Iva Dian Nadifa


As far as making errors is unavoidable in speaking class, oral corrective feedback (OCF) plays a crucial role to solve that problem. For the past two decades, OCF has become the debatable issue among researchers. This present study was conducted in one of the English courses in East Java, Indonesia. The participants were one native teacher and one non-native teacher teaching two different classes alternately.  The speaking class was for elementary school students. This qualitative study has several aims; 1) to investigate the distribution of OCF types that providing by the teachers in the speaking class, 2) to know whether or not there is an ignorance of the errors by the teachers and the reason behind it, 3) the types of OCF that often used by the teachers. The data was collected through video recording, stimulated recall and semi-structured interview. The results evinced that the teachers provided all the types of OCF to the students with different portions of usage. Recast became the type of OCF that is commonly used by teachers. Furthermore, the teachers corrected almost of the student’s errors. Unfortunately, there several ones that ignored by them. The ignorance of the student’s error due to some reasons such as tiredness and lack of knowledge. Nevertheless, the most prominent reasons were they did not want interrupt the student’s utterances in order to not create the students’ negative feelings about OCF.


Oral corrective feedback; Error correction; Speaking class; Corrective feedback

Full Text:



Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.

Fadilah, A.I., Anugerahwati, M., Prayogo, J. A. (2017). EFL students’ preferences for oral corrective feedback in speaking instruction. Jurnal Pendidikan Humaniora, 5 (2), 76-87. Retrieved from

Gamlo, N. H., (2019). EFL learners’ preferences of corrective feedback in speaking activities. World Journal of English, 9(2), 28-37.'_Preferences_of_Corrective_Feedback_in_Speaking_ActivitiesWorld Journal of English Language, 9(2), 28-37. doi:10.5430/wjel.v9n2p28

Ha, X. V., Nguyen, L. T., Hung, B. P., (2021). Oral corrective feedback in English as a foreign classroom: a teaching and learning perspective. Heliyon, 7(7) 1-8. Retrieved from

Hashemian, M., & Mostaghasi, H. (2015). Oral corrective feedback preferences in Iranian L2 learners with difference proficiency level. English Language Teaching, 2(3), 1-19. Retrieved from'_With_Different_Proficiency_Levels/citation/download

Jabbari, A. A. & Fazilatfar, A. M. (2012). The role of error types and feedback in Iranian EFL classrooms. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2(1), 135-148.

Kaivanpanah, S., Alavi, S. M., & Sepehrinia, S. (2012). Preferences for interactional feedback: differences between learners and teachers. The Language Learning Journal, 43, 1-20.

Nguyen, T.N., McFadden, A., Tangen, D., & Beutel, D. (2013) Video-stimulated recall interviews in qualitative research. In White, J (Ed.) Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE). Australian Association for Research in Education, Australia, pp. 1-10.

Öztürk, E. Ö. (2016). Beliefs and practices of Turkish EFL teachers regarding oral corrective feedback: a small-scale classroom research study. The Language Learning Journal, 12(2), 22-37. doi:

Phakiti, P. De Costa, L. Plonsky, & S. Starfield (Eds.). (2018). The palgrave handbook of applied linguistics research methodology (pp. 103-121). Palgrave.

Rahimi, M., & Zhang, L. J. (2014). The role of incidental unfocused prompts and recasts in improving EFL learners’ accuracy. Language Learning Journal, 42, 67-87. Retrieved from

Sopin, G. (2015). Perceptions and preferences of ESL students regarding the effectiveness of corrective feedback in Libyan secondary schools. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(4), 71-77. doi: 10.9790/7388-05427177

Yakışık, B. Y. (2021). EFL learners’ preferences and emotions about oral corrective feedback at secondary education in Turkey: are there gender and grade-level differences? Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 103-122. doi: /ijeltal.v6i1.889



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Fakultas Sastra 
Universitas Islam Sumatera Utara (UISU), Medan
Jl. Sisingamangaraja Teladan Medan 20217
Telp. (061) 7869911, e-mail: