在這個快節奏的世界中，英語被認為是最重要的技能之一。台灣人的英文能力與和世界建立全面的繫變得越來越重要。台灣的大學要求大一新生修讀英語實習課程以培養他們的聽說能力。在大多數情況下，學生擔心他們在說英語時會出現口說錯誤。研究人員提議將口語糾正性反饋 (Oral CF) 整合到教學中以解決這一難題。然而，學習的過程是複雜的，每個人都會以不同的方式從中受益，這取決於性別、種族、環境、個性和學習風格等因素。幾十年來，學習風格一直是備受關注的因素之一。然而，研究口語糾正性反饋與不同學習風格之學生的感受之間的關係之研究相對較少。因此，本研究調查了具有不同學習風格的學生對口語糾正性反饋的看法和信念。
本研究涉及來自台灣北部一所私立大學的十個英語實習課中的501位學生。為了確定影響學習風格和對口語糾正性反饋的偏好之間的關係因素，對 501為英語實習課學生進行了混合研究。而後，專門選擇了七位參與者進行定性案例研究分析，以便更詳細地探索這些結果。
   研究結果顯示，學生的學習風格和學科之間沒有顯著差異；然而，在學習風格方面，性別之間存在統計學上的顯著差異。不同學科背景的學生在應糾正的錯誤類型、口語糾正性反饋的偏好類型和總體問卷方面表現出顯著差異。在口語糾正性反饋的有效性、應糾正的錯誤類型、看法和偏好的口語糾正性反饋類型方面，性別之間存在顯著差異。進一步的分析顯示，僅有聚合型學習風格與口語糾正性反饋的偏好中的有效性之間呈現負相關。參與者普遍對口語糾正性反饋給予正面評價，例如提高他們的英語能力、提高口語流利度以及提高他們對英語的興趣。研究中更發現，喜歡顯性糾正性反饋的人認為這種糾正方式更精確和直觀，而喜歡隱性糾正性反饋的人認為這種糾正形式提供了更多的反思的機會。
  本研究的結果說明，教師可以透過創造一個支持與鼓勵學生的環境來提供有效的口語糾正性反饋。並且通過積極參與學生的學習過程並提供及時和個人化的口語糾正性反饋，從而有效地指導學生提高學習成果。

English is considered one of the essential skills in this fast-paced world. Taiwanese English proficiency has become increasingly important for making comprehensive global connections. Taiwan's university and college regulations require first-year students to take an English Lab Class to develop their listening and speaking skills. In most cases, students are concerned that they will make mistakes when speaking English. Several researchers have proposed integrating Corrective Feedback (CF) into the teaching process in order to resolve this dilemma. The learning process is complex, and each individual will benefit from it differently, depending on gender, race, environment, personality, and learning style. For decades, the learning style has been one of the factors that have attracted attention. However, more research needs to be conducted regarding the relationship between oral CF and the perception of students with different learning styles. The present study examines the perceptions and beliefs of students with different learning styles regarding oral CF.
The study involved 501 students from ten English Lab Classes at a private university in northern Taiwan. To identify factors contributing to the relationship between learning styles and CF preferences, a mixed-methods sequential explanatory study was conducted on 501 English Lab students. Following this, six individuals were explicitly selected for qualitative case study analysis in order to explore these results in more detail.
The study's results revealed no significant differences between students' learning styles and their disciplines; however, there were statistically significant differences between genders regarding learning styles. Different disciplines exhibited significant differences in terms of the types of errors to be corrected, the preferred types of oral CF, and the comprehensive questionnaire. A significant difference has been found between genders in the effectiveness of oral CF, the types of errors that should be corrected, perceptions, and the preferred oral CF types. Further analysis revealed only a negative correlation between converging learning styles and the effectiveness of oral CF preferences. The oral CF was rated positively by participants in general. Participants rated oral CF positively for its benefits, such as improving their English abilities, increasing their oral fluency, and raising their interest in English. Those who preferred explicit corrections believed that this form of correction was more precise and intuitive. In contrast, those who preferred implicit corrections believed that this form of correction provided more opportunities for reflection. By creating an environment that is supportive and encouraging, teachers can effectively provide feedback to students, and can effectively guide their students towards improved learning outcomes by actively engaging with their progress and providing oral CF on a timely and personal basis.

Table of Contents
CHAPTER ONE	1
INTRODUCTION	1
1.1 Background and Motivation	1
1.2 Statement of the Problem	2
1.3 Purpose of the Study	4
1.4 Significance of the Study	5
1.5 Conceptual Framework	6
1.6 Research Questions	7
1.7 Hypotheses	8
CHAPTER TWO	10
LITERATURE REVIEW	10
2.1 Learning Styles	10
2.1.1 Overview of Learning Styles	10
2.1.2 The Impact of Learning Styles	18
2.1.3 Empirical Studies of Learning Styles	21
2.2 Corrective Feedback	23
2.2.1 Overview of Corrective Feedback	23
2.2.2 Types of Oral Corrective Feedback	24
2.2.3 The Impact of Corrective Feedback	26
2.2.4 Issue with Corrective Feedback	26
2.2.5 The Empirical of Oral Corrective Feedback	27
CHAPTER THREE	31
METHODOLOGY	31
3.1 Participants	31
3.2 Research Design	32
3.3 Instruments	33
3.3.1 Learning Styles Inventory	33
3.3.2 Corrective Feedback Preferences Questionnaire	35
3.3.3 Factor Analysis	37
3.3.4 Reliability	40
3.3.5 Interview	42
3.4 Data Collection	42
3.5 Data Analysis	43
CHAPTER FOUR	46
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION	46
4.1 Background of the Participants	46
4.2 Analysis of the Differences Between Students' Learning Styles and Their Disciplines	49
4.3 Analysis of the Differences Between Gender Based on Students’ Learning Styles	52
4.4 Analysis of Differences Between Learning Styles Regarding Oral CF Preference	55
4.5 Analysis of Differences Between Genders Regarding Oral CF Preference	60
4.6 Analysis of Differences Between Disciplines Regarding Oral CF Preference	64
4.7 Analysis of Correlation Between Learning Styles Regarding Oral CF Preference	70
4.8 The Beliefs and Preferences of Taiwanese EFL Learners Regarding Oral CF	74
4.8.1 Oral Corrective Feedback Preference Questionnaire	74
4.8.2 Interview	84
CHAPTER FIVE	111
CONCLUSION	111
5.1 Summary of the Major Findings	111
5.2 Pedagogical Implications	113
5.3 Limitations of the Present Study	114
5.4 Suggestions for Future Studies	115
REFERENCES	116
APPENDICES	130


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 The Experiential Learning Cycle ………………………………………17
Figure 2 Scores and Types of Kolb Learning Style Inventory……………………34


LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 The Classification and Definitions of Oral CF	25
Table 2 The Definition and Example of Oral Corrective Feedback	36
Table 3 Rotated Factor Matrix	38
Table 4 Reliability Statistics	40
Table 5 Correspondence of Data Analysis Methods with Research Questions	44
Table 6 Descriptive Statistics of Learning Styles	47
Table 7 Descriptive Statistics of College	48
Table 8 Descriptive Statistics of Gender	48
Table 9 Cross Tabulation Results - College/Learning Styles	50
Table 10 Chi-Square Results - College/Learning Styles	51
Table 11 Cross Tabulation Results - Gender/Learning Styles	53
Table 12  Chi-Square Results - Gender/Learning Styles	53
Table 13 One-way ANOVA Results - Oral CF Preferences/Learning Styles Summary	56
Table 14 One-way ANOVA Results - Oral CF Preferences/Learning Styles	59
Table 15 Independent T-test Results - Oral CF Preferences/Genders	63
Table 16 One-way ANOVA Results - Oral CF Preferences/Disciplines Summary	66
Table 17 One-way ANOVA Results - Oral CF Preferences/Disciplines	68
Table 18 Pearson Coefficient Results - Oral CF Preferences/Learning Styles	72
Table 19 Results of Descriptive Analysis- Effectiveness of Oral CF	75
Table 20 Results of Descriptive Analysis - Preferred Oral CF Types	77
Table 21 Results of Descriptive Analysis - Correction Frequency	79
Table 22 Results of Descriptive Analysis - Types of Error	80
Table 23 Results of Descriptive Analysis - Perception	82
Table 24 Results of Descriptive Analysis - Correction Timing	83

Aldridge, J., & Fraser, B. (2000). A cross-cultural study of classroom learning environments in Australia and Taiwan. Learning Environments Research, 3, 101-134.
Amalia, Z. D. H., Fauziati, E., & Marmanto, S. (2019). Male and Female Students’ Preferences on the Oral Corrective Feedback in English as Foreign Language (EFL) Speaking Classroom. Humaniora, 10(1), 25-33.
Ananda, D. R., Yamin, M., & Mu'in, F. (2017). Students’ preferences toward oral corrective feedback in speaking class at English department of Lambung Mangkurat university academic year 2015/2016. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7(03).
Ata, R., & Cevik, M. (2019). Exploring relationships between Kolb’s learning styles and mobile learning readiness of pre-service teachers: A mixed study. Education and Information Technologies, 24(2), 1351-1377.
Aydin, B. (2016). Examination of the Relationship between Eighth Grade Students' Learning Styles and Attitudes towards Mathematics. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(2), 124-130.
Basturkmen, H., Loewen, S., & Ellis, R. (2004). Teachers’ stated beliefs about incidental focus on form and their classroom practices. Applied Linguistics, 25(2), 243–272.
Biabani, M., & Izadpanah, S. (2019). The Study of Relationship between Kolb's Learning Styles, Gender and Learning American Slang by Iranian EFL Students. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2), 517-538.
Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of second language writing, 17(2), 102-118.
Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. Routledge.
Bohlke, D. (2014). Fluency-oriented second language teaching. In M. Celce-Murcia, Brinton, D. & Snow, M. (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language, fourth edition (pp. 121–135). Boston, MA.: Heinle Cengage.
Boyle, E. A., Duffy, T., & Dunleavy, K. (2003). Learning styles and academic outcome: The validity and utility of Vermunt's Inventory of Learning Styles in a British higher education setting. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(2), 267-290.
Bozkurt, O., & Aydog˘du, M. (2009). A Comparative analysis of the effect of Dunn and Dunn learning styles model and traditional teaching method on 6th grade students’ achievement levels and attitudes in science education lesson. Elementary Education Online, 8(3), 741–754.1080/10494820.2019.1588745
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (5th Ed.). New York: Longman
Brown, H. D. (2014). Principles of language learning and teaching. (6th ed.). New York: Pearson Longman.
Cassidy, S.  (2004). Learning Styles: An overview of theories, models, and measures, Educational Psychology, 24(4), 419-444, DOI: 10.1080/0144341042000228834
Caple, J., & Martin, P. (1994). Reflections of Two Pragmatists. Industrial and Commercial Training, 26(1), 16–20. doi:10.1108/00197859410051235
Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Chen, Y. C. (2015). Linking learning styles and learning on mobile Facebook. International review of research in open and distributed learning, 16(2), 94-114.
Cockerton, T., Naz, R., & Sheppard, S. (2002). Factorial validity and internal reliability of Honey and Mumford's Learning Styles Questionnaire. Psychological reports, 91(2), 503-519.
Curry, L. (1983, April). An organization of learning styles theory and constructs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED 235 185).
Darabad, A. M. (2013). Oral accuracy, field dependent/independent cognitive styles and corrective feedback. International Journal of English Language Education, 1(1), 204-221.
De Houwer, J., Barnes-Holmes, D. & Moors, A. (2013). What is learning? On the nature and merits of a functional definition of learning. Psychon Bull Rev 20, 631–642. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0386-3
Dewaele, J. M. (2009). Individual differences in second language acquisition. The new handbook of second language acquisition, 2, 623-646.
Dilek, F. (2015). Learners preferences of oral corrective feedback: An example of Turkish as a foreign language learners. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(9), 1311-1317.
Dockterman, D. (2018). Insights from 200+ years of personalized learning. npj Science Learn 3, 15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-018-0033-x
Dörnyei, Z. (2006). Individual differences in second language acquisition. AILA review, 19(1), 42-68.
Duff, A., & Duffy, T. (2002). Psychometric properties of honey & Mumford's learning styles questionnaire (LSQ). Personality and individual differences, 33(1), 147-163.
Dunn, R. & Dunn, K. (1979). Using learning styles data to develop student prescriptions. In J.W. Keefe, (Ed.) Student learning styles diagnosing and prescribing programs (Chapter 12, pp. 109-122). Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals. 
