B a thesis DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN TEACHERS’ AND LEARNERS’ BELIEFS ABOUT ERROR FEEDBACK IN EFL WRITING CLASSROOM

CAN THO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

B.A Thesis

DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN TEACHERS’ AND
LEARNERS’ BELIEFS ABOUT ERROR FEEDBACK
IN EFL WRITING CLASSROOM

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed

Student: Vo Thi Tuyet Hong
Student ID: 7075890
Class: NN0752A2
Course: 33

CanTho, May 2011


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
In the effort to complete this paper, I have received lots of assistance from many
teachers and friends. I would like to express my considerable thanks to all of them.
Firstly, I owe my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Ms. Tran Thi Chau Pha, for her
encouragement and enthusiastic help during the process of my thesis. She was willing
to spend her valuable time offering me good advice and providing cautious corrections
many times for the completeness of my study. Besides, she passionately helped me get
experiences in the data analysis with the SPSS program.
Secondly, I am also grateful to Mr. Van Van Luan, Ms. Tran Thi Kim Kha, and Ms.

Le Thi Phuong Nhung, who gave me convenient conditions in collecting the data for
my research. Especially, my best regard is respectfully sent to Ms. Vo Thi Kim Hong,
my former high-school teacher, for her zealous assistance in delivering questionnaires
to participants.
Also, I faithfully thank 10 EFL teachers and 96 students in class 11A1 and class 11A2
at Vo Van Kiet high school, who responded to the questionnaires and supplied me
with valuable information. Without their cooperation, my research questions would
not have been accomplished.
I would also like to express my gratitude to my friends and my roommates, Ly Thi
Anh Tuyet, Nguyen Thi Thanh Bien, Tran Thu Anh, Tran Thu Van, Truong Thi
Phuong Thao, Nguyen Thi Phuong Thuy, for their encouragements and for so
willingly helping me with facilities serving my study.
Finally, my special appreciation goes to my mother, my aunt, and my brother for their
unconditional love and support.
Vo Thi Tuyet Hong

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

i

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

ABSTRACT
Studies on teachers’ and students’ beliefs about error feedback suggested that if
learners’ beliefs are in line with teachers’ beliefs, a good EFL writing classroom
environment will be established. Such a match has a great impact on the entire
learning process, which will lead to both effective teaching and successful learning

(Diab, 2006; Halimi, 2008). The present study aims to find out the existence of
different beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom held by teachers and
students at Vo Van Kiet high school. Two parallel versions of questionnaires were
distributed to 96 EFL high-school students and 10 EFL teachers of Vo Van Kiet high
school to collect the descriptive data. The participants were given a 20-item
questionnaire to assess their beliefs about (1) committing errors and significance of
giving error feedback, (2) kind of errors to be corrected and degree of providing
correction, (3) techniques used for error feedback. The SPSS program was used to
analyze the quantitative data from the questionnaires. The results revealed that both
teachers and learners held negative beliefs about the committing errors. However,
they were in agreement with the importance of giving error feedback. More
interestingly, the findings also indicated considerable discrepancies between
teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about types of errors to be corrected, degree of
supplying correction and techniques used for error feedback. On the basis of the
research outcomes, discussions and pedagogical implications which can be applied in
EFL writing classroom in the context of Vietnam are accordingly proposed.

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

ii

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

TÓM LƯỢC
Những nghiên cứu của Diab (2006) và Halimi (2008) về quan điểm của học sinh và
giáo viên đối với việc sửa lỗi khẳng định rằng nếu quan điểm của học sinh thống nhất
với quan điểm của giáo viên thì nó sẽ tạo ta một môi trường học kỹ năng viết rất tốt.

Và sự thống nhất quan điểm này có ảnh hưởng rất lớn đến toàn bộ quá trình học. Nó
không chỉ mang lại hiệu quả trong giảng dạy mà còn đem đến sự thành công trong
việc học. Bài nghiên cứu này được thực hiện nhằm tìm ra sự khác biệt trong quan
điểm của học sinh và của giáo viên trường phổ thông Võ Văn Kiệt về vấn đề sửa lỗi
trong lớp học dạy kỹ năng viết. Có 96 học sinh và 10 giáo viên trường phổ thông Võ
Văn Kiệt tham gia trả lời bảng câu hỏi nghiên cứu. Mỗi bảng câu hỏi nêu ra 20 ý kiến
liên quan đến vấn đề sửa lỗi bài viết nhằm đánh giá quan điểm của họ về (1) việc
phạm lỗi và tầm quan trọng của việc sửa lỗi, (2) loại lỗi nào nên được sửa và mức độ
sửa lỗi ra sao, (3) cách nào nên sử dụng trong việc sửa lỗi bài viết. Số liệu thu thập
được từ các câu trả lời được phân tích bằng phần mềm SPSS. Qua phân tích, kết quả
nghiên cứu cho thấy cả giáo viên và học sinh đều có quan điểm khá tiêu cực đối với
việc phạm lỗi trong bài viết. Vì vậy, họ cho rằng việc sửa lỗi bài viết là quan trọng.
Thú vị hơn là kết quả nghiên cứu cũng cho thấy có sự không tương hợp giữa quan
điểm của giáo viên và của học sinh về loại lỗi nên được sửa, mức độ sửa lỗi và cách
để sửa lỗi bài viết. Dựa vào kết quả thu được, tác giả cũng đưa ra ý kiến thảo luận,
những đề xuất liên quan đến quá trình giảng dạy và hướng nghiên cứu mới.

