

/trei/ your food.

Teacher : I want to try /traI/

Student A : Yes, I want to try

/traI/your food.

Student B : /imagin/

Teacher : /I’mǣdƷIn/

Student B : No, it doesn‟t seem

like what I imagine /I’mǣdƷIn/

before, how about you?

Student A : I‟m very worried

/wor it/ that it will be rain

tomorrow. I don‟t have an

umbrella.

Teacher : I‟m very worried

/’wɅrid/.

Student A : I‟m very worried

/’wɅrid/ that it will be rain

tomorrow. I don‟t have an /an/

umbrella.

Teacher : I don‟t have an /ǝn/

Page 70: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

62

umbrella.

Student A : I don‟t have an /ǝn/

umbrella.

Student C : What‟s a relief

/relif/

Teacher : What‟s a relief

/rI’li:f/

Student C : What‟s a relief

/rI’li:f/

Student B : It is about your gift

/gef/. I have opened it and I really

love it.

Teacher : /gIft/

Student B : /gIft/. It is about

your gift /gIft/. I have opened it

and I really love it.

Repetition Student A : Hi Iqbal, what‟s up?

/wasap/. You look so sad.

Teacher : /wasap/?

Student B : No, it doesn‟t seem

like what I imagine /imagine/

before, how about you?

Teacher : /imagin/?

Student C : Oh, what‟s a relief

/relif/

Teacher : What‟s a relief

/relif/?

After analyzed the data from the table above, the types of oral

feedback used by the English teacher at Senior High School Padang was

Page 71: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

63

recast and repetition. Based on the data analysis above, the researcher had the

finding that recast was used by the teacher A were: The students utterance

realize (rilij) that directly changed by the teacher by saying Realize ( ri:ǝlaiz).

It also did to the sentences They will be a great film tonight which of the

sentence were incorrect in that case, the teacher implicitly corrected become

There will be a great film tonight. The student utterance I can‟t (ken-not)

cook, Sorry, I can‟t (kent), Sorry, I can‟t (keint). Then teacher directly

changed by saying Sorry, I can‟t (kǣnt). Then the sentence I guess (gues) not,

teacher changed by I guess (ges) not. The student utterance Of course, I can

(kant), directly changed by the teacher with saying I can (ken). It also did in

other words It must be west life ( lef) song, teacher directly corrected by

saying West life ( laif) song. These utterances when the students made error in

their spelling, grammar, pronunciation and the sentence of the students were

not complete the teacher used recast to correct them.

The researcher had the finding recast and repetition used by teacher B

in correcting student utterance. The oral corrective feedback:

a. Recast

Recast is the teacher feedback without directly indicating that the

student‟s utterance was incorrect. The teacher implicitly reformulates the

student‟s error, or provides the correction. Teacher does not use phrases

such as you mean or you should say. Teachers focus on one word and

Page 72: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

64

grammatical modification. The student utterances: Hi Iqbal, what‟s up?

/wasap/ directly changed by the teacher by saying what‟s up. /wat’s ap/.

And student revised with saying Hi Iqbal, what‟s up? /wat’s ap/. You

look so sad. It also did to the sentence Yes, I want to try /trei/ your food.

In that case the student incorrect in pronounce try with saying /trei/. It

also directly changed by the teacher with saying I want to try /traI/ and

repeat by the student with saying Yes, I want to try /traI/ your food. Other

incorrect utterances when the student says /imagin/ and directly changed

by the teacher with saying the correct pronunciation /I’mǣdƷIn/ and

student revised with saying No, it doesn‟t seem like what I imagine

/I’mǣdƷIn/ before, how about you?. It also did to the word worried /wor

it/ and an /an/ and directly changed the teacher by saying worried

/’wɅrid/ and an /ǝn/ and the student revise the utterance to the correct

pronounces. The other incorrect pronounced What‟s a relief /relif/ and

teacher also directly changed by saying What‟s a relief /rI’li:f/. After

corrected by the teacher, the student revise and repeat and then saying

What‟s a relief /rI’li:f/. The last student utterances It is about your gift

/gef/. And teacher gave the example in correct pronounced /gIft/. And

students changed with saying /gIft/. It is about your gift /gIft/.

Page 73: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

65

b. Repetition

In repetition, the teachers highlight the utterance to the student

utterance. The teacher repeats the learner utterance highlighting the error

by means of emphatic stress. In other word, teacher adjusts their

intonation so as to highlight the error. The student utterances: Hi Iqbal,

what‟s up? /wasap/. You look so sad. In that case, the student incorrect

pronounced what‟s up? /wasap/. And teacher repeat student utterance

with saying the correct pronunciation /wasap/?. it also did to the sentence

No, it doesn‟t seem like what I imagine /imagin/ before, how about you?.

In that case, the student incorrect in pronounced imagine /imagin/, then,

the teacher repeat the student incorrect pronounced with saying

/imagin/?. The last incorrect utterance Oh, what‟s a relief /relif/. The

student incorrect in pronounced relief /relif/. Then, the teacher repeat the

student incorrect pronunciation by saying What‟s a relief /relif/?. It

means that the teacher repeat the student utterance, so it can conclude the

teacher used repetition as the types of oral corrective feedback on student

dialogue performances.

D. Discussion

Based on the data analysis and findings, the English teacher at Senior

High School PGRI 1 Padang used recast and repetition as oral corrective

feedback in correcting students‟ utterance in dialogue performance. Based on

Page 74: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

66

the indicator used by the researcher adapted from Ellis (2009:9), recast is the

corrector incorporates the content word of the immediately preceding

incorrect utterance and changes and corrects the utterance in some way.

Teacher does not use phrases such as you mean or you should say, teacher

focus on one word and grammatical modification. And repetition is teacher

repeats the learner utterance highlighting the error by means of emphatic

stress. Teacher adjusts their intonation so as to highlight the error.

a. Recast

Rydahal (2005) showed that recast is the most oral feedback. It

means that in correcting student utterance, the teacher mostly used recast

to revise student incorrect utterance. According to Mosa (2010), a

considerable number of teachers have heard that recasts a type of

feedback that involves reformulating the student‟s error into the correct

form, is the most appropriate one, especially because it may decrease

students‟ anxiety. In other word to solve the students anxiety when

performs the teacher directly reformulated students error. when the

students performs and have incorrect utterance, it will make the students

anxiety, and if the teacher not react that fast, it will make the student

forget what they will say after that.

In Jabbari study (2012:145), in the case of recasts, classroom

learners, whether they are given the opportunity to repeat or not, are less

actively engaged insofar as there is little evidence that they can actually

Page 75: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

67

notice the gap between their initial use of non target forms and the

teacher‟s reformulation. It means teacher give the opportunity to the

students to repeat, but the students not active and mostly repeat the

incorrect utterance, so, to solve that problem the teacher directly give the

reformulation of the student utterance. The other reason mentioned by

teachers for their choice of recast as corrective feedback was that they

preferred less intimidating feedback for the learner. To lack the time of

performance in front of the class the teacher used recast in correcting

student utterance.

For example, The students utterance realize (rilij) that directly

changed by the teacher by saying Realize (ri:ǝlaiz). The teacher focuses

on word realize and directly changes the students utterance into the

correct form. It also did to the sentences They will be a great film

tonight which of the sentence were incorrect in that case, the teacher

implicitly corrected become There will be a great film tonight. The

student utterances: Hi Iqbal, what‟s up? /wasap/ directly changed by the

teacher by saying what‟s up. /wat’s ap/. And student revised with saying

Hi Iqbal, what‟s up? /wat’s ap/. You look so sad. It also did to the

sentence Yes, I want to try /trei/ your food. In that case the student

incorrect in pronounce try with saying /trei/. It also directly changed by

the teacher with saying I want to try /traI/ and repeat by the student with

saying Yes, I want to try /traI/ your food. Other incorrect utterances

Page 76: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

68

when the student says /imagin/ and directly changed by the teacher with

saying the correct pronunciation /I’mǣdƷIn/ and student revised with

saying No, it doesn‟t seem like what I imagine /I’mǣdƷIn/ before, how

about you?. It also did to the word worried /wor it/ and an /an/ and

directly changed the teacher by saying worried /’wɅrid/ and an /ǝn/ and

the student revise the utterance to the correct pronounces. The other

incorrect pronounced What‟s a relief /relif/ and teacher also directly

changed by saying What‟s a relief /rI’li:f/. After corrected by the teacher,

the student revise and repeat and then saying What‟s a relief /rI’li:f/. The

last student utterances It is about your gift /gef/. And teacher gave the

example in correct pronounced /gIft/. And students changed with saying

/gIft/. It is about your gift /gIft/. Teacher focuses on grammatical

modification and directly changes to the correct grammatical without

asks the students what are the correct grammar. So, it indicated that the

teacher uses recast in corrects students in dialogue performances.

b. Repetition

Repetition is the teacher repeat the student error. But different

with recast, repetition is the teacher repeat without reformulate to the

correct form. It considered to more beneficial and effective for students‟

learning and increases students‟ critical thinking ability. It means that

with repetition, the student will think about the correct form to achieve

the answer of teacher asked to the student when repeat the student

Page 77: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

69

utterance. According to Dabaghi (2010:188), When repetition is used as

a correction technique in class, it positively affects the result of the tests,

which means the student learn better and achieve what they are expected

to achieve. When the students fails in choosing the correct word or

pronouncing it, it will possible the student to make him/her aware of the

incorrect pronunciation when the incorrect word repeat by the teacher.

For example, the student utterances: Hi Iqbal, what‟s up?

/wasap/. You look so sad. In that case, the student incorrect pronounced

what‟s up? /wasap/. And teacher repeat student utterance with saying the

correct pronunciation /wasap/?. it also did to the sentence No, it doesn‟t

seem like what I imagine /imagin/ before, how about you?. In that case,

the student incorrect in pronounced imagine /imagin/, then, the teacher

repeat the student incorrect pronounced with saying /imagin/?. The last

incorrect utterance Oh, what‟s a relief /relif/. The student incorrect in

pronounced relief /relif/. Then, the teacher repeat the student incorrect

pronunciation by saying What‟s a relief /relif/?.

In observation, the researcher did not find another characteristics that

can be used by the teacher to indicate the teacher uses another types, for

example, if the teacher uses what, pardon me, or excuse me to indicate that the

teacher not understand and suggest the students‟ to repeat again, it indicate

that the teacher uses clarification request as the way in give correction to the

students. After that, if the students has error and the teacher say you should

Page 78: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

70

say or we say then give the correct form, it indicate that the teacher uses

explicit correction in correcting students error. If the teacher uses no, not that

when the student has error in dialogue performances, it means that the teacher

uses elicitation to correct the student error in dialogue performances. The last,

if the students has error and the teacher just uses facial expression or gestures

to tell that the students has error, it is means that the teacher uses

paralinguistic signal to correcting students error.

Teacher A uses recast and teacher B uses recast and repetition in

correcting students‟ utterance when dialogue performance. Edith, Rosario, &

Griselda (2010), also found repetition and recast are often used by teachers in

providing feedback. It caused the students‟ only has error in their

pronunciation, so the teacher just focuses to the one word students‟ error and

directly correct it. Teacher does not uses another types of oral corrective

feedback because the students‟ almost error in their utterance. It also caused

the students‟ does not has mistakes in using tenses when dialogue

performance, so the teacher only focuses on students‟ pronunciation error.

