IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jfr/wjel11/v15y2025i6p77.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Students' Preferences of Oral Corrective Feedback: Traditional vs. Online Learning

Author

Listed:
  • Eman Matar M. Alshammari
  • Thamir Issa Alomaim

Abstract

Previous studies explored teachers' perceptions regarding different types of oral corrective feedback (OCF) (see e.g. Alshammari & Wicaksono, 2022). They found some similarities and dissimilarities between instructors' views and their actual choices and practices regarding OCF, with one of the key findings being that recast was the most commonly used, mainly because teachers considered it very effective for their learners' education (Alshammari & Wicaksono, 2022). This was not in line with most previous research, which found that recast was the predominant oral correction form employed, even though it was considered the least effective. It was mainly used to keep the smoothness of interaction or to prevent the arousal of negative feelings. However, there is a lack of studies investigating learners' preferences regarding OCF. Therefore, the current research examines learners' attitudes towards various oral correction strategies, considering the possible influence of multiple variables such as the context, and specifically comparing online vs. traditional learning English language classes.

Suggested Citation

  • Eman Matar M. Alshammari & Thamir Issa Alomaim, 2025. "Students' Preferences of Oral Corrective Feedback: Traditional vs. Online Learning," World Journal of English Language, Sciedu Press, vol. 15(6), pages 1-77, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:jfr:wjel11:v:15:y:2025:i:6:p:77
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/wjel/article/download/27741/16990
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/wjel/article/view/27741
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jfr:wjel11:v:15:y:2025:i:6:p:77. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sciedu Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://wjel.sciedupress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.