Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Error correction
Student:
Date:
I -2014
1
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
TABLE OF CONTENTS
4.a.3.2 Self-correction………………………………………………Page 12
2
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
V. CONCLUSIONS ……………………………………………………………Page 23
3
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
I. Abstract
This research tries to present information about studies and reports which intent to
identify main aspects to know what error correction is about and how important it is to use
in the teaching-learning process. Also it is going to present concrete reasons to use this
technique and the different classification of error correction.
This research presents some efficient methods to perform the error correction and
how resiliency is involved. This paper also deals with the information about how to
implement the theories of oral and written correction of errors in the classroom. The project
is going to show how an error correction method can be developed and how it can use for
the learners to provide a reasonable level of competence in the students.
4
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
II. Introduction
Everything starts in 1950s in which language teaching was concerned about two
essential elements; the error prevention and error correction. The first approach interested
in error correction was the audio-lingual approach, because when the teacher detected
errors must be corrected right away, for audio-lingual method the errors are not part of the
habit formation scheme, for that reason teachers should not permit errors. As Brooks says
“like sin, error is to be avoided and its influence overcomes, but its present is to be
expected” (1960 p. 58). In other words the errors learners commit cannot be avoided,
especially when it is about a second language learning. Later, interlanguage studies provide
new opinions about the interpretation of learner’s errors that the main proponent was
Selinker in 1972. Selinker (1972) observes a learner`s interlanguage and assumes that there
is a “latent psychological structure in the brain of the teacher, which activates when he
attempts to learn a second language”.
5
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
III. Definitions
a. Error correction:
6
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
7
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
Generally the word “error” and “mistake” are considered to be synonymous, but
Penny Ur (2002) made a difference between these terms. Errors are consistent and based
on “mis-learned” generalizations. On the other hand, mistakes are occasional, inconsistent
slip. Language teachers perceive that both mistake and error done spontaneously by the
student. Again, according to Brown (2000) a mistake refers to a performance error, which
is made by language learners while producing a known structure incorrectly and comes out
a slip of tongue. He also referred to it as an “unsystematic guess”. Mistakes can be self-
corrected by native or non-native speakers but errors cannot be done so because the
mistakes do not occur from insufficiency or incompetence, whereas, errors occur for
incompetence in the language.
Corder, says about error correction, “errors result from lack of knowledge, while
mistakes are performance phenomena, such as writing it's for its” (Corder 1967, p 35).
In other words we can see the difference between an error and a mistake:
Error: It occurs when the students have not learned a specific subject of matter and
she/he produces an error. E.g: The students produce an error when he tries to says
sentences without apply the appropriate tense because he does not know it yet.
Mistake: It is when the student knows the correct way to say something but even do
they do it wrongly. E.g. the student knows third person rule but even do he does not
use the rule to write sentences.
Corder (1967) “A mistake refers to a performance error that is either a random guess or
a slip, in that it is a failure to utilize a known system correctly. An error, a noticeable
deviation from the adult grammar of a native speaker, reflects the competence of the
8
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
learner. Mistakes are what researchers have referred to as performance errors, while the
errors are a result of one’s systematic competence”
Another difference about an error and a mistake is that according to James (1998 p 79)
“An error cannot be self-corrected, while mistakes can be self-corrected if the deviation is
pointed out to the speaker”. It is essential to know that errors are produce because the
students are not aware of the error because of the lack of knowledge they have, for that
reason they cannot correct themselves, the mistakes are produced for a miss care of the
student and they can correct themselves because they have the knowledge to do it.
One part of the learning process is to make errors because it is evidently attached to
the human being way of learning. According to Lennon (1991) an error is "a linguistic form
or combination of forms which in the same context and under similar conditions of
production would, in all likelihood, not be produced by the speakers' native speakers’
counterparts". The correction may come from the student, a peer or the teacher as the paper
explains about the classification of mistakes. It is quite obvious that errors are integral parts
9
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
of language learning and error correction has a significant role in improving learners
writing accuracy.
Researchers in the field of applied linguistics usually distinguish between two types
of errors: performance errors and competence errors. Performance errors are those errors
made by learners when they are tired or hurried. Normally, this type of error is not serious
and can be overcome with little effort by the learner. Competence errors, on the other hand,
are more serious than performance errors since competence errors reflect inadequate
learning. In this connection, it is important to note that researchers (cf. Gefen 1979)
distinguish between mistakes which are slips in performance and errors which reflect
inadequate competence.
Other researchers (cf. Burt and Kiparsky 1974) distinguish between local and global
errors. “Local errors do not hinder communication and understanding the meaning of an
utterance. Global errors, on the other hand, are more serious than local errors because
global errors interfere with communication and disrupt the meaning of utterances. Local
errors involve noun and verb inflections, and the use of articles, prepositions, and
auxiliaries. Global errors, for example, involve wrong word order in a sentence; language
learning errors involve all language components: the phonological, the morphological, the
lexical, and the syntactic.” . In other words, local errors do not distort the meaning of a
sentences but global error are the opposite.
Another classification according to some terms taken from the interactive encyclopedia
are:
1.1 Slips
1.2 Errors
1.3 Mistakes
1.4 Fault
1.5 Blunder
10
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
According to many researches there are three main types of error correction which are;
teacher´s correction, self-correction and peer correction:
Tedick and Gortari research on “error correction and implications for teaching”
presents a list of factors teachers need to take into account when the teacher is going to
correct an error. They offer four general suggestions for teachers based on the classroom
experiences which are:
Consider the context. Before you plan systematic error correction practices
for your classrooms, you need to consider the context in which student
language use and errors occur. As immersion teachers are well aware,
students in the early stages of cognitive development and language
acquisition need to be encouraged to produce language that communicates
meaning; error correction techniques that require student reflection on
language structures or vocabulary are not appropriate for learners in those
11
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
early stages. The types of corrective feedback techniques that elicit student-
generated repairs are clearly more appropriate for the more cognitively
mature and L2 proficient learners.
Become aware of your current practices. Immersion teachers can benefit by
taking time to find out how they currently address student errors. Ask a
colleague or classroom aide to observe you while focusing specifically on
your feedback techniques. Or, should a colleague or aide not be available,
audio record a number of your lessons and reflect on the recording.
Practice a variety of feedback techniques. Good teachers understand that one
size does not fit all. Individual learners may well differ in terms of the
particular error correction technique most appropriate for their unique
language development needs. Choosing to learn and use a few different
types of feedback that seem to produce student-generated repairs increases
your chance of reaching more students.
Focus on the learner. It’s important to let the learner self-correct. Remember
that your students may well be more capable than you think. As teachers we
often feel an urge to rush in with the correct response before students have
had enough time to process the information. If we allow time and provide
appropriate cues for the learner to self-repair, more often than not the student
will come through. The least effective technique for correcting a student’s
incorrect language use is to simply give them the answer.
“Ordinary correction, teacher corrects student’s error using different codes and way to do
it” (Budden, 2001). It is the main way to correct student’s errors, the traditional way in
which the teacher points out.
4.a.3.2 Self-correction:
In the process of language learning, learners sometimes notice some of their errors
by themselves, through the strategy of monitoring, and they can also correct some of their
errors when other people, such as teachers or peers, give them proper cues or hints about
12
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
them. It assumes that learners are able to apply the rules they have learned in order to
correct their own errors.
According to the article “Learner self-correction in EFL written compositions” by
Taka-Yoshi Makino “It can be understood that self-correction gives students an opportunity
to correction consider and activate their linguistic competence, so that they can be active
participants in written compositions rather than passive recipients of feedback. It is clear
from the study how much students can self-correct with the help of teacher cues, and that
more detailed cues lead to a higher ratio of self-correction. This technique of error
correction has two advantages: one is that teacher cues give students a chance to reflect on
their writing and to pay more attention to the structural forms they have written; the other is
that students can activate their linguistic competence in correcting their own errors. They
also improve their linguistic creativity through self-correction. Therefore, we can reach the
conclusion that self-correction is highly effective with grammatical (especially,
morphological) errors.”
“The first port of call when correcting can be the students themselves. Students can
often correct themselves when they realize they’ve made a mistake. Sometimes the mistake
is simply a ‘slip’ and they are aware of the correct version” (Budden, 2001). Provide the
students the opportunity and time to correct themselves. “Often by just raising your
eyebrows or repeating the mistake students will know what you mean and back track to
correct the error themselves. Some teachers create all sorts of hand signals to indicate the
type of error” (Budden, 2001).
4.a.3.3 Peer-correction:
13
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
technique of correction they are comfortable with. If students are not ready for peer
feedback, then the teacher should not force it on them.”