Dunn, R. (1990). Understanding The Dunn and Dunn Learning Styles Model and The Need for Individual Diagnosis and Prescription. Journal of Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities International, 6(3), 223–247. doi:10.1080/0748763900060303
Dunn, R., Griggs, S. A., Olson, J., Beasley, M., & Gorman, B. S. (1995). A Meta-Analytic Validation of the Dunn and Dunn Model of Learning-Style Preferences. The Journal of Educational Research, 88(6), 353–362. doi:10.1080/00220671.1995.9941181
Ellis, R. (1989). Classroom learning styles and their effect on second language acquisition: A study of two learners. System, 17(2), 249-262.
Ellis, R. (2005). The study of second language acquisition. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Education Press.
Ellis, R. (2006). Researching the effects of form-focussed instruction on L2 acquisition. AILA Review 19,18–41.
Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective Feedback and Teacher Development. L2 Journal, 1(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.5070/l2.v1i1.9054 Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2504d6w3
Ellis, R. & Sheen, Y. (2011). Corrective feedback in language teaching, in Hinkel, E. (ed), Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning Volume 2, pp. 593-610. New York: Routledge.
Ellis, R. (2017). Oral corrective feedback in L2 classrooms: What we know so far. In Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning (pp. 3-18). Routledge.
Felder, R. M., & Silverman, L. K. (1988). Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering Education, 78(7), 674-68 1. Preceded by a preface in 2002: http://www.ncsu.edu/felderpublic/ PapersILS- 1988.pdf
Felder, R. M. (1993). Reaching the second tier: learning and teaching styles in college science education. College Science Teaching, 23(5), 286–290. Retrieved from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/Secondtier.html
Felder, R. M., & Spurlin, J. (2005). Applications, reliability and validity of the index of learning styles. International Journal of Engineering Education, 21(1), 103-112.
Ferris, D. R., Liu, H., Sinha, A., & Senna, M. (2013). Written corrective feedback for individual L2 writers. Journal of second language writing, 22(3), 307-329.
Fleming, N. D., & Mills, C. (1992). Not another inventory, rather a catalyst for reflection. To Improve The Academy, 11(1), 137-155.
Fleming, N. D. (1995). I'm different; not dumb. Modes of presentation (VARK) in the tertiary classroom. In A. Zelmer (Ed.), Research and Development in Higher Education, Proceedings of the 1995 Annual Conference of the Higher Education and Research Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA) (Vol. 18, pp. 308- 313). http://www.vark-learn.com/wpcontent/uploads/2014/08/different_not_dumb.pdf
Fukuda, Y. (2004). Treatment of spoken errors in Japanese high school oral communication classes (Doctoral dissertation, San Francisco State University).
Geçkin, V. (2020). Do gender differences affect foreign language anxiety and preferences for oral corrective feedback?. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 13(3), 591-608.
Ghaedi, Z., & Jam, B. (2014). Relationship between Learning Styles and Motivation for Higher Education in EFL Students. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 4(6).
Gould, T. E. & Caswell, S. V. (2006). Stylistic learning differences between undergraduate athletic training students and educators: Gregorc mind styles. Journal of Athletic Training, 41(1), 109–116.
Gregorc, A. F. (1982a). An adult? guide to style. Maynard, MA: Gabriel Systems. 
Gregorc, A. F. (1982b). Gregorc style delineator: Development, technical, and administation manual. Maynard, M4: Gabriel Systems.
Harasym, P. H., Leong, E. J., Lucier, G. E., & Lorscheider, F. L. (1995). Gregorc learning styles and achievement in anatomy and physiology. Advances in Physiology Education, 268(6), S56. doi:10.1152/advances.1995.268.6.s
Hassan, A. W., & Arslan, F. Y. (2018). A comparative study on Iraqi EFL teachers’ and learners’ preferences of corrective feedback in oral communication. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 7(3), 765-785.
Hassan, M. A., Habiba, U., Majeed, F. & Shoaib, M.(2021) Adaptive gamification in e-learning based on students’ learning styles.  Interactive Learning Environments, 29(4), 545-565
Hernández Méndez, E., & Reyes Cruz, M. D. R. (2012). Teachers' perceptions about oral corrective feedback and their practice in EFL classrooms. Profile Issues in TeachersProfessional Development, 14(2), 63-75.
Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (1992). The manual of learning styles: Revised version. Maidenhead: Peter Honey.
Hu, J., Peng, Y., Chen, X., & Yu, H. (2021). Differentiating the learning styles of college students in different disciplines in a college English blended learning setting. PLoS One, 16(5), e0251545.
Huang, Luo, Y. F., Yang, S. C., Lu, C. M., & Chen, A.-S. (2020). Influence of Students’ Learning Style, Sense of Presence, and Cognitive Load on Learning Outcomes in an Immersive Virtual Reality Learning Environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(3), 596–615. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119867422
Idkhan, A. M., & Idris, M. M. (2021). Dimensions of students learning styles at the university with the kolb learning model. International Journal of Environment, Engineering and Education, 3(2), 75-82.
Ilnicki-stone, E. (2012). How learning styles, chemistry attitudes and experiences, confidence, and demographics correlate with academic success in first and second year chemistry courses. Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters. Rertived 10 Mei, 2016 from http://dr.library.brocku.ca/bitstream/handle/10464/4256/Brock_IlnickiStone_Elizabeth_2012.pdf?
Jones, C., Reichard, C., & Mokhtari, K. (2003). ARE STUDENTS' LEARNING STYLES DISCIPLINE SPECIFIC?. Community College Journal of Research &Practice, 27(5), 363-375.
Kanadlı, S. (2016). A meta-analysis on the effect of instructional designs based on the learning styles models on academic achievement, attitude and retention. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16(6).
Khenissi, M. A., Essalmi, F., Jemni, M., Graf, S., & Chen, N. S. (2016). Relationship between learning styles and genres of games. Computers & Education, 101, 1-14.
Kivi, P.J., Hernández, R.M., Flores, J.L.E., Garay, J.P.P. & Fuster-Guillén, D. (2021). The correlation between cognitive styles and written corrective feedback preferences among Iranian and Turkish EFL learners. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 16(2), 669-685. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v16i2.5643
Klassen, A. C., Creswell, J., Plano Clark, V. L., Smith, K. C., & Meissner, H. I. (2012). Best practices in mixed methods for quality of life research. Quality of Life Research, 21(3), 377-380.
Kolb, D. A. (1976). The Learning Styles Inventory: Technical manual. Boston: McBer & Company.
Kolb, D. A. (1976). Management and the learning process. California Management Review, 18(3), 21-31.
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2013). The Kolb learning style inventory 4.0: A comprehensive guide to the theory, psychometrics, research on validity and educational applications. Retrieved from http://learningfromexperience.com/media/2016/10/2013-KOLBS-KLSI-4.0-GUIDE.pdf
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc.
Keefe, J. W. (1985). Assessment of Learning Style Variables: The NASSP Task Force Model. Theory Into Practice, 24(2), 138–144. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1476430
Kolb, A. Y. & Kolb, D. A.  (2005). The Kolb Learning Style Inventory—Version 3.1 2005 Technical Specifi cations.
Kolb, D. A., & Wolfe, D. M. (1981). Professional Education and Career Development: A Cross Sectional Study of Adaptive Competencies in Experiential Learning. Lifelong Learning and Adult Development Project. Final Report.
Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition. Second Language Learning, 3(7), 19-39.
Ku, D. T., & Chang, C. S. (2011). The effect of academic discipline and gender difference on Taiwanese college students' learning styles and strategies in web-based learning environments. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 10(3), 265-272.
Labov W. (1972). Language in the Inner City. Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press
Lee, C., Yeung, A. S., & Ip, T. (2016). Use of computer technology for English language learning: do learning styles, gender, and age matter?. Computer assisted language learning, 29(5), 1035-1051.
Lee, E. J. E. (2013). Corrective feedback preferences and learner repair among advanced ESL students. System, 41(2), 217-230.
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta‐analysis. Language learning, 60(2), 309-365.
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are learned. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Liu, M., & Shi, J. (2015). Chinese University Students’ Learning Styles: Gender and Discipline Differences. Institute for learning Styles, 1, 1-16.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37-66.
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in second language acquisition, 32(2), 265-302.
