The Case for Smiling? Nonverbal Behavior and Oral Corrective Feedback

Abstract

Oral Corrective Feedback is a widely used teaching strategy that has been found to help language acquisition. The factors that contribute to its effectiveness, however, remain elusive. In this study, the role of smiling during teachers' OCF provision is investigated in intact language classrooms by modifying the analytical framework developed by Lyster and Ranta (Stud Second Lang Acquis, 19(1):37-66, 1997), which determines OCF effectiveness by the success of the learner uptake. In addition to the feedback strategies used, this study examines teacher smiling during the feedback instances, and whether they were genuine or polite smiles.

Exploration of the characteristics of teachers' multimodal behaviours in problem‐oriented teaching activities with different response levels

“…Kozic et al (2013) found no significant differences in visual communication and facial expressions between experienced and novice teachers. Ergül (2021) also found not all smiles will have a good effect on students. This finding can be explained by the semiotic perspective.…”

“…While deeply analysing the selected lectures in this study, we found that teachers' smiles were often deliberate. Ergül (2021) found that when teachers faked smile while providing feedback to a student, students were not positively influenced by the feedback.…”

“…In addition, teachers' non‐verbal behaviours in the classroom, such as eye contacts, gestures, head postures and facial expressions, were shown to positively affect learners' cognitive level and social interactions (Ergül, 2021; Liu, 2021). Hence, we included these four variables as non‐verbal behaviours.…”

“…Many studies have begun to explore how teachers use different modalities of behaviour in POT. Ergül (2021) investigated the role of smiling during verbal feedback provided by teachers in language classrooms. Wang and Loewen (2015) found that teachers use a variety of non‐verbal behaviours in their corrective feedback, including gestures, head movements, emotional displays, kinetographs and emblems.…”

Using Social Cues to Recognize Task Failures for HRI: A Review of Current Research and Future Directions

“…Types of reactions to errors can include eyebrow raises, head movements, gaze, and facial expressions. Many studies point to the fact that bystander behavioral reactions to a person's mistake are commonly observable by the person, and able to positively influence the person's performance, both intentionally and unintentionally [38,43,105,145]. Jones et al [63] goes even further and finds that the behavioral change resulting from social feedback works in a similar fashion to reinforcement learning.…”