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

iii

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements ...........................................................................................................i
Abstract (English version)............................................................................................... ii
Abstract (Vietnamese version) ....................................................................................... iii

Table of contents.............................................................................................................iv
List of tables....................................................................................................................vi
List of figures..................................................................................................................vi
Abbreviation ..................................................................................................................vii
Chapter 1: Introduction.................................................................................................1
1.1 Rationale.................................................................................................................1
1.2 Research aims and questions...................................................................................2
1.3 Research hypothesis................................................................................................3
1.4 Research significance..............................................................................................3
1.5 Research organization.............................................................................................3
Chapter 2: Literature Review........................................................................................5
2.1 An introduction to error ..........................................................................................5
2.1.1 Definition of error ................................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Types of error.......................................................................................................... 6
2.1.3 Significance of committing errors ......................................................................... 6
2.2 Error feedback in EFL writing classroom................................................................7
2.2.1 Definition of feedback ............................................................................................ 7
2.2.2 Error feedback ......................................................................................................... 8
2.2.3 Effect of giving error feedback .............................................................................. 9
2.2.4 Some techniques for error feedback ...................................................................... 9
2.2.4.1 Reformulation (overall correction) .............................................................9
2.2.4.2 Coding (Coded correction).......................................................................10
2.2.4.3 Underlining (Uncoded correction)............................................................10
2.3 Teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback.............................................11
2.3.1 Teachers’ beliefs ................................................................................................... 11
2.3.2 Students’ beliefs .................................................................................................... 12
2.3.3 Some studies on the discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs
about error feedback ............................................................................................. 13

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

iv

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

Chapter 3: Research Methodology..............................................................................15
3.1 Research design ....................................................................................................15
3.2 Participants ...........................................................................................................15
3.3 Instruments ...........................................................................................................15
3.4 Research procedures .............................................................................................16
Chapter 4: Results and Discussions.............................................................................18
4.1 Results of the study...............................................................................................18
4.1.1 Common teachers’ and students’ beliefs about error feedback ......................... 18
4.1.2 Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback ... 20
4.2 Discussions on the results of the study..................................................................22
4.2.1 Teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about committing errors and the significance
of giving error feedback ....................................................................................... 22
4.2.2 Teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about kinds of errors to be corrected and
degree of providing correction............................................................................. 23
4.2.3 Teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about techniques used for error feedback ....... 24
Chapter 5: Implications, Limitations, Recommendations and Conclusion ...............26
5.1 Implications for classroom teaching in the context of Vietnam .............................26
5.2 Limitations and recommendations for further research..........................................27
5.3 Conclusion............................................................................................................28
References................................................................................................................... viii
Appendices....................................................................................................................xii
Appendix 1........................................................................................................... xiii

Appendix 2...........................................................................................................xvii
Appendix 3............................................................................................................xxi
Appendix 4 ..........................................................................................................xxv

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

v

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1:

Clusters of questionnaire items....................................................................16

Table 2:

Common beliefs of students and teachers about error feedback....................18

Table 3:

Different beliefs of students and teachers about error feedback....................20

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1:

Percentage of teachers’ and students’ agreement with issues of error

feedback ...................................................................................................19

Figure 2:

Percentage of teachers’ and students’ agreement with issues of error
feedback ...................................................................................................21

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

vi

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

ABBREVIATION
EFL

English as a Foreign Language

ESL

English as a Second Language

SPSS

Statistical Package for Social Sciences

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

vii

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
This chapter will address the following five sections: (1) the rationale of the research, (2) the
research aim and questions, (3) the research hypothesis, (4) the significance of the research,
and (5) the thesis organization.

