Grammar-Focused Written Corrective Feedback in Malaysian Primary ESL Classrooms: Teacher Beliefs, Teacher Practice and Learner Beliefs
Grammar-focused written corrective feedback (GWCF) is widely used to address learners’ grammatical errors and improve accuracy. However, misalignment with learners’ beliefs can lead to disengagement and hinder progress. While much research has focused on learners’ perspectives, less attention has be...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thèse |
| Langue: | anglais anglais anglais |
| Publié: |
Universiti Malaysia Sarawak
2025
|
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | http://ir.unimas.my/id/eprint/49883/ |
| Abstract | Abstract here |
| Résumé: | Grammar-focused written corrective feedback (GWCF) is widely used to address learners’ grammatical errors and improve accuracy. However, misalignment with learners’ beliefs can lead to disengagement and hinder progress. While much research has focused on learners’ perspectives, less attention has been given to teachers, especially in primary education. This study aimed to investigate the beliefs and practice of GWCF in the Malaysian primary school context. The objectives were: (a) to compare teacher beliefs with learner beliefs of GWCF, (b) to investigate teachers’ practice of GWCF, and (c) to compare teacher and learner beliefs with teacher practice of GWCF. A mixed-method descriptive research design was employed to collect data from 30 Year 5 English language teachers and 607 learners from 33 national schools in Limbang, the capital of Limbang district in Sarawak, East Malaysia. Quantitative data was collected from questionnaires and learners’ essays, analysed using SPSS version 22 and manual counting, while qualitative data from semi-structured interviews with teachers and learners was analysed using ATLAS.ti. The findings revealed that both teachers and learners believed GWCF is crucial for improving learners’ grammar and they supported using a range of feedback approaches. Teachers and learners also agreed on the importance of using both comprehensive and selective feedback, and saw benefits in using both synchronous and asynchronous feedback. In addition, they agreed that direct feedback was preferable to indirect feedback, and shared the belief that responsibility for identifying and correcting grammatical mistakes should be a collaborative effort between teachers and learners. Similarly, both teachers and learners felt that follow-up activities should involve both parties. However, some mismatches in teachers’ and learners’ beliefs were found. Teachers viewed GWCF as more important for improving learners’ grammatical accuracy than learners did. Besides that, teachers preferred giving positive feedback, yet learners were open to receiving both positive and negative feedback. In terms of GWCF practice, teachers mainly provided comprehensive, direct, and whole-class feedback, while selective, indirect, positive, and negative feedback were less frequently given. This highlighted a gap between teachers’ GWCF practice and teachers’ and learners’ beliefs, as teachers’ feedback methods were less varied despite both groups valuing a range of approaches. Teachers did not provide as much selective feedback as they believed was important, nor did they offer the positive and negative feedback that learners preferred. The KSSR curriculum should provide clear guidelines on age-appropriate feedback and train teachers to address GWCF aspects preferred by primary school learners. |
|---|