Teacher corrects the students‟ error directly when the students‟ dialogue

performance. So, it indicated the teacher used recast and repetition as oral

corrective feedback on students‟ dialogue performance.

Noruzi Azar‟s (2012) study investigated whether teacher‟s feedback is

effective in promoting student‟s oral performance. With giving the feedback to

the students it will increase student to improve their performance for the next.

Page 79: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

71

It can be said effective because when the student performs in front of the class

and has the mistakes or error, it will correct by the teacher directly. This

activity will remember by the student to remind their mistakes and revise it to

the correct form. So, it can effective to promoting students when students oral

performance.

In conclusion, interaction between students‟ and teacher in responses

students‟ utterance in dialogue performance run well especially when

students‟ was incorrect, teacher not keep silent about the students‟ error, but

teacher directly changed by corrects it. Based on the discussion above, can

conclude that the students‟ understand and get the point of what the teacher

said and the teacher has good way in delivered it, so, the goals of teaching and

learning process can be achieved at that time. By using oral corrective

feedback, it means that the teacher has known how to uses oral corrective

feedback when the students‟ was incorrect based on the students‟ need. In

short, the teachers‟ has known about oral feedback and when to use it in

appropriately. Oral corrective feedback can use based on students‟ error and

teacher can use oral correctives feedback appropriately based on situation and

condition.

Page 80: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

72

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

A. Conclusion

Oral corrective feedback is teacher correction or response to the

learner utterances containing an error directly when student have mistake or

error and teacher gives information to the student to revise their mistakes or

error. Students can improve their knowledge based on teacher correction on

their mistakes. So, the student can improve their performance with the

correction. There are six types of oral corrective feedback. They are recast,

repetition, clarification request, explicit correction, elicitation, and

paralinguistic signal. Oral corrective feedback can be used in correcting

students‟ grammar, utterance, pronunciation, word choice, and others

performance and it can improve students‟ in the next performance in learning

English.

Based on the research question of the research “what are types of oral

corrective feedback used by the teacher on students‟ dialogue performance at

Senior High School PRGI 1 Padang“, the researcher formulated the

conclusion into the types of oral corrective feedback used by English teachers‟

on students‟ dialogue performance at Senior High School PGRI 1 Padang are

teacher A used recast and teacher B used recast and repetition. Recast is the

corrector incorporates the content words of the immediately preceding

72

Page 81: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

73

incorrect utterance and changes and corrects the utterance in some way.

Repetition is the corrector repeats the learner utterance highlighting the error

by means of emphatic stress. Teacher adjusts their intonation so as to

highlight the error. This type used by English teachers‟ to correcting students‟

in grammar, utterance, and pronunciation. It can improve students‟ in their

next performances.

B. Suggestion

After doing the observation in the field and analyzing the collected

data, the researcher states insightful suggestions at this point. The researcher

suggests all of English teachers‟ to know about the characteristic of students‟

error or mistake in dialogue performance. It is important to identify the

students‟ error to give the feedback about it. Then, by identifying the students‟

error, the teachers‟ can use the feedback on students‟ speaking performance. If

the teachers‟ is known the types of feedback in students‟ dialogue

performance, the teacher can know the better feedback that should be given in

teaching activity especially when students‟ dialogue performances. With this

feedback, the English teacher will know about the students‟ ability or

achievement which the teachers‟ oral feedback or attention with giving oral

corrective feedback to the students‟ dialogue performance.

Then, for the reader and the next researcher, this research can give the

advantages to do the new research. After reading this research, the next

researcher can find the new idea and this research also can be the sources to

Page 82: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

74

continue the research. After the next researcher knows about what are the

types of teachers' oral corrective feedback on students‟ dialogue

performances, the next researcher can do the research about students‟ attitude

when the teachers‟ gives oral corrective feedback or what are the effects to the

students after the teachers‟ gives oral corrective feedback.

Page 83: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

75

REFERENCES

Askew, S. Feedback for Learning. London: RoutledgeFalmer. (2000). Print.