1.1 Rationale
In EFL writing, it is essential for teachers to give feedback on their students’ written
work. This is because writing is a complex, recursive and creative process (Siva, 1990
cited in Spear, 2006). Also, students often commit errors in their paper. Thus, the most
important thing teachers do for students in teaching writing is responding to their
written work so that the students can realize their errors and get progress in the writing
(Vengadasamy, 2002). Error feedback, therefore, becomes one of the key issues in
English writing course (Liu, 2008).
Specifically, the topic of error correction in language classroom tends to spark the
controversy between teachers and researchers (Naeini, 2008). In the field of EFL
teaching and learning, a great deal of research has been conducted to examine the
effectiveness of corrective feedback for writing (Binglan & Jia, 2010; Grami, 2005;
Sheppard, 1992; Truscott, 2007). The findings from these studies reflect two
contentious viewpoints on error feedback. Some researchers consider error correction
as harmful, time consuming and ineffective (Sheppard, 1992; Truscott, 2007). Others
defend the use of error feedback and believe that correcting students’ written errors

would help them improve the quality and accuracy of their writing (Binglan & Jia,
2010; Grami, 2005). In spite of considerable controversies about the effect of error
feedback, two factors remain clear. First, writing teachers believe that responding to
students’ errors is a vital part of their job. Second, students are eager to receive error
feedback on their writing and believe that they benefit from it (Wang, 2010).
Significantly, an area that has called for much attention recently is how students and
teachers perceive error feedback. Kern (1995, cited in Lasagabaster & Sierra, 2005)
claims that the consistency in teachers’ and students’ beliefs is crucial for
understanding the learning process. Namely, conflicts that may augment frustration,
anxiety, lack of motivation on the part of the student, or even their giving up the
Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

1

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

learning of foreign language study can be prevented. Furthermore, if teachers and
learners have similarities in their views on error feedback, students may be helped and
motivated in their writing, which will ultimately lead to higher English proficiency in
writing (Wang, 2010). Additionally, error feedback techniques are more likely
productive.
In a particular EFL writing classroom, finding some common grounds with space for
both teachers’ and students’ beliefs about error feedback is necessary. The reason is
that differences between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs may provoke a discrepancy
about what is useful to emphasize in language lessons, which may obviously cause
miscommunication and result in unsuccessful teaching and learning (Diab, 2006;
Halimi, 2008). These discrepancies can also hamper the effectiveness of corrective

feedback (Amrhein & Nassaji, 2010). Consequently, the aim of encouraging students
to learn from errors and to get the promotion in their next writing will not be
satisfactorily obtained by teachers. It is thus vital to continue exploring this issue in
different contexts. Studies on students’ and teachers’ preferences for error feedback
have mostly been set out in university settings (Amrhein & Nassaji, 2010; Diab, 2006;
Halimi, 2008). However, there is a lack of research conducted in high-school contexts
in general and in Vietnamese high-school settings in particular. Lee (2008) asserts that
a focus on high school setting is significant because by the time students enter college
or university, they will have been exposed to EFL writing for a substantial period of
time, long enough to develop positive attitudes towards EFL writing.
In an attempt to get a deeper understanding of the issue, this study aims to explore the
discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL
writing classroom at Vo Van Kiet high school in Vietnam. In addition, it is intended to
offer some implications for classroom teaching in the context of Vietnam.
1.2 Research aims and questions
This research aims to explore three aspects in teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about
error feedback: (1) their beliefs about committing errors and the importance of giving
error feedback, (2) their beliefs about what errors to be corrected and the degree of
providing correction, (3) their beliefs about techniques used for error feedback.
Furthermore, the study will investigate whether there are any considerable
discrepancies between their beliefs.
Specifically, the study seeks the answers for the following questions:
Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

2

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

1) What are teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about committing errors and the
importance of giving error feedback?
2) According to teachers’ and learners’ beliefs, what types of error should be
corrected and how much correction should be provided?
3) In teachers’ and learners’ beliefs, which techniques should be used for error
feedback?
4) Are there any discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs?
1.3 Research hypothesis
Based on the relevant literature review and the research questions, it is hypothesized
that there will be considerable discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs
about: (1) committing errors and the importance of giving error feedback, (2) what
errors to be corrected and how much to provide correction, (3) what techniques to be
used for error feedback.
1.4 Research significance
The findings of this research will be helpful to both high-school teachers and learners.
Through learners’ beliefs, teachers can know what learners view on committing
errors, what they want and expect to be corrected in their written work, and what
techniques the learners think are effective for error feedback. Being aware of these
beliefs will allow teachers to choose appropriate ways of correction to serve their
students’ needs. This will also result in getting learners to gain more success in their
English writing. In addition, students may be instructed to have proper attitudes
toward their errors. Thus, learners can overcome fear of making errors in writing,
which will create a friendly and relaxed atmosphere in the EFL writing classroom.
1.5 Research organization
The thesis consists of five chapters:
Chapter 1, Introduction, presents the rationale for conducting the study, the aim of
the research, the research questions and hypothesis, the research significance and the
organization of the thesis.
Chapter 2, Literature review, provides a theoretical framework for the study

including the definition of error, types of error and the importance of committing
Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

3

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

errors. Besides, the definition of feedback and error feedback, the effect of giving
error feedback and some common techniques for giving error feedback will be
discussed. Then, teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback and some studies
on discrepancies between their beliefs will be mentioned at the end of the chapter.
Chapter 3, Research Methodology, describes the methodology used in the research
involving research design, participants, instruments and the procedures for data
collection and analysis.
Chapter 4, Results and Discussions, reports and represents the findings of the
research.
Chapter 5, Implications, Limitations, Recommendations and Conclusion,
summarizes what is addressed in the study. Next, limitations and some pedagogical
implications from this research will be discussed. Finally, directions for further
research will be provided.

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

4

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890

Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter includes three parts. The first part introduces the definition of error, types of
error and the importance of committing errors. The second part discusses the definition of
feedback and error feedback, the effect of giving error feedback as well as some common
techniques for error feedback. In the third part, teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error
feedback and some studies on discrepancies between their beliefs will be mentioned.

2.1 An introduction to error
2.1.1 Definition of error
In general terms, an “error” is simply a “mistake”(Cobuild, 2004). Within the context
of teaching and learning English, errors and mistakes are terms commonly used to
refer to students’ wrong performance in the language (Catalán, 1992). However, in
Error Analysis, a distinction has been made between errors and mistakes (Maicusi,
Maicusi, & López, 2000). According to Ellis (1997, p.17 ), “Errors reflect gaps in a
learner’s knowledge, they occur because the learner does not know what is correct.
Mistakes reflect occasion lapses in performance, they occur because the learner is
unable to perform what he or she knows.” The former is what Chomsky (1965, cited
in Hashimoto, 2004) calls “competence error” and the later “performance error”.
Although Ellis (1997) suggested a distinction between an error and a mistake, he
finally concludes that ultimately a clear distinction between them may not be possible.
Corder (1967) also supports that how to determine what is a learner’s mistake and
what is a learner’s error is extremely difficult. This issue calls for a much more
sophisticated study and deeper analysis of errors.
Considering that the purpose of the current study focuses on teachers’ and students’
beliefs about error feedback, it is not of primary importance to distinguish errors and
mistakes. Accordingly, the term “error” in this study is used to mean both

performance mistake and competence error made by learners.

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

5

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

2.1.2 Types of error
Errors can be classified into several different types. For example, on the basis of the
distinction between competence and performance, there are competence errors and
performance errors (Catalán, 1992). In terms of the cause of errors, there are
interlingual errors and intralingual errors (Dulay, Burt, & Krashen, 1982). Concerning
with comprehensibility, global and local errors are distinguished (Catalán, 1992; Ellis,
1997; Richards, Platt, & Platt, 1992). From the respect of correctness, errors are
grouped into overt and covert ones (Dulay, et al., 1982). Since the focus of the review
will be shifted to categorization which concerns more specifically with written errors,
the research just represents two criteria categorizing errors in terms of
comprehensibility and form correctness.
With regard to comprehensibility, errors are divided into global and local errors
(Catalán, 1992; Ellis, 1997; Richards, et al., 1992). A global error is an error in the use
of a major element of a sentence structure which makes a sentence or utterance
difficult or impossible to understand. In contrast, a local error refers to an error in the
use of an element of a sentence structure, which does not cause problems of
comprehension.
In terms of correctness, Coder (1967), Dulay, Burt and Krashen (1982) put errors into
groups of covert errors and overt ones. The former is defined as errors which do not

appear on the surface of the utterance but are present within the message including
errors of organization, coherence, content or idea. Very frequently, these errors are
hard to detect and may pass totally unnoticed. Overt errors, on the contrary, are clearly
observable in the surface structure of a sentence and judged as either incorrect or
inappropriate. This kind of errors is also known as surface-level errors which consist
of errors in grammar, vocabulary, and the actual mechanics of writing such as spelling
and punctuation (Greenslade & Brasdefer, 2006; Halimi, 2008).
2.1.3 Significance of committing errors
Hendricson (1978, cited in Rahimi, 2010) claims that making errors is a necessary and
natural process of language learning. Biao (2010) also states that errors are a clear
sign of learning in language acquisition process which provides a visible proof that
learning is actually taking place. Making errors is therefore regarded as a natural
phenomenon integral to the process of learning a foreign language. According to

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

6

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

Coder (1967), a learner’s errors are significant not only to teachers but also to students
themselves.
In the first place, errors show teachers their learners’ progress, explicitly how far
toward the goal the learners have progressed and consequently, what remains for them
to learn. Therefore, from the analysis of the learners’ errors, teachers can determine
whether they can move on the next item they have been working on (Zhu, 2010).
Additionally, errors indicate to teachers which part of the target language students

