Feedback in Distance Learning Programmes in Languages: Attitudes to linguistic faults and implications for the learning process

Abstract

In distance learning provision in languages, fault correction and feedback can facilitate teacher–student dialogue. This article examines teachers’ beliefs and assumptions about faults and the attitudes of both teachers and learners towards the correction process, all of which can play a key role in fostering this dialogue. Our findings are based on two surveys, one of 215 students enrolled on an intermediate Open University Spanish course and one of a sample of 18 tutors who teach on this course. The results of the two questionnaires suggest that the strategies currently in use for identifying and correcting faults may not be explicit enough. We conclude that this problem may be addressed if both tutors and students are given the tools to make the process more transparent and are encouraged to see dialogue as an essential component in the feedback mechanism.

Notes

1. From this point on we shall use the generic term “fault” to refer to unacceptable deviations from the expected norm. We prefer this term to “mistake”, “error”, and so on, because the latter have been used at different times to denote specific types of deviations.

2. Solecisms have only marginal relevance for the types of learners discussed in this article (see James, 1998, pp. 83–84). They are defined as deviations from the rules established by purists and descriptive (and prescriptive) grammar manuals. For example, many native speakers of English regularly split infinitives (“to boldly go”) even though this practice is condemned in numerous guides to English usage.

3. Note that we have rounded the exact percentages for each response up or down to convert them to whole numbers, so in some cases the overall totals for the responses to each question may add up to more than or less than 100.