This study surveyed 435 commercial fishermen across eight coastal regions of the United States where commercial fishing takes place. The regions of the study included: Northeast Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic, Southeast Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, Great Lakes, Southern Pacific, Pacific Northwest, and Alaska. Participants were asked to complete the Commercial Fishing Worker Survey (CFWS), which is a survey instrument consisting of an approved, adapted version of the Index of Learning Styles instrument (ILS) combined with a demographic section which included questions designed to obtain data regarding the four variables of the study: age, education level, captain's license status, and method of fishing. The instrument was designed to provide data sufficient to answer the three research questions of the study. 1. What are the learning preferences of commercial fishermen? 2. Are there differences in the learning preferences of commercial fishermen across the eight geographical regions of the study? 3. Are there differences in the learning preferences of commercial fishermen based on the demographical variables? The commercial fishermen showed obvious inclinations toward specific learning preference dimensions. The fishermen indicated that they preferred the active (rather than the reflective) dimension, the sensing (rather than the intuitive) dimension, the visual (rather than the verbal) dimension, and the sequential (rather than the global) dimension. The participant's responses were similar across the eight regions. Where differences existed, they were related to the sensing/intuitive and sequential/global learning preferences dimensions. Region 8 Alaska appeared to have stronger sensing and sequential learning preferences than the other regions. Age did not appear to influence the learning preferences of the fishermen. The majority of the respondents indicated they were high school graduates. However, education did not appear to affect the learning preferences of the fishermen. Captain's license status had no influence on the learning preferences of the commercial fishermen, since the majority of the respondents did not possess a captain's license. Respondents indicated that the largest percentage of commercial fishing used net fishing methods as their primary means of fishing. For the majority of the commercial fishermen, method of fishing did not appear to influence the learning preferences of commercial fishermen. However, net and trap fishermen exhibited significant differences related to the sensing/intuitive and sequential/global learning preference dimensions and reported more preference for the sequential/global learning preference dimensions then fishermen using other methods of fishing. Implications and recommendations for further study are enumerated in the last chapter.

Lärare använder sig av olika metoder för att hjälpa studenter att utveckla de verktyg de behöver för att lära sig engelska, eller något annat ämne. En metod här är muntlig feedback, som används för att uppmuntra elever eller korrigera dem när de utför språkliga fel. Vårt mål med detta examensarbete är därför att undersöka vilka typer av muntlig feedback som kan hittas i ett klassrum där man lär sig engelska som främmande språk och vilka attityder som både lärare och studenter kan ha gentemot muntlig feedback. Tre typer av undersökningsmetoder har använts: observationer, intervjuer och enkäter. Resultatet visar på att studenter förhåller sig positivt till muntlig feedback i klassrummet, särskilt explicit corrective feedback. Däremot var denna typ av feedback minst använd i klassrummet på grund av att lärarna tror på andra typer av feedback vara mer fördelaktiga. / Teachers use different methods to help students acquire the tools needed to learn English, or any other subject for that matter. One method is oral feedback, which is used to immediately encourage students or correct them when making an error. Our aim is therefore to investigate what kind of oral feedback can be found in a EFL-classroom and what attitudes both teachers and students have towards oral feedback. Three types of research tools were used: observation, interviews and questionnaire. The results show that the students were positive to oral feedback in the classroom, especially explicit corrective feedback. On the other hand, this type of feedback was the least used one in the classroom due to the teachers’ believing that other kinds of oral feedback are more beneficial.

Research demonstrating the beneficial effects of corrective feedback (CF) for second language (L2) learning (e,g., Li, 2010) has almost invariably resulted from studies in which CF was provided immediately. Yet teachers are often encouraged to delay CF to avoid interrupting learners (Harmer, 2001). This study investigates how differences in the timing of CF on oral production affect L2 learning and learners’ reactions to CF. Theoretically, Immediate CF may facilitate L2 development by allowing learners to immediately compare their errors to accurate models (i.e., recasting, e.g., Doughty, 2001). The effectiveness of Immediate CF has also been linked to skill acquisition theory because some CF (i.e., prompting) is hypothesized to help learners proceduralize their L2 knowledge (Ranta & Lyster, 2007). This thesis introduces additional theoretical explanations to explain the effectiveness of both Immediate and Delayed CF. For example, reactivation and reconsolidation theory (Nader & Einarsson, 2010) holds that long-term mental representations are susceptible to change when they are recalled. Thus, both Immediate and Delayed CF may help learners alter their incorrect mental representations of language features if that CF reminds learners of those incorrect representations and provides them with accurate models. In a laboratory-based study, 90 intermediate-level adult ESL learners were randomly assigned to Immediate, Delayed, and No CF conditions. Learners took three pre-tests to measure their knowledge of the English passive construction: an aural grammaticality judgment test (AGJT), an oral production test (OPT), and a written error correction test (ECT). Next, they received some brief instruction on the passive. Learners then completed three communicative tasks in which the CF conditions were provided. These tasks were followed by immediate and delayed post-tests. Learners’ reactions to CF were elicited with a questionnaire. Mixed-design one-way ANOVAs revealed statistically significant improvement for all conditions over time on all measures, but no statistically significant differences between conditions. The questionnaires revealed that learners prefer Immediate CF, but that Immediate CF may constrain CF noticeability and learners’ independence, while Delayed CF may cause anxiety or embarrassment. In summary, altering the timing of CF did not differentially affect L2 development, but it did elicit different reactions from learners.