have most difficulty producing correctly and which types detract most from a learner’
ability to acquire language effectively (Catalán, 1992). Thus, by describing and
categorizing learners’ errors, teachers may make up a picture of linguistic features
causing their learning problems, which provides teachers the information for
designing an improved syllabus to aid students to obtain their goal in EFL writing.
Errors are also essential to the learners. Seemingly, it is a method the learners use to
test their hypotheses about the nature of the language they are learning (Coder, 1967).
As a result, through errors students can see what they are struggling to master, what
concepts they have misunderstood and what extra work they need (Coder, 1981 cited
in Zhu, 2010). Committing errors is thus a healthy problem because when errors
occur, the correction comes and with correction emerges learning. According to
Lynch (2008, p.2), “The more errors learners make, the more correction is done. The
more correction is done, the more learning takes place”.
To sum up, errors are the evidence of the learning process. Both teachers and learners
should be conscious of the significance of errors in language learning as it might help
teachers understand why and how they can interfere to assist their students (Coder,
1981 cited in Zhu, 2010). Also, the teachers should look at learners’ errors as the sign
of development and progress in their learning rather than as a sign of failure and
inability to master the new language.
2.2 Error feedback in EFL writing classroom
2.2.1 Definition of feedback
Feedback is a fundamental element of process approach to writing, so effective
learning requires feedback (Fahim, 2006). Different researchers provide diverse views
on feedback. Feedback is conceptualized as information provided by an agent
regarding aspects of one’s performance (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). According to
Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

7

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890

Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

Kavaliauskiené, Anuesiené and Kaminskiené (2009), feedback is generally a process
of sharing observations, concerns and suggestions with intention of improving both
personal and organizational performance.
However, regarding the aims of the research, feedback will strictly refer to the written
feedback by teachers as response to students’ errors in writing. The terms feedback,
correction, comment in this study will be used interchangeably and they do not
constitute any real differences.
2.2.2 Error feedback
Error feedback is the feedback teachers give on students’ errors, which could be direct
or indirect (Lee, 2004). Direct feedback is defined as overt correction of students’
errors; that is, teachers locate and correct errors for students. Contrarily, indirect
feedback refers to situations where teachers indicate that an error has been made but
do not provide a correction, thereby leaving students to diagnose and correct it
(Bitchener, Young, & Cameron, 2005).
From another perspective, error feedback is classified into two categories of form
feedback and content feedback (Grami, 2005; Ken, 2004; Magno & Amarles, 2011;
Williams, 2003). Feedback on form consists of marks used by the teacher to correct
errors on grammatical features, capitalization, punctuation, tenses and other surface
structures. Feedback on content involves teachers’ comments on the organization of
the idea in the composition.
Besides, error feedback may be selective or comprehensive (Erel & Bulut, 2007; Lee,
2004). Selective feedback is teachers’ marking only some major patterns of error in a
student paper. In contrast, comprehensive feedback means teachers’ marking all types
of errors in students’ written work.
In summary, since teachers’ responses to students’ writing are expected to help
students develop their ideas fully and present them effectively, error feedback needs to

cover all aspects of students’ written work including issues of content, organization,
style, grammar and mechanics (Magno & Amarles, 2011). A question posed for most
teachers is that whether giving error feedback is effective and necessary. The answer
will be discussed in the following part which focuses on the effect of error feedback.

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

8

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

2.2.3 Effect of giving error feedback
Through the years, there have been controversial views on the effect of error
feedback. Truscott (1996) claims that error feedback has no effect on students’ writing
and should be abandoned. Inversely, other research on the effectiveness of error
feedback concluded that students valued from getting error feedback and found it
useful in helping them improve their writing (Bitchener, et al., 2005; Chandler, 2003;
Grami, 2005; Lee, 2004). Despite the continuous debate on the effect of error
feedback, Lee (2004) claims that students want to have their errors corrected, and
teachers think that it is their responsibility to correct errors. This is the reason why
error correction continues as a beneficial way to both teachers and learners.
Regarding teachers, feedback is valuable in the way it motivates their students to
continue learning and acquire more language skills. Consequently, teachers may feel
more satisfied with their task of instructing less experienced language learners and
users.
With regard to students, error feedback enables students to progress in their language
learning. This is because the goal of feedback is to teach skills that facilitate students

to improve the proficiency in their writing (Williams, 2003). Also, students can learn
from their errors when they receive periodic and supportive feedback (Lam, 2007).
In short, giving error feedback is not only crucial to teachers but also to learners.
Therefore, teachers should know how to respond to students’ written work so that it
can encourage students’ learning. With this concern, the next part will mainly place an
emphasis on presenting some common techniques used for giving error feedback.
2.2.4 Some techniques for error feedback
When responding to students’ written work, teachers normally employ one of the
three techniques for error feedback including reformulation, coding and underlining
(Vengadasamy, 2002). These techniques were also mentioned in several studies as
common techniques which are generally practiced by most teachers of English. They
are considered as helpful tools for giving error feedback in students’ paper
(Benthuysen, 2005; Liu, 2008; Wang, 2010).
2.2.4.1 Reformulation (overall correction)
Reformulation, or overall correction, refers to the way the teacher gives error feedback
on students’ written work by locating and providing the correct versions to replace
Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

