What Type of Oral Corrective Feedback do Chilean EFL Young Learners Prefer?

Main Article Content

Pablo Aedo
Claudia Millafilo


This article presents the perspectives of a Chilean group of young learners of English as a foreign language with respect to the types of corrective oral feedback when making a spoken mistake and the reasons for their preferences. By means of a qualitative exploratory study, the views of 20 students were collected through a specially adapted scale and a focus group. The data from the scales were analyzed with descriptive statistics while the focus groups were interpreted with the content analysis technique. The results suggest that students appreciate teacher’s correction and feedback when done carefully and clearly and considering students’ affective domains such as beliefs and motivation. They also show a tendency towards the strategies of recast and repetition. On the other hand, they prefer less the use of metalinguistic feedback and elicitation strategies. In addition, this experience suggests that children are capable of reflecting on their learning processes, so it is urged that children be given an active participatory role in the development of methodologies and strategies to capture the voices of the real potential beneficiaries of these.

Article Details

How to Cite
Aedo, P., & Millafilo, C. (2022). What Type of Oral Corrective Feedback do Chilean EFL Young Learners Prefer?. HOW Journal, 29(2), 81–100. https://doi.org/10.19183/how.29.2.643
Research Reports
Author Biographies

Pablo Aedo, Universidad de Concepción

Pablo Aedo holds a BA in Education and English Teaching and a MA in the innovation of teaching, learning, and assessment of English, both from Universidad de Concepción (Chile). He is currently working at Universidad de Concepción as a research assistant.

Claudia Millafilo, California Intercontinental University

She holds a B.A. in Education and English Teaching from Universidad Católica de la Santísima Concepción. She is currently working at California Intercontinental University.


Adler, K., Salanterä, S., & Zumstein-Shaha, M. (2019). Focus Group Interviews in Child, Youth, and Parent Research: An Integrative Literature Review. International Journal of Qualitative Methods.

Alderson, J. C., & Banerjee, J. (2002). Language testing and assessment (Part 2). Language Teaching, 35(2), 79–113.

Alloway, T., Gathercole, S., Willis, C., & Adams, A. (2004). A structural analysis of working memory and related cognitive skills in young children. Journal of experimental child psychology. 87. 85-106.

Aranguiz, M. F., & Quintanilla, A. (2016). Oral Corrective Feedback Strategies in EFL. A Pilot Study in Chilean Classrooms. Elia, 16, 103–132.

Arıkan, A., & Taraf, H. U., (2010). Contextualizing young learners’ English lessons with cartoons: Focus on grammar and vocabulary. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), pp.5212–5215.

Bagnoli, A., & Clark, A. (2010). Focus groups with young people: A participatory approach to research planning. Journal of Youth Studies, 13(1), 101–119.

Barahona, M. (2016). Challenges and accomplishments of ELT at primary level in Chile: Towards the aspiration of becoming a bilingual country. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24(82).

Berk, L. E. (2005). Infants, children and adolescents. 5th Edition, Allyn & Bacon Inc., Boston.

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the Black Box: Assessment for Learning in the Classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 8–21.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

Bruner, J. (1983). Child's Talk: Learning to Use Language. Norton.

Butler, Y. G. (2016). Assessing young learners. Handbook of Second Language Assessment.

Christensen, P., & Prout, A. (2002). Working with Ethical Symmetry in Social Research with Children. Childhood, 9(4), 477–497.

Cronquist, K., & Fiszbein, A. (2017).El aprendizaje del inglés en América Latina. El diálogo, liderazgo para las Américas.

Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Creating a Motivating Classroom Environment. In Cummins, J., Davison, C. (Eds.) International Handbook of English Language Teaching (pp. 719-731). Springer International Handbooks of Education (vol. 15). Springer.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: the new psychology of success. Random House.

Dweck, C. S. (2017). The journey to children's mindsets—and beyond. Child Development Perspectives, 11(2), 139–144.

Flórez, E., Pineda, J., & García, N. (2012). EFL Students’ Perceptions about a Web-Based English Reading Comprehension Course. Bogotá, Colombia.

Gallacher, L. A., & Gallagher, M. (2008). Methodological Immaturity in Childhood Research?: Thinking through ‘participatory methods’. Childhood, 15(4), 499–516.

Given, L. M. (2008). The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (Vols. 1-0). SAGE Publications, Inc.

Glas, K. (2013). Teaching English in Chile: A study of teacher perceptions of their professional identity, student motivation and pertinent learning contents. Peter Lang Edition.