Brookhart, Susan M. How to Give Effective Feedback to Your Students. New York:

ASCB. (2008). print.

Creswell, Jhon W. Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method

Approaches. New York: Cambridge University. (2009). Print.

Ellis, R. Researching the Effects of Form-Focused Instruction on L2 acquisition.

AILA Review 19, (2006): 18-41. Print.

Ellis, R. Corrective Feedback and Teacher Development. L2 Journal, 1, (2009): 3-13.

Print.

Faqeih et al. Oral Corrective Feedback and Learning of English Modals. Open

Access Article under the CC BY-NC-ND License. New York: Elsevier Ltd.

(2014). Print.

Gay, L. R and Airasian p. Educational Research Competences for Analysis and

Application. New Jersey: Prentice hall Inc. (2000). Print.

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. W. Educational Research: Competencies for

Analysis and Applications. Boston: Pearson. (2012). Print.

Mila, R. & Mayo, M. P. G. Corrective Feedback Episodes in Oral Interaction: A

Comparison of a CLIL and an EFL Classroom. International Journal of

English Studies. University of Murcia: Ijes. (2013). Print.

Rahimi, M. & Sobhani, A. Teachers‟ Different Types of Feedback on Iranian EFL

learners‟ Speaking Errors and Their Impact on the Students‟ Uptake of The

Correct Forms. Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning.

Holonic Open University: ISSN. (2015). Print.

Russell, J. & Spada, N. The Effectiveness of Corrective Feedback for Second

Language Acquisition: A Meta-analysis of The Research. In J. Norris & L.

Ortega (eds). Synthesizing Research on Language Learning and Teaching (pp.

133-164). Amsterdam : Benjamins. (2006). Print.

75

Page 84: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

76

Rydahl, S. Oral Feedback in the English Classroom: Teachers‟ Thoughts and

Awareness. Karlstads Universitet. Engelska. (2005). Print.

Sheen, Y. & R. Ellis. Corrective Feedback in Language Teaching. In E. Hinkel (ed.),

Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, Vol.2.

New York: Routledge, (2011): 593-610. Print.

Sprouls, K. Teachers‟ Use of Positive and Negative Feedback with the Students Who

Are High-Risk for Emotional Behavioral Disorders. A Dissertation Presented

in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of

Philosophy. Arizona State University. (2011): 33. Print.

Wannemacker, Stefan De et al. Interdisciplinary Approach to Adapting Learning.

London: Springer.Verlag Berlin Durdrecht. (2011). Print.

Winter. Dialogue and Interpersonal Communication: How Informal Logic Can

Enhance Our Understanding of the Dinamics of Close Relationships. United

States. Cogency. (2011): 94. Print.

Yoshida, R. Learners in Japanese Language Classrooms.London: Continuum

International Publishing Group. (2009). Print.

Page 85: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

77

Appendices 1

Page 86: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

77

Appendices 1 :

RESEARCH SCHEDULE

No Month/Date/Year Activities Location

1 May, 04, 2016 Enter the letter in college

administration

STKIP PGRI West

Sumatera

2 May, 10, 2016 Taking the letter for

observation from

Department of Education

Padang and give the letter to

the school

Department of

Education Padang

and SMA PGRI 1

Padang

3 May, 12, 2016 Come to SMA PGRI 1

Padang and asked the

teacher schedule

SMA PGRI 1

Padang

4 May, 13, 2016 Doing the first observation

with teacher A

SMA PGRI 1

Padang

5 May, 16, 2016 Doing the second

observation with teacher A

SMA PGRI 1

Padang

6 May, 18, 2016 Doing the third observation

with teacher A

SMA PGRI 1

Padang

7 July, 29, 2016 Doing the observation with

teacher B

SMA PGRI 1

Padang

Page 87: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

78

Page 88: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

79

Page 89: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

80

v

Page 90: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

81

Appendices 2

Page 91: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

81

Appendices 2:

Transcript Observation I

Date of observation : May 13, 2016

English teacher name : Teacher A

Time of observation : 07.15 WIB

Class : X2

Students dialogue text.