9

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

students’ errors. Generally, it is believed as one of the easiest ways to correct errors
because the correct forms are provided and students are given instant access to the
correction they need (Wang, 2010). Nevertheless, this technique seems to be timeconsuming and tedious since teachers must be overly preoccupied with marking errors
and giving the correct forms of errors in their students’ writing. It is also very
disconcerting for students to see many words crossed out, and new words added. In

addition, students would not think about the errors if the right answer was written for
them. As a result, reformulation turns writing teachers to composition slaves and
makes learners dependent on the correction by others (Maicusi, et al., 2000).
2.2.4.2 Coding (Coded correction)
Coding technique is the way teachers indicates both types and location of errors such
as T. (tense); Sp. (spelling); W.w (wrong word); and P. (punctuation) (Agosti, 2006;
Lee, 2004; Zhu, 2010). Hyland (1990, cited in Hashimoto, 2004) notes that coded
correction allows teachers to reduce negative and disheartening effects of indicating
mistakes without reducing the benefits of error treatment. The advantage of this
technique is that if students are given adequate time, it will lead them to work out for
themselves what is wrong, and to go some ways towards correcting it (Wang, 2010).
With the coded feedback, students are required to both identify the type of error and
self correct their own errors. In other words, this technique enables students to become
more autonomous in their language learning. Nonetheless, according to Agosti (2006),
one of the disadvantages of using coding technique is that there is sometimes
disagreement among teachers of what should be included. Moreover, some students
cannot come up with the correct form and will not ask for it unless they are asked to
resubmit their writing. The teachers will then need to reformulate.
2.2.4.3 Underlining (Uncoded correction)
Underlining technique is defined as an approach accompanied with no further
treatment (Benthuysen, 2005). With this technique, the teacher only shows where the
error is by underlining or circling the error. Then, students are left to resolve the
problem and correct the error (Bitchener & Knoch 2008; Halimi, 2008). This
technique appears effective for students of average and high levels of proficiency. The
reason is that it compels students to engage in guided learning and problem solving. In
other words, students must be able to recognize the category of errors and then figure
out the correct forms by themselves. Additionally, the underlining approach may take
Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

10

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

less teacher time (Chandler, 2003). The teachers do not need to provide all the correct
forms for students’ written errors as they do in reformulation. However, this technique
is sometimes confusing (Liu, 2008). Students may make wrong guesses about their
errors. Especially, this technique seems ineffective for students of low proficiency
levels who need more detailed feedback so that they can build up their knowledge of
the target language.
In brief, the three techniques are recommended as commonly used approaches for
error feedback in both ESL and EFL writing classrooms. Although each technique has
its own strong and weak points, each of them has brought to the writing classroom
different effectiveness depending on the aim of giving feedback in students’ written
work and on the proficiency level of learners.
2.3 Teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback
2.3.1 Teachers’ beliefs
Kagan (1992, cited in Vásquez & Harvey, 2010: 422) describes teacher beliefs as
the “…tacit, often unconsciously held assumptions about students, classrooms, and
the academic material to be taught”. With regard to error feedback, teachers’ beliefs
towards error and error feedback throughout the history of language teaching have
been vacillating from one position to another.
Specifically, when audio-lingualism dominated foreign language methodologies
during the 1950s and well into the 1960s, error was regarded as “sin” to be avoided
and teachers should correct all errors immediately. Since the late 1960s, however,
the trend has been changed from audio-lingualism to cognitive learning. As a result,
the pedagogical focus has been shifted from preventing errors to a different point of
view being made obvious that learners can learn from their errors (Biao, 2010).

From the outlook of error as something negative which should be avoided, the
traditional type of error feedback applied regularly was the overt correction of
surface errors in the belief that students would recognize their errors and not repeat
them. Nevertheless, Williams (2003) argued that having students merely copy
teacher correction is a passive action that does not teach students how to identify or
correct errors on their own because the vast majority of students do not record nor
study the mistakes noted in the feedback. Hence, some teachers believed that
students should be given a chance and trained to correct their own errors. In fact,
Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

11

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

self–correction will focus students’ attention on the errors and reduce reliance on the
teacher, thus encouraging student autonomy (Ancker, 2000 cited in Kavaliauskiene,
2003).
2.3.2 Students’ beliefs
Students bring to the classroom very specific assumptions about how to learn a
language and about what kinds of activities and approaches they believe to be
useful. For instance, the best way to learn a language is to mix with native speakers
of the language or it is not useful to try and remember grammar rules (Richards,
1996). Therefore, learners’ belief systems cover a wide range of issues and can
influence learners’ motivation to learn, their expectations about language learning,
their perceptions about what is easy or difficult about a language and the kinds of
strategies they favor. Assessing beliefs that language learners bring to the classroom
is important as beliefs are predispositions to action (Rokeach, 1968 cited in Tok,