“Peer correction often helps to create a positive class atmosphere as students realize
you are not the only source of error correction and they can learn a lot from one another.”
(Budden, 2001) Students can also correct each other the errors they produce.
Corder (1973) and Allwright (1975) suggest that the “teacher should be primarily
responsible for correcting learner´s error… it has been suggested that both self correction
and peer correction should be encouraged to complement the teacher´s role in error
correction” There are many ways correct an error those could be: teacher´s correction is the
main way to correct student’s errors, the traditional way in which the teacher points out the
mistake, self-correction provides the students the opportunity and time to correct
themselves and peer-correction in which students can also correct each other the errors they
produce.
According to the research “Error correction techniques for English teachers” says about
general issues in error correction was changing attitudes toward mistakes and correction:
Traditional attitudes
Mistakes are a revelation of students’ ignorance, laziness and lack of
commitment.
Mistakes should be highly avoided.
A good lesson should be mistake-free.
14
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
Frequency: Errors that are constantly made by an individual student or the entire class
should be given priority.
Pedagogical focus: Errors in form that students have recently learned in class should be
corrected.
15
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
Do not interrupt the students too quickly. Research has shown that if “the
teacher waited three to five seconds to intervene after asking a question
(instead of the typical one second), student responses increased
dramatically”.
Avoid confusion in giving correction: asking for ambiguous word choices,
giving inexplicit directions, using vague correction techniques that lead to
error repetition.
16
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
Make correction in a positive manner. Correct gently and with respect. This
is especially important with oral work, since it is almost always in front of
others. (Source: Error correction techniques for the FL classroom, Waltz J. )
Recast/ Paraphrasing: Model the incorrect sentence without proper substitution but
without calling attention to the correction.
e.g.: S: I go to school yesterday.
T: I WENT to school yesterday.
Question mark/ Intonation: Use a question mark, in your voice and/or in your face.
e.g.: S: I go yesterday.
T: turns face to the side a bit and frowns: go?
S: Oh. Yes. I went yesterday
Alternative: Give the students an alternative: tell them the correct answer and the
wrong answer, put a question mark into your voice and get them to choose the right
one.
e.g.: S: He go to the market everyday.
17
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
T: He go or he goes?
S: He goes.
Indirect correction (during pair work and group work): Go around from group to
group, with a notebook and pencil. Listen to the group for a while and write down
one or two discernible and BIG mistakes that they make. At the end of the class or
at the beginning of the next class write the mistakes on the board or read them out to
the class. Get the student to correct the mistakes.
The issue as to whether error feedback helps L2 student writers improve the accuracy and
overall quality of their writing is controversial.
Some researcher says that feedback on error to L2 students is discouraging and generally
fails to produce any improvements in their subsequent writing (Robb, Ross & Shortreed
1986; Kepner 1991; Sheppard 1992; Polio, Fleck & Leder 1998; Fazio 2001).
On the other hand, other researchers affirm corrective feedback was effective when
combined with classroom discussions (Master 1995). Similarly, Fathman & Whalley
(1990) stated there are “positive effects for rewriting from feedback on both grammar and
content”.
As controversy continues as to whether feedback on error helps L2 student writers to
improve the accuracy and overall quality of their writing, as English language teachers,
what is your standpoint on this matter? To what extent do you think your correction
benefits your students’ writing performance? Your ideas and opinions are essential to
making this a fruitful discussion.
18
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
Basically, there are two kinds of techniques that teachers can use to correct students’
written work: direct and indirect feedback.
Direct feedback: It is given when the teacher provides the correct form for the student
writer; if the student revises the text, s/he needs only to transcribe the correction into the
final version.
Indirect feedback: It occurs when the teacher indicates in some way that an error exists but
does not provide the correction, thus letting the writer know that there is a problem but
leaving it to the student to solve it.
Second language acquisition theorists and ESL writing specialists alike argue that indirect
feedback is preferable for most student writers because it engages them in “guided learning
and problem solving” (Lalande, 1982), leading to reflection about linguistic forms that may
foster long-term acquisition (James and Reid).
Error correction researchers who have examined the effects of these two contrasting types
of feedback have reported that indirect feedback helps students to make progress in
accuracy over time more than direct feedback does (Ferris et al., 2000; Ferris & Helt, 2000
and Lalande) or at least equally as well (Frantzen and Robb).
