Öz Murat

Belorussian State University, Republic of Belarus

Error Correction

Introduction

One of the most frustrating tasks of Foreign Language teachers is correcting errors of students’ speech or written products. A great proportion of time is consumed in correcting errors, but there is often a feeling that the same errors are corrected over and over again. However, correction of these errors play an important role while teaching and learning target language since they have an important place both in acquisition of first language and learning foreign language (Leno, 1995). Learners need information about the external target forms they are aiming for, and they need to believe that essential internal language developments taking place inside them as a lot of things that we can mistakes can be seen as learning steps (Edge, 1989). Indeed, making errors are normal and inevitable part of learning process and one of the most important classroom techniques. Generally, students acquire certain forms of the target language, but they may not be able to produce these forms correctly due to various reasons such as interference from the native language. students assume that their target language and native language are similar; difference of two languages and incomplete knowledge of the target language; and complexity of target language ( Ancker,2000).

When these views are taken into count, different types of techniques and strategies such as student’s his own correction, student’s peer correction, and teacher correction. Also, there are some criteria for strategic classroom error correction such as exposure, seriousness, students’ need, and consistency.

It is not hard to understand why students have nightmare about being corrected by teacher. Because, if students are corrected every time, they inevitable make errors (Ancker, 2000). If it is repeated negatively, they feel ashamed, offended, and demotivated (Seedhouse, 1997; Duford, 1993). Therefore, most of the teachers tend not to correct students all the time. However, if they don’t correct the errors, students may think that their teachers aren’t professional in their field, and teachers aren’t interested in their performance and success in English (Ancker, 2000). On the other hand, if students save no desire to be corrected, it doesn’t go far from the waste of time. Hence, when student makes a spoken error, teacher has two choices; to address it or to ignore and continue on.” (Freiermeth. M.P, P.3). By having their errors addressed on the spot, students realize that an error has been made, and may even desire such correction. However, there is no guarantee that the learners have caught the meaning nor understood the gravity of error.

The aim of error correction is to improve learners’ accuracy and language acquisition. To help learners’ become not only increasingly accurate, but also increasingly as independent as English speakers. So teachers, who are thought to be responsible for these errors, should know the criteria and techniques for strategic classroom error correction.

What are criteria for error correction?

“Devising a reasoned and consistent plan for correcting students’ errors requires informed judgment about the nature of the errors” (Friermuth, M.R, L2 Correction, p.1)

1) Exposure: It is unfair to penalize students for errors when they lack exposure to such forms and functions. On the contrary, they should be encouraged for attempting to push the boundaries of their language abilities. Moreover, the teacher encouraging them can also serve as motivation for others to attempt new language in unfamiliar linguistic waters.

2) Students’ needs: Self confident, capable students will often profit even minor correction whereas most struggling students should probably receive correction only when they make major error (Walz, 1982). For significant improvement in those who have trouble teacher should listen to their utterances to determine the language trouble spots, considering frequency and gravity.

3) Consistency: It requires that teacher to draw attention to a point where the erroneous structure is, at the very least, recognized and then ask student to repair it. This is helpful since teachers avoid reacting emotionally to students’ errors. Besides being consistent regarding the manner in which an error is corrected, the language teacher should be consistent in the particular errors that she/ he choose to address.

What kind of error correction techniques are used in speaking classrooms?

When teachers do speaking activities, they should use error correction techniques accordingly. They deal with students’ errors by using different error correction techniques (1) Self-correction that gives chance students to correct themselves by rephrasing, cueing, expressing, and questioning (i.e. Rephrasing to give chance students answering incorrectly and without confidence to hear the question in another way; Cueing for students hesitating during an answer and making an obvious error; Expressing to provide feedback to make everything clear; Questioning for teacher not to comprehend a student’s utterance, or the pronunciation of word, and want to be model the word through questioning (Walz, 1982); (2) Peer-correction that gives chance students to practice with each other and correct his/her friend’s errors (Brutten & Sumuda, 1980; Porter, 1986); and Teacher Correction that teacher reassess students’ comprehension. Generally, students prefer not to be marked down for each minor speaking error because this practice destroys their confidence and forces them to expand so much effort on details that they lose the overall ability to use language. While correcting students’ errors teachers should be careful in their correction determining how likely correcting learners’ errors will improve their speech and how strongly the learners will sense their achievement.

Methodology

Participants

The participants of this study were the teachers and the students of the prep- classes who were, at the time of the study, attending Çukurova University ELT department in order to collect data and reach the participants whenever needed.

Instruments

In this study, during the observations, tally sheets (see Appendix A) were used. The tally sheet included different types of correction techniques and eight sub-techniques of these types. Also, they included related parts in order to measure the frequency of these techniques use. Regarding the data obtained through observation, two teachers and six students were interviewed only once to collect more information.

