The importance and benefits of corrective feedback have been debated in many aspects in SLA field. Most of the teachers take correcting errors as their responsibility. There is no doubt that the first aim of corrective feedback is to make students aware of their mistakes so that they can correct. The way teachers carry out this progress may differ from eachother hence I dedicated this paper to find out differences or similarities in correcting feedback patterns of a native English teacher and a non-native English teacher lecturing at University of Kocaeli ELT Department. After observation , I asked them their opinions about students’ mistakes and corrective feedback so as to understand dynamics that effect the type and rate of Corrective feedback they give. LITERATURE REVIEW
Corrective feedback is called any reaction from teachers to students’ “non-nativelike use of the target language” indications.(Kim, 2004)The approaches towards corrective feedback differ.Rezaei, Mozaffari&Hatef, 2011 summarize these approaches; some schools of thought like Behaviorism considered errors as taboos in their discourse and believed that theyshould be immediately corrected by the teacher (Brown, 2007; Larsen-Freeman, 2000; Richards &Rodgers, 2001)while others claimed that error correction was not only unnecessary, but also harmful to language learning(Krashen, 1981a;1981b). With the emergence of communicative approaches, error correction underwent aradical shift (Nicholas, Lightbown, &Spada, 2001; Russell, 2009). CLT advocates created a balance betweenwhat Audiolinguists and Cognitistvists do and suggested that an error must be viewed as evidence of learners'linguistic development, not as a sin to be avoided. CLT advocates recognized the need for fluency and thisallows teachers to leave some errors uncorrected.Nevertheless, currently SLA researchers strongly believe in error correction and corrective feedback (Ellis,2006). While carrying out corrective feedback, different methods are implemented during the classroom period. Researchers have begun to focus on these different methods so as to find out which ones are more or less effective. When it comes to practice in the class the methods may differ according to the students’ language level and type of error, teachers’ attitudes towards errors and also time for feedback. Types of Corrective Feedback:(Lyster, 1997; Lyster&Ranta, 1997). 1. Explicit correction: Clearly indicating that the student's utterance was incorrect, theteacher provides the correct form. “S: Some diamonds used to decoration.
T:Please say, ‘Diamonds are used for decoration’. ‘Don’t say,used to’. You must use a passive form of the present simple tense here.“ 2. Recast: Without directly indicating that the student's utterance was incorrect, the teacher implicitly reformulates the student's error, or provides the correction. “S: Some diamonds used to decoration.
T: Some diamonds are used for decoration”
3. Clarification request: By using phrases like "Excuse me?" or "I don't understand,"the teacher indicates that the message has not been understood or that thestudent's utterance contained some kind of mistake and that a repetition or a reformulation is required. “S: Some diamonds used to decoration.
T: Excuse me? “
4.Metalinguistic clues. Withoutproviding the correct form, the teacher poses questions or provides comments or information related to the formation of the student's utterance .
“S: Some diamonds used to decoration.
T: Do diamonds use something to decorate ?
5. Elicitation:The teacher directly elicits the correct form from the student by asking questions (1), by pausing to allow the student to complete the teacher's utterance (2) or by asking students to reformulate the utterance(3). Elicitation questions differ from questions that are defined as metalinguistic clues in that...