Student A : Hey, what‟s up?

Student B : Nothing really.

Student A : I‟m throwing a party on Friday.

Student B : I did I . . .

Teacher : I didn‟t

Student B : I didn‟t realize /rilij/ that.

Teacher : Realize /ri:ǝlaiz/.

Student B : I didn‟t realize /ri:ǝlaiz/ that.

Student A : You did not?

Student B : Nobody has told me anything about your party.

Student A : Did you want to go?

Student B : When does it start?

Student A : At 8:00 p.m

Student B : I will be there.

Student A : Thank you.

Page 92: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

82

Date of observation : May 13, 2016

English teacher name : Teacher A

Time of observation : 10.55 WIB

Class : X1

Students dialogue text.

Student A : Hi Rafiul. They will be a great film tonight.

Teacher : There will be

Student A : There will be a great film tonight. Would you like to go to the movie

with me?

Teacher : It‟s about . . . .?

Student A : It‟s about vampire. Would you like to go to the movie with me?

Student B : Yes, I‟d like to very much. When will you pick me up?

Student A : I‟ll pick you at 07.00. Be ready. Ok!

Student B : Alright

Page 93: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

83

Transcript Observation II

Date of observation : May 16, 2016

English teacher name : Teacher A

Time of observation : 8.31 WIB

Class : X1

Students dialogue text.

Student A : Are you doing anything tonight?

Student B : Not really. Why?

Student A : I‟m to go a movie tonight

Teacher : I‟m going to a movie tonight.

Student A : I‟m going to a movie tonight. I wonder if you want

Teacher : To come with me?

Student A : I‟m going to a movie tonight. I wonder if you want to come with me?

Student B : No, thanks. I don‟t like movie.

Student A : How about dinner? My mother is going to go to Jakarta with my

father tonight. I can‟t /ken-not/ cook.

Teacher : I can‟t /kǣnt/ cook.

Student A : I can‟t /kǣnt/ cook.

Student B : Oh, sure. Sound good.

Student A : Okay. I‟ll pick you up at your house at seven.

Student B : Okay, see you then.

Page 94: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

84

Date of observation : May 16, 2016

English teacher name : Teacher A

Time of observation : 9.35 WIB

Class : X2

Students dialogue text.

Student A : Hello

Student B : Hi, Aura. This is Tika

Student A : Hi, how are you?

Student B : Alright, thanks.

Student A : Would you like to go out tonight?

Student B : Sorry, I can‟t /kent/.

Teacher : Sorry, I can‟t /kǣnt/.

Student B : Sorry, I can‟t /keint/.

Teacher : Sorry, I can‟t /kǣnt/.

Student B : Sorry, I can‟t /keint/.

Teacher : Sorry, I can‟t /kǣnt/.

Student B : Sorry, I can‟t /kǣnt/. I have many matters to settle down.

Student A : Well, how about tomorrow night? Are you still busy?

Student B : I guess /gues/ not.

Teacher : I guess /ges/ not.

Student A : Well, would you like to go to a concert?

Student B : Sure, I‟d love to.

Student A : Ok. Thank you.

Page 95: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

85

Transcript Observation III

Date of observation : May 18, 2016

English teacher name : Teacher A

Time of observation : 11.05 WIB

Class : X1

Students dialogue text.

Student A : Hello Tika

Student B : Hello Yuni

Student A : What are you doing?

Student B : I‟m reading a novel.

Student A : Can you come to my birthday party tomorrow?

Student B : Of course, I can /kant/. Thanks for the invitation.

Teacher : I can /ken/.

Student B : Of course, I can /ken/. Thanks for the invitation.

Student A : You are welcome.

Page 96: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

86

Date of observation : May 18, 2016

English teacher name : Teacher A

Time of observation : 7.15 WIB

Class : X2

Students dialogue text.

Student A : I have a dream . . . a song to sing.

Student B : Hi, Brigit! It must be west life /lef/ song.

Teacher : West life /laif/ song.

Student B : It must be west life /laif/ song.

Student A : One hundred for you! I plan to watch west life concert tonight. Why

don‟t you join me?

Student B : Wow . . . that‟s a great idea.

Student A : Of course.

Page 97: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

87

Interview Transcription

Date of interview : July 29, 2016

Teacher‟s name : Teacher A

Pertanyaan:

Researcher : saya ingin menayakan beberapa pertanyaan mengenai feedback yang

ibu berikan di dalam kelas.

Teacher : boleh silahkan.

Researcher : apakah ibu memberikan feedback kepada siswa ketika siswa sedang

menampilkan dialogue di depan kelas?

Teacher : iya,

Researcher : feedback apakah yang ibu berikan?

Teacher : biasanya saya langsung saja memberikan feedback kepada siswa.

Researcher : bagaimana cara ibu memberikan feedback tersebut? Apakah

langsung memberikan contoh yang betul atau menayakan siswa terlebih dahulu?

Teacher : kalau saya sudah terbiasa secara langsung memberikan contoh yang

betul.

Researcher : kenapa ibu tidak menanyakan terlabih dahulu kepada siswa?

Teacher : karena saya banyak menemukan ketika tampil didepan kelas siswa

salah dalam pengucapannya, jadi saya langsung memberikan contoh yang

benarnya.

Researcher : berarti ibu memberikan feedback kepada siswa tergantung kepada

kesalahan yang siswa lakukan ketika berdialogue?

Teacher : iya, saya melihat apakah siswa memiliki kesalahan dalam

pengucapan atau grammarnya. Dan juga karena siswa yang saya ajar adalah siswa

kelas 1 jadi kalau saya menanyakan apa yang betulnya nanti akan memakan

waktu yang lama untuk mereka tampil dan mereka akan lupa apa yang akan

mereka sampaikan selanjutnya. Saya pikir setelah mereka kelas 2 atau 3 baru bisa

saya menanyakan apa yang betulnya ketika mereka memiliki kesalahan waktu

tampil didepan kelas.

Page 98: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

88

Researcher : selain alasan tadi apakah ibuk memiliki alasan tersendiri mengapa

mememberikan feedback secara langsung?

Teacher : kalau ibuk tipenya tidak mau menyulitkan siswa, untuk berbicara

bahasa asing di depan kelas saja sudah membutuhkan keberanian yang tinggi bagi

mereka. Kan ada juga tu yang tidak berani karena takut salah. Jadi ibuk sangat

menghargai sekali yang tampil di depan kelas. Selain alasan yang tadi untuk

menghemat waktu, ibuk memberikan feedback langsung itu juga untuk

mengurangi kekhawatiran atau rasa takut mereka saja.

Researcher : baiklah , terimakasih atas waktu yang telah ibu berikan.

Teacher : iya sama-sama.

Page 99: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

89

Appendices 3

Page 100: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

89

Appendices 3:

Page 101: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

90

Page 102: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

91

Page 103: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

92

Page 104: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

93

Page 105: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

94

Page 106: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

95

Page 107: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

96

Page 108: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

97

Page 109: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

98

Page 110: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

99

Page 111: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

100

Page 112: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

101

Page 113: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

102

Page 114: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

103

Page 115: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

104

Page 116: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

105

Page 117: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

106

Page 118: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

107

Appendices 4

Page 119: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

107

Appendices 4 :

Teacher asks students to make a dialogue about accepting and declining invitation

Students perform the dialogue and teacher gives the feedback

Page 120: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

108

Students perform the dialogue and teacher gives the feedback

Students perform the dialogue and teacher gives the feedback

Page 121: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

109

Page 122: TEACHERS’ ORAL CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ …

110