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language teaching, 46(1), 1-40.
Martin, S., & Alvarez Valdivia, I. M. (2017). Students’ feedback beliefs and anxiety in online foreign language oral tasks. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14, 1-15.
Martínez, S. G. (2006). Should we correct our students’ errors in L2 learning. Journal of Research and Innovation in the Language Classroom, 16, 1-7.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative reserach: A guide to design and implementation. Sacramento, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merritt, A. C. (2019). Learning Styles and Demographic Predictors of College Student Satisfaction in an Online Learning Environment (Order No. 13425820). Available from Education Collection; Education Database; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I. (2189113378). https://ezproxy.lib.tku.edu.tw/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.tku.edu.tw/dissertations-theses/learning-styles-demographic-predictors-college/docview/21891
Metcalfe, J. (2017). Learning from errors. Annual review of psychology, 68, 465-489.
Miao, R. (2015). Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. 360-367. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.92096-8.
Nassaji, H., & Kartchava, E. (2017). Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. doi, 10, 9781315621432.378/se-2
Navidinia, H., Mobarak, M., & Malekzadeh, F. (2019). Investigating the Effect of Noticing on EFL Students' Speaking Accuracy. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 83-98.
Nulty, D. D., & Barrett, M. A. (1996). Transitions in students' learning styles. Studies in higher education, 21(3), 333-345.
Ölmezer-Öztürk, E., & Öztürk, G. (2016). Types and Timing of Oral Corrective Feedback in EFL Classrooms: Voices from Students. Novitas-ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language), 10(2), 113-133.
Oxford, R. L. (2003). Language learning styles and strategies: Concepts and relationships. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 41(4). doi:10.1515/iral.2003.012
Pask, G. (1969). Strategy, competence and conversation as determinants of learning, Innovations in Education & Training International, 6(4), 250-267, DOI: 10.1080/1355800690060404
Pawlak, M. (Ed.). (2021). Investigating individual learner differences in second language learning. Springer.
Payaprom, S., & Payaprom, Y. (2020). Identifying learning styles of language learners: A useful step in moving towards the learner-centred approach. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 16(1), 59-72.
Rahimi, A., & Dastjerdi, H. V. (2012). Impact of immediate and delayed error correction on EFL learners’ oral production: CAF. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 45-45.
Ranta, L., & Lyster, R. (2007). A cognitive approach to improving immersion students' oral language abilities: The awareness-practice-feedback sequence (pp. 141-160). na.
Rayner, S., & Riding, R. (1997). Towards a Categorisation of Cognitive Styles and Learning Styles. Educational Psychology, 17(1-2), 5–27. doi:10.1080/0144341970170101
Riding, R., & Cheema, I. (1991). Cognitive Styles—an overview and integration. Educational Psychology, 11(3-4), 193–215. doi:10.1080/0144341910110301
Saeb, F. (2017). Students’ and Teachers’ Perceptions and Preferences for Oral Corrective Feedback: Do They Match?. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 6(4), 32-44.
Sakiroglu, H. Ü. (2020). Oral Corrective Feedback Preferences of University Students in English Communication Classes. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 6(1), 172-178.
Salehi, M., & Jafari Pazoki, S. (2020). The Impact of Gender and Task Nature on Iranian EFL Learners’ Oral Corrective Feedback Preferences. Applied Research on English Language, 9(1), 137-154.
Sauro, S. (2021). Computer-mediated corrective feedback and the development of L2 grammar. UMBC Education Department Collection.
Schachter, J. (1991). Corrective feedback in historical perspective. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin (Utrecht), 7(2), 89-102.
Scrivener, J. (2005). Learning teaching: A guidebook for English language teachers. Oxford: Macmillan Education.
Selmes, I. (1987). Improving study skills: Changing perspective in education. Hodder a. Stoughton.
Sengodan, V., & Iksan, Z. H. (2012). Students' learning styles and intrinsic motivation in learning mathematics. Asian Social Science, 8(16), 17.
Severiens, S. E., & Ten Dam, G. T. (1994). Gender differences in learning styles: A narrative review and quantitative meta-analysis. Higher education, 27(4), 487-501.
Simelane-Mnisi, S., & Mji, A. (2015). Establishing the reliability and validity of the Kolb Learning Style Inventory: A South African perspective. International Journal of Educational Sciences, 11(3), 312-319.
