MA project by [put in name]
Peer Comment by [put in name]
Project Title: [put in title here]
Error correction has been an issue of much concern for language teachers. Moreover, research findings suggest that it is an area where student and teacher beliefs considerably differ, as discussed in this project of [name deleted]. It certainly seems to be an area which needs to be more investigated because minimizing the discrepancy between teacher and student beliefs should maximize students' benefits.
[Name deleted]'s topic is interesting and meaningful not only because she chose this very important topic for all language teachers but also she focused specifically on oral error correction. This seems to be a relevant topic in her context of a language school where acquiring oral skills is the major goal. Also, the small size of classes, which can be considered to be the norm in language schools, makes it possible for oral correction to take place and function effectively for each student. This is quite unlike some of the other EFL contexts such as secondary schools and colleges where class size is rather large and oral error correction can only happen for a limited number of students.
It seems quite relevant that [name deleted] in the literature review touched on the issue of student and teacher beliefs about error correction because the discrepancy between them is known to be very large, as stated above. As she pointed out, teacher beliefs about error correction should effect their behaviors in the classroom. [Name deleted] reviewed the issue in different contexts: language trainee teachers university students and teachers both in the US and abroad. It means that she not only reviewed ESL but also EFL context, making connections with her own context.
This study follows a widely accepted qualitative research approach utilizing observational techniques from Hubbard and Power (1993) with the combination of some survey results using questionnaire and interview procedures, thus enhancing data triangulation. I think this is a very successful MA project for the following three reasons. First of all, it should be an issue of much concern among language teachers, especially at language schools where the major purpose is to improve their speaking skills in English. I am sure this project will be very beneficial to [name deleted]'s fellow language school teachers. The two other reasons relate to this point. Second, by participating in the study, the two teachers became aware of their error correction characteristics and even tried to modify them. It is wonderful that subjects in a study can actually benefit from participating in it. Third, [name deleted] claims that she herself learned a great deal about her error correction tendencies and it was very beneficial for her. I believe that the purpose of MA project is to reflect on issues relevant to one's teaching context and to consider possible implications for it. [Name deleted] project meets this purpose without doubt.
In comparison with my own MA project, my topic actually has to do with belief studies. Therefore, it was especially interesting for me to read about beliefs concerning error correction. In my project, I argued that it is important for teachers to be aware of their own beliefs as well as student beliefs because a wide gap between them might result in ineffective instruction. I, however, did not go so far as to bring the subjects to realization of their own beliefs nor did I present any concrete suggestions for implication. I was very impressed that [name deleted] accomplished that.
The only concerns I hold about her project are firstly to do with the need to make some changes based on my editing of the project, and secondly my feeling that there is a relatively limited amount of data on student beliefs. Regarding my editing comments, [name deleted] needs to make some changes to conform to the APA format in the citations and the references sections, and she needs to make some changes in sentence and syntactic organization in certain areas (see my comments in the margins). Regarding the limited amount of data on student beliefs, I wish that follow-up interview or second questionnaire had been conducted to learn about what kind of beliefs the students hold about error correction. Let me make it clear that I understand very well that this project focuses on the teacher. However, I think that a closer examination of student beliefs should help understand teacher beliefs better especially because in the interviews, the teachers talked very much about having to suit to student expectations and personalities. I believe those are part of their beliefs. It definitely seems important that student demands be taken into consideration in any teaching context because teacher and student cooperation must be a powerful tool in making effective instruction happen. If it seems even more true in the language school because of its business aspect, as [name deleted] states, it may have been interesting to compare teacher and student beliefs and even ask students how they feel about what teachers think. Moreover, if teachers and students can sit down together and compare each other's beliefs, it would be a great opportunity for both sides to reflect on the difference, to discuss it, and eventually help each other overcome the gap.
My concern is, however, only minor. [Name deleted]'s project is nevertheless a great success which I am sure many TC students will learn very much from.
I conclude this comment by suggesting a possible future research topic. Findings suggests that pronunciation is the least corrected area by teachers. This is actually another area where student and teacher views are greatly different from each other. According to previous research findings, many students seem to consider perfect pronunciation is essential while teachers do not think so at all. It may be interesting to explore what students think about not having their pronunciation corrected and what teachers' reactions are.
I really enjoyed reading this project and learned very much from it. I am thankful that I was given an opportunity to review it.
Signed: [name deleted]
TC ID Number: [if appropriate]
| FORMAT GUIDE | |
|---|---|
| Word count: 1004 | Page Count: 2.5 |
| Line spacing: 1.5 | Paper size: A4 |
| Font: Times New Roman | Font size: 12 |