Treatment of classroom oral errors : a comparative study between native and non-native speaking teachers

This thesis is a qualitative study of how native and non-native speaking teachers treat classroom oral errors across three lesson types: reading, free activity and grammar in a military school in Saudi Arabia. The general purpose of this thesis is to understand error treatment from both the emic (teachers’ views) and the etic (systematic study) perspectives and to relate these two perspectives to students’ attitudes in order to achieve a holistic understanding of this phenomenon. Ten teachers, divided evenly between native and non-native speakers, teaching reading, free activity and grammar lessons were observed and their lessons recorded. Six teachers were interviewed and a Likert-type scale questionnaire was administered to sixty students. A new technique called Digital HyperLinking (DHL) was devised to analyze both classroom observation and research interview data. This technique uses a database programme – Microsoft Access – and a sound editing programme – Sound Forge. This technique lessened the problems associated with transcription: representation, validity and reliability. Each set of data is analyzed separately before a holistic analysis is presented. The findings indicate that the treatment of classroom oral errors is contingent on a host of factors including lesson type, teachers’ views about error treatment, their preferred instructional techniques, learner variables and the teaching context with its organizational culture, course objectives and requirements. Error treatment is a complex process and teachers lack conscious knowledge of the available corrective feedback moves. There are more similarities than differences between native and non-native speaking teachers. In general, teachers’ treatment of classroom oral errors in this study is compatible with the students’ preferences.