Gnepp, J., Klayman, J., Williamson, I. O., & Barlas, S. (2020). The future of feedback: Motivating performance improvement through future-focused feedback. PLoS ONE 15(6): e0234444.

Gopnik, A. (2012). Scientific thinking in young children: theoretical advances, empirical research, and policy implications. Science (New York, N.Y.), 337(6102), 1623–1627.

Gutiérrez, A., Arancibia, C., Bustos, C., Mora, F., Santibáñez, X., & Flores, M. (2021). Students’ perceptions of oral corrective feedback given by teachers in communicative approach English courses from an EFL pedagogy program at a private university. Lenguas Modernas, (56), pp. 9–26. https://revistas.uchile.cl/index.php/LM/article/view/61507

Gruber, B., & Gelman, C. (2014). States of curiosity modulate hippocampus-dependent learning via the dopaminergic circuit. Neuron, 84 (2014), pp. 486-496.

Han, Z. (2002). A study of the impact on tense consistency in L2 output. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 543–572.

Hartshorne, J., Tenenbaum, J., & Pinker, S. (2018). A critical period for second language acquisition: Evidence from 2/3 million English speakers. Cognition, 177, 263–277.

Hasselgreen, A. (2005). Assessing the language of young learners. Language Testing, 22(3), 337–354.

Hernandez, E., & Reyes, R. (2012). Teachers' Perceptions about Oral Corrective Feedback and their Practice in EFL Classrooms. Profile: Issues in Teachers` Professional Development. 14. 63-75.

Inostroza, M. (2015). Examining challenges and complexities in the Chilean young learner classroom: a case of teaching English as a foreign language (PhD Thesis, University of Sheffield).

James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998). Theorising Childhood. Polity Press.

Jenkins, J. (2015). Global Englishes: A resource book for students. Routledge.

Johnstone, R. (2009). An early start: What are the key conditions for generalized success? In J. Enever, J. Moon, & U. Raman (Eds.), Young learner English language policy and implementation: international perspectives (pp. 31–42). Garnet Education Publishing.

Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (4th ed.). Sage.

Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19/1: 37–66.

Malloy, A. (2015). Seven essential considerations for assessing young learners. Modern English Teacher, 24(1), 20–23.

Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative Researching (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

McKay, P. (2006). Assessing young language learners. Cambridge University Press.

Mellor, D., & Moore, K. (2014). The Use of Likert Scales with Children. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, Volume 39, Issue 3, pp. 369–379.

MINEDUC. (2012). Bases curriculares 2012. Idioma extranjero inglés. Santiago, Chile: Ministerio de Educación, Gobierno de Chile.

Moon, J. (2005). Children learning English. Macmillan Education.

Nassaji, H. (2009). Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning, 59(2), 411–452.

Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the Asia-Pacific region. TESOL Quarterly, 37(4), 589–613.

Nunan, D. (2011). Teaching English to Young Learners (1st ed.). Anaheim University Press.

Palys, T. (2008). Purposive sampling. In L. M. Given (Ed.), The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. (Vol.2) (pp. 697-8). Sage.

Pinter, A. (2006). Teaching Young Language Learners (1st ed.). Oxford University Press.

Pinter, A. (2014). Child Participant Roles in Applied Linguistics Research. Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 168–183.

Pinter, A., & Zandian, S. (2014). ‘I don’t ever want to leave this room’: Benefits of researching ‘with’ children. ELT Journal, 68(1), 64-74.

Rodríguez-Garcés, C. (2015). Competencias comunicativas en idioma inglés: La influencia de la gestión escolar y del nivel socioeconómico en el nivel de logro educativo en L2-inglés. Perfiles educativos, 37, 74-93.

Rushton, A. (2005). Formative assessment: a key to deep learning?. Medical teacher, 27 (6), 509-513.

Sadler, R. D. (2010). Beyond feedback: developing student capability in complex appraisal. Assessment and evaluation in Higher education.

Shanker, S. (2008). In search of the pathways that lead to mentally healthy children. Journal of Developmental Processes, 3(1): 22 - 23.

Shaw, C., Brady, L. M., & Davey, C. (2011). Guidelines for research with children and young people. National Children’s Bureau.

Sheen, Y. (2006).Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner uptake.Language Teaching Research, 10, 361–392.

Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. In J. P. Mestre & B. H. Ross (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Vol. 55. The psychology of learning and motivation: Cognition in education (pp. 37–76). Elsevier Academic Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. MIT Press.

Zabihi, S. (2013). The effect of recast on Iranian EFL learners’ writing achievement. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 2(6), 28–35.