Smeby, J. C. (1996). Disciplinary differences in university teaching. Studies in higher education, 21(1), 69-79.
Stirling, P. (1987). Power lines. NZ Listener, 13-15.
Sudria, I. B. N., Redhana, I. W., Kirna, I., & Aini, D. (2018). Effect of Kolb's Learning Styles under Inductive Guided-Inquiry Learning on Learning Outcomes. International Journal of Instruction, 11(1), 89-102.
Sung, K. Y., & Tsai, H. M. (2014). Exploring student errors, teachers' corrective feedback, learner uptake and repair, and learners' preferences of corrective feedback. The Journal of Language Learning and Teaching, 4(1), 37-54.
Surjono, Herman. (2015). The Effects of Multimedia and Learning Style on Student Achievement in Online Electronics Course. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology. 14.
Tale, M. A. A., Alqahtani, S. M., & Salih, H. M. O. (2021). Saudi EFL College Learners’ Preferences of Teachers’ Oral Corrective Feedback Across Cognitive Styles. Journal of Arabic and Human Sciences, 15(1), 19-51.‎
Tasdemir, M. S., & Yalcin Arslan, F. (2018). Feedback preferences of EFL learners with respect to their learning styles. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1481560.
Thepsatitporn, S., & Pichitpornchai, C. (2016). Visual event-related potential studies supporting the validity of VARK learning styles' visual and read/write learners. Advances in Physiology Education, 40(2), 206-212.
Tien, C. Y. (2018). English speaking anxiety in EFL university classrooms in Taiwan. European Journal of English Language Teaching, 4(2).
Touchie, H. Y. (1986). Second language learning errors: Their types, causes, and treatment. JALT journal, 8(1), 75-80.
Toyoda, E., & Harrison, R. (2002). Categorization of text chat communication between learners and native speakers of Japanese.
Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Ha, X., Nguyen, L. T., & Hung, B. P. (2021). Oral corrective feedback in English as a foreign language classrooms: A teaching and learning perspective. Heliyon, 7(7).
Van Zwanenberg, N., Wilkinson, L. J., & Anderson, A. (2000). Felder and Silverman's Index of Learning Styles and Honey and Mumford's Learning Styles Questionnaire: how do they compare and do they predict academic performance? Educational Psychology, 20(3), 365-380.
Vermunt, J. D. (1992). Learning styles and guidance of learning processes in higher education. Amsterdam: Lisse Swets and Zeitlinger.
Vermunt, J. D. (1996). Metacognitive, cognitive and affective aspects of learning styles and strategies: A phenomenographic analysis. Higher Education, 31(1), 25-50.
Vermunt, J. D. (1998). The regulation of constructive learning processes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 149–171.
Willing, K. (1988). Learning strategies in adult migrant education. National Curriculum Resource Centre, Adelaide.
Wolfe, K., Bates, D., Manikowske, L., & Amundsen, R. (2005). Learning styles: do they differ by discipline?. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 97(4), 18.
Wong, L. L., & Nunan, D. (2011). The learning styles and strategies of effective language learners. System, 39(2), 144-163.
Yang, J. (2016). Learners' oral corrective feedback preferences in relation to their cultural background, proficiency level and types of error. System, 61, 75-86.
Zhang, L. J., &Rahimi, M. (2014). EFL learners' anxiety level and their beliefs about corrective feedback in oral communication classes. System, 42, 429-439.
Zhao, Y., & Ellis, R. (2022). The relative effects of implicit and explicit corrective feedback on the acquisition of 3rd person-s by Chinese university students: A classroom-based study. Language Teaching Research, 26(3), 361-381.
江盈慧（2010）。從學習風格探析高齡者資訊通訊科技的使用。國立中山大學教育研究所碩士論文，高雄市。 取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/t33h57
黃品勻（2021）。引導與反思在戶外冒險教育活動中對不同學習風格的大學生復原力之影響。南臺科技大學休閒事業管理系碩士論文，台南市。 取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/e45w53
錢盈君（2016）。以個案研究探討高中英語教師對口語修正回饋教學信念與實務及學生感受。國立交通大學英語教學研究所碩士論文。 取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/9ppxn5