1. First, identify and record the error types that each learner produces frequently. Then,
student reads his written work to search out and correct all high-frequency errors.
2. Use different color inks for distinguishing more important errors from less important
ones.
19
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
3. Underlining a word and providing a verbal tip such as “use subjunctive”, crossing out
superfluous words and supplying correct form or structure.
According to Jack C. Richards and Charles Lockhart (1997) provide some strategies of
giving feedback on content and feedback on form.
20
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
Kwok, Hong Lok in his paper “correction project for an English composition class”
presents two areas that are involved.
Firstly, self-correction is useful for the student and convenient for the teacher. “A
larger number of errors are performance errors caused by the constraints of the composing
process and they can be corrected by the students themselves after the writing is completed.
Thus, allowing a period of time to pass before giving the students the marked errors can
widen the awareness of the students towards the errors. For competent learners, a hint in the
form of an underlining is often sufficient assistance. Further help with a correction symbol
is useful but only for 'easier' areas of grammar (e.g . verb agreement or spelling) . With
'difficult' areas such as choice of lexical items or prepositions, giving the students more
teaching or exposure to the language would be a better solution”. In practical terms, it
means having a system to keep track of the errors, give the students the correct form of an
error should then be used as the last resort and only used for difficult errors which resist
correction.
Secondly, the usefulness of kernel ideas can be extended. “For an essay of any
kind, it will be very helpful if a group or even just one native-speaker of the language can
write a list of kernel ideas or a model for a comparison with non-native speakers' responses
on the same topic” This will provide a way of assessing the quantity of information
produced by a non-native writer and will also make the learner aware of the linguistic and
cultural differences as revealed in the native-speaker's text.
In the late 1960s and early 1970s emphasis was shifted from contrastive analysis to
error analysis (EA). One of the major proponents of error analysis was Stephen Pit Corder.
Error analysis was established as an alternative to contrastive analysis. Both
methods explain sources of error, but in different ways. CA sees errors as results of L1
interference only. EA, on the other hand, “accepts many sources of errors such as
21
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
22
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
V. Conclusions
In the whole learning and teaching process which teachers have to deal every day, it
is important to know that it involves a variety of factors. Besides the quantity of elements
related to the process, teachers have to take into account one of the main aspects which is
error correction.
students have in order to understand their learning process. Students errors can be corrected
by themselves or using the help of the teacher or even be corrected by their partners. To
apply correct use of error correction it is important to understand the types of errors and the
It has been pointed out that teachers’ positive approach to error as to something
showing learners’ willingness to experiment and be creative with language is crucial for the
has been pointed out that it is necessary to distinguish between error and mistake due to
teachers should consider correction of errors, it is not the case with mistakes, which are
The following planning will show how to apply the way teachers have to correct
23
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
VI. References
Brooks, N. (1960). Language and language learning. (2nd Ed.). New York: Harcourt,
Brown, H Douglas 2000 Principles of language learning and teaching. New York
Longman.
Burt, m., & Kiparsky, c. 1978. Global and local mistakes, in j. Schumann & n. Stenson
Linguistics, 5, 161-170
Penguin.
24
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
22,16·24.
James (1993 ) Errors in language learning and use: Exploring error analysis. Harlow, UK:
James, c. (1998). errors in language learning and use – exploring error analysis.
Edinburgh: Harlow.
J. Harmer: the practice of English language teaching, 7th ed. London: Pearson
Longman.(2007)
Harmer, Jeremy, 1998. How to teach English. Addison Wesley Longman limited.
25
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
Larsen-Freeman, d. & Long, M.H. (1991). The linguistic environment for language
Prabhu, N. S. (1989). Three models in second language pedagogy. Journal of English and
Richards, Jack C, Lockhart, Charles 1997. Second Language Classroom, Unite Kingdom:
Cambridge University.
Taka-Yoshi Makino
Written compositions
Tedick and de Gortari • “research on error correction and implications for teaching” •
may 1998
Wieczorek, J. A. (1991). Error evaluation, interlanguage analysis, and the preterit in the
Yang, W. (may 2010). a tentative analysis of errors in language learning and use.
27
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
VII. PLANNING
28
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
29
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
30
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
31
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
32
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
33
ERROR CORRECTION
CINTHYA MARIA VILLALOBOS RODRIGUEZ
VIII. APPENDIX
34