Data Collection

The data was collected in the first term by using observation for both teachers and students and also interview was conducted. Two EFL teachers teaching prep class speaking courses observed three times through the semester. Then the teachers were interviewed about how they feel about their own error correction techniques. Also, 6 students chosen from the observed classes were interviewed about their feelings, reactions towards their teachers’ error correction techniques. The aim of the interview and study was clearly explained to participants before the interview. In addition to these, enough time was given to them and unclear parts were clarified by researcher.

Data Analysis

The scope of the analysis covered the tally sheet used in observation and questions asked in interviews. n the tally sheet analyses how often the teachers use correction techniques were calculated. It was displayed in the form of table below.

Table 1. Tally Sheet

TYPES	TECHNIQUES	TOTAL USE	(%)
Self	Repeating	2	5.4
	Echoing	11	29.7
	Denial	-	0
	Expression	2	5.4
Peer Correction	Questioning	-	0
	Kind&Harsh Angel	-	0
	Waging War	_	0
Teacher correction	Teacher correction	22	59.4

Table1. illustrates the types of error correction and sub-techniques of each type percentage value of total use of self-correction techniques were used mostly. Peer correction techniques generally were not chosen. As the last result, the percentage value of total use of “Teacher Correction” was 59.4. Moreover, 20 errors of students were immediately corrected other 17 errors were delayed before correction.

According to the interview made with students, some points appeared. Firstly, none of the teachers want to correct every student’s errors. If there is not an important problem, they do not correct this kind of errors. Also, the teachers firstly prefer “Self Correction” of students. If the correction is not successful, they apply “Teacher Correction”. Lastly teachers do not want to interrupt students while they are speaking because of giving importance to fluency.

Table 2. Desire to be corrected always

DESIRE	NUMBER OF STUDENTS	(%) PERSENTAGES
YES	4	66.6
NO	2	33.4

This table shows the desire of students to be corrected all the time according to the results, the percentages value of “yes” responses were 66.6, “no” responses were 33.4. Those results show that most of the students want to be corrected whenever they make an error. Moreover, two of participating students do not want to be corrected immediately. They want correction after they finished speaking.

Table 3. Students’ attitudes towards error correction

ATTITUDES	NUMBER OF STUDENTS	(%)
Feel Comfortable	5	83
Feel Pleased	3	50
Find Natural	2	33.2
Shyness	2	33.2
Not Feel Complexed	2	33.2

Table 3. shows the attitudes of the students towards error correction. %83 of students pointed out that they feel comfortable when they were corrected. %50 of students feel pleased, %33.2 feel shyness and as last, %33.2 do not feel complexes., when they were corrected by the teachers. These findings show that most of the students are pleased and they feel comfortable when they are being corrected.

4. Conclusion

This study investigated which error correction techniques teachers prefer in prep class speaking classes. It also investigated the attitudes of students towards the type of the error corrections their teacher employ.

EFL teachers do not want to correct each error students make when they are speaking English. And also, they give more importance of fluency than accuracy. In contrast to this tendency of teachers, EFL students want to be corrected whenever they make error. Although teachers pointed out that they prefer “Self Correction”, they mostly use “Teacher Correction” strategy while correcting the errors of the students.

APPENDIX A

TALLY SHEET

Class:............................

Date:...........................

TYPES	TECHNIQUES	FREQUENCY	IMMEDIATE	DELAYED	NOTES
Self_Correction	Repeating
	Echoing
	Denial
	Expression
Peer-Correction	Questioning
Teacher Correction	Teacher correction

NOTES:..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

LIST OF SOURCES

1. Ancker, W. (2000). Errors and Corrective Feedback: updated theory and classroom practice.

2. Retrieved April 19, 2002, from http://exchanceges. State. gov/ forum

3. Davies, E. (1983). Error Evaluation : time importance of viewpoint. ELT Journal, 37(4), 304- 31

4. Edge, J. (N.D.). My most direct and concise response to this question must be: At those times and in those ways that you think will be of most help to your students. Retrieved April 19, 2002, from http://eltnews. Com/columns/thinktank/May.athml

5. Harmer, J. (1983). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow: Longman.

6. Johnson, K. (1988). Mistake Correction. ELT Journal, 42(2), 89-95

7. Lavezzo, M. (1993). To Be Corrected or Not To Correct? MET 2(3), 62-63

8. Lengo, N. (1995). What is an error? Retrieved April 21, 2002, from/forum

9. Mohammed, J. (2001). Classroom Techniques and Activities. Retrieved April 20, 2002, from

10. http://clinicmain.homestead. Com/techniques.html

11. Rivoluncri, M. (1998). Mistakes: 1. MET, 7(3), 57-59

12. Sanborn, R. & Nation, P. (N.D). Teaching Speaking Suggestions for the Classroom.

13. Retrieved from April 20, 2002, from http://langue.hyper.chubu.ac.jp/jalt/pub/tlt/97/jan/speaking.html