SSRUIC Students' Attitude And Preference Toward Error Corrections

Matching the expectations of teachers and learners is significant for successful language learning. Moreover, teachers should discover what their learners think and feel about what and how they want to learn. Therefore, this study investigates International College, Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University students' preferences toward error corrections in order to help SSRUIC teachers match their expectations and their learners because it is important for successful language learning. This study examined the learners' attitude and preference toward error correction through 50 first year SSRUIC students both male ( 25) and female ( 25) in Bangkok, Thailand. The data were collected from a questionnaire and interviews to investigate the necessity and frequency, timing, type of errors, method of corrective feedback, and person who gives error correction in order to answer the overall research question and sub-questions. The findings indicate five suggestions regarding the overall research question. Firstly, errors should be treated, and always be treated. Secondly, treating errors after finish speaking is the most appropriate time. Thirdly, "errors that may cause problems in an understanding of listener" and "frequent spoken errors" should be treated. Fourthly, repetition and explicit feedback were the most popular types of feedback among males, whereas metalinguistic feedback was the most favoured types amongst females. Finally, teachers were the most preferred person to deliver corrective feedback for the learners. Although the results of the study are difficult to generalize to a larger population, which are Thai EFL learners because of the small sample, the findings provide useful information that may contribute to understanding of SSRUIC learners' preferences toward error corrections and it might reduce the gap between what teachers employ and what students expect when receiving corrective feedback. The reduction of this gap may be useful for the learning process and could enhance the efforts of both teachers and learners in a Thai context. (C) 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.