2010).
In the field of error feedback, just like teachers, most students like error feedback
and prefer to be corrected every error. They believe that they can benefit from it due
to teachers’ provision of correct forms. Some research has shown that students want
error feedback and think it helps them improve their writing skills in the target
language (Agosti, 2006; Lee, 2005). Similarly, in a study on ESL students writers,
Leki (1991) found that 100 per cent of students wanted all their written errors
corrected. In support of Leki’s survey, Lee’s study (2004) revealed that teachers and
students preferred comprehensive error feedback and that students were reliant on
teachers in error correction. However, although most students placed a high
premium on accuracy in writing and wanted to have all their errors corrected by the
teacher, some students believe that indirect error feedback helps them learn more
from self-correction where they are given clues and also a more active role to play in
the feedback process (Chandler, 2003).
Obviously, both teachers and students hold different beliefs about error feedback.
These differences indeed have a vital impact on teachers and learners because as
stated in Richards (1996), teachers’ belief systems influence how they go about
teaching while learners’ belief systems affect how they conceptualize learning and
the way they interpret learning within the classroom context. For this reason, having

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

12

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

a firm understanding of students’ beliefs is substantial for the importance of teaching

and students’ learning and achievement (Wang, 2010).
2.3.3 Some studies on the discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs
about error feedback
Gardner and Miller (1999) state that while teachers’ beliefs influence the learning
environment, the learners’ beliefs are important as they have a strong effect on the
way they learn. For example, if students prefer and believe that one kind of written
error feedback is more useful, then they may be more likely to pay much attention to
the correction and use it for learning than if they do not believe in its effects (Amrhein
& Nassaji, 2010). Thus, being aware of these preferences and attitudes is significant.
Regarding to the issue of the relationship between teachers’ and students’ beliefs in
language learning, there have been several studies investigating the discrepancies
between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in writing classrooms.
Four of them are research of Diab (2006), Halimi (2008), Wang (2010), Amrhein and
Nassaji (2010). All of these mainly utilized written questionnaires and compared
students’ and teachers’ answers to the questionnaire items.
The first study is the one conducted by Diab (2006). This study examined and
compared the preferences for error correction and paper-marking techniques of EFL
university instructors with those of their students in American University of Beirut. A
four- part questionnaire based on Leki’s survey of ESL students’ preferences for Error
Correction (1991), which was adapted to include questionnaire items for both first and
final drafts was administered to participants. The analysis of teachers’ and students’
responses revealed various discrepancies between instructors’ and students’
preferences for error correction and paper-marking techniques, as well as differences
in beliefs among instructors themselves.
The second research is one carried out by Halimi (2008). The survey investigated
Indonesian teachers’ and students’ preferences for error correction by using
questionnaires based on Diab’s study (2006), which were adapted to focus on surfacelevel error correction. The researcher reported that there were diverse discrepancies
between teachers’ and students’ views regarding when to provide error correction,
attention given to teachers’ correction, preference for error correction technique, how
much correction to provide, and how a teacher should correct errors. However, both

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

13

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

students and teachers agreed that accuracy was very important and they were in
support of the use of coding technique for error correction.
The third study is the one of

Wang’s (2010) research which concentrated on

exploring the discrepancies between teacher practice and students preferences in
written error correction. A questionnaire and an interview were used to gather data
mainly from teachers and students in Chinese universities. The result indicated that
the teachers and students shared certain common ground in regarding the importance
of written error correction and the accuracy in compositions. Nonetheless, there also
existed discrepancies to their views on the techniques of error correction.
The last research is a survey conducted by Amrhein and Nassaji (2010). The research
focused on examining and comparing how ESL students and teachers perceive the
usefulness of different types, the amount of written corrective feedback, and also the
reasons they have for their preferences. Qualitative and quantitative data were
collected from 31 ESL teachers and 33 ESL students by means of written
questionnaires. The result showed that while there were some areas of agreement
between teachers and students, important discrepancies in their opinions did occur, not
only in how written corrective feedback should be provided but also why.

Apparently, there are immense differences between students’ and teachers’ beliefs on
error feedback. The discrepancies found in these studies raise the question of what
teachers and students believe in committing errors, whether students should be
corrected, what to be corrected and how to provide error feedback. These differences
could create some tension as well as challenges in error correction pedagogy. In
addition, Diab (2006) and Halimi (2008) note that discrepancies about corrective
feedback may cause miscommunication and result in unsuccessful teaching and
learning. Therefore, it is especially important to continue to explore this area of
research. Furthermore, relatively few studies have been carried out among high–
school teachers and students. From these perspectives, the present study aims at
finding out whether teachers and students in high-school hold different or similar
beliefs about error feedback. It is hoped that the information from this study will be of
pedagogic importance to EFL teachers about how they should treat their students’
written errors.

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

14

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter will present the methodology of the research including (1) the research design,
(2) the participants, (3) the research instruments, (4) the data collection procedures.

3.1 Research design

An investigation towards teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback is highly
theoretical, which is hard to conduct an experimental survey. Thus, this research is a
descriptive-survey in which quantitative data were collected through the use of
questionnaires to explore the discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs
about issues of error feedback.
3.2 Participants
The participants in this study were divided into two groups. The teacher group
involved 10 EFL teachers of Vo Van Kiet high school in Vinh Long province. They
have EFL teaching experience ranging from five to twenty years. The student group
consisted of 96 EFL students in grade 11 at Vo Van Kiet high school. They have
learnt English for six years. The approach of the sample selection for the study was
nonprobability sampling. The convenience-sampling was chosen as the main type for
the research because participants were readily available to participate in the survey. In
addition, it was easy for the researcher to contact the participants.
3.3 Instruments
Beliefs are not observable; hence, to compare teachers’ and students’ beliefs about
error feedback, parallel questionnaires were constructed with two versions (one
version for teachers and the other for students). The quantitative data were gathered
through structured questions using a five-point Likert-scale type (1 = strongly
disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = undecided, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree). Each version of
the questionnaire delivered to the participants comprised twenty-questionnaire items
translated into Vietnamese to make sure that all of them could understand and
complete the questionnaires correctly. All the questionnaire items in the questionnaire
were based on items from questionnaires used in previous studies that examined
similar research issues (Amrhein & Nassaji, 2010; Diab, 2006; Halimi, 2008), which
Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

15

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890

Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

increased the validity of the research tool. However, these questionnaire items were
adapted to get along with the literature review for the purpose of the present research.
The questionnaire included a covering letter from the researcher to get the willingness
of the participants responding accurately and conscientiously to the survey
questionnaires. Furthermore, the participants’ confidentiality and anonymity were also
guaranteed in this letter. The letter was then followed by the four parts of the
questionnaire as can be seen in Appendices 1,2,3 and 4.
The first part of the questionnaire (part A) was demographic characteristics. This part
covered the participants’ personal information such as age, class, gender for students,
and teaching experience, gender for teachers.
The next three parts were composed of 20 items related to issues of error feedback.
These items were categorized into six clusters as shown in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Clusters of questionnaire items
Part
B

Clusters
Cluster 1: Beliefs about committing errors

Statements
1, 2, 3, and 4

Cluster 2: Beliefs about significance of error
feedback

C

Cluster 3: Beliefs about form-focused errors

7, 8, 9, and 10

Cluster 4: Beliefs about content-focused errors

11, and 12

Cluster 5: Beliefs about degree of providing error
correction

D

5, and 6

Cluster 6: Beliefs about techniques used for error
feedback

13, 14, 15, and 16
17, 18, 19, and 20

The second part of the questionnaire (part B) included six questions structured as
statements, in the form of a five-point Likert scale (from “strongly disagree” to
“strongly agree”). High scores represented greater agreement with the statement. This
section of the questionnaire was based on existing questionnaire items from Diab’s
(2006), Halimi’s (2008), which inquire about the participants’ beliefs regarding the
importance of committing errors and of giving error feedback.
The third part of the questionnaire (part C) consisted of ten items adapted from
Amrhein and Nassaji’s study (2010). These items were also constructed in the form of

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

16

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890


Discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about error feedback in EFL writing classroom

a five-point Likert scale to investigate teachers’ and students’ beliefs about types of
errors to be corrected and degree of supplying the correction.
The last part (part D) with four questions adapted from Halimi (2008) focused on
teachers’ and students’ beliefs about techniques employed for error feedback.
3.4 Research procedures
Before the questionnaires were administered in the main study, a pilot survey was
conducted with 47 students in grade 11. The questionnaire had a Conbrach alpha of
.663. Therefore, this data collection instrument was quite acceptable (George &
Mallery, 2003; Nunnaly, 1978 ).
In the pilot survey, seven students returned the questionnaires with missing items
without answers in part C (Appendix 2) because of the confusing format of the pilotquestionnaire. For this reason, some changes were made for the items in part C both in
wording and formatting so that all items in the questionnaire have the same format of
answering (putting a tick). Significantly, none of the data collected in the pilot study
was utilized in the present research.
The final Vietnamese version of “learner questionnaire” was administered to 96
students, which took them approximately fifteen minutes to complete. Before
answering the questionnaire, they were told the purpose of the study, and given details
of how to respond to the questionnaire. In addition, all items in the last part of the
questionnaire were explained in Vietnamese with the examples to make students
comprehend the techniques used for error feedback in order that they could finish the

questionnaire completely.
The final Vietnamese version of “teacher questionnaire” was also delivered to 10 EFL
instructors at Vo Van Kiet high school at the same time as the “learner questionnaire”.
However, it was collected a week after the delivery thanks to the help of an EFL
teacher at Vo Van Kiet high school.
Finally, the data gained from questionnaires were subjected to SPSS program so as to
find out any discrepancies between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about (1)
committing errors and the importance of giving error feedback, (2) what errors to be
corrected and the degree of providing correction, (3) what techniques to be used for
error feedback.

Supervisor: Tran Thi Chau Pha, M.Ed.

17

Vo Thi Tuyet Hong- 7075890