Luận văn teachers' correction of written errors and students' uptake

Second Language Acquisition Perspectives on Error Correction in Second, Language Learning 1.3.. Besides, there are quite a lot of differences in the way of thinking, lifestyle, and liter

PHAM THI VIET DUNG

TI.XTRIE (U811NNŒ'WNITINHSIRIS

1W)SIUNNIS U'ĐWđ:

( Cách chữa lỗi viết của giáo viên và sự tiếp nhận của học sinh )

M.AMINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

METHODOLOGY

CODE: 601410

HA NOL, AUGUST 2010

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOL

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

PHAM THI VIET DUNG

TI.XTRIE (U811NNŒ'WNITINHSIRIS

1W)SIUNNIS U'ĐWđ:

( Cách chữa lỗi viết của giáo viên và sự tiếp nhận của học sinh )

M.AMINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

METHODOLOGY

CODE: 601410

SUPERVISOR: CAO THI PHUONG

HA NOI, AUGUST 2010

2 Aims of the study

3 Soopes of the study

4, Method of the study

5 Design of the study

Part 2: Content

Chapter 1: Literature Review

1.1 Eors in language learning process

1.1.1 Definition of erors

1.1.2 Errors and mistakes

1.1.3 Ercor Analysis in sccond language acquisition

1.2 Second Language Acquisition Perspectives on Error Correction in Second Language

1.2.2 Second Language Acquisition Perspectives on Error Correction in Second,

Language Learning

1.3 Written Error Correction Strategies

1.3.1 Direct corrective feedback

1.43,

Indirect corrective feedback

1.3.3 Metalinguistic corrective feedback

1.3.4, Foons of the f2edback

1.3.5 Reformulation

1.4 Effectiveness of corrective feedback strategies

1.5 Exror Correction and Learners’ Uptake

Chapter 2: The Study

2.5.1.1, Task 1: (Direct corrective feedback applied)

2.5.1.2 Task 2: (Indirect corrective feedback applied)

2.5.1.3, Task 3: Metalinguistic corrective feedback applied)

Chapter 3: hmplications and Suggestions for written error correction

CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK

ERROR ANALYSIS

ENGLISH SECOND LANGUAGE

FIRST LANGUAGE SECOND LANGUAGE

PART I: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale

English serves as a major language for international communication and people all over the world are making increasing use of English as their “second language” Writing is one of four skills in language learning process and if is seen as a language skill which is the most difficult and complex because il’s required widely perception and needs good understanding

on grammar and structures It is a task thal no Iwo poopie do the same way However, there are some logical steps that every writer seems to follow in the creation ofa paper In writing process that need grammatical and spelling understanding well to make the composition well and can be understood,

English is very complicated for Vietnamese learners, as English and Vietnamese are of two different Linguistic types Besides, there are quite a lot of differences in the way of thinking, lifestyle, and literature between the two cultures, These contrasts themselves have caused Vietnamese learners to meet some difficulties and commit errors while leaming English,

Most teachers hope their feedback will not only improve their students’ current writing, but also help their writing and language development TTow to deal with and when to give feed back to the errors are vital in teaching English as it may either result in motivation or discouragement in language learning,

There have boon a nomiber of B.A, M.A thesis making ror analysis by Vietnamese

ELT methodotogists and applied linguists, such as Nguyen Van Loi (1999), Do Mong Yen

(2002), Tran Thi Hai Binh (2005), ote, bul nenc of them tnantioned the responding of students

to their teachers’ correction It is hoped that the findings of this thesis in the area of writing and the influence of teachers’ correction as well as students’ uptake would be relevant to teachers as well as students at school

2, Aims of the study

This study investigates the cffeet of teacher conective feedback and is aimed at making an analysis of the errors made by students of English in learning writing skill Basing

on the results af the above ersor analysis, the researcher finally hopes

- giving a better awareness of pupils’ errors in written English

11

- helpmg teachers have positive attitudes towards students’ written errors

- to find out sofutions to the problems in the students’ learning process as well as the teachers’ teaching process so that students” errors in writing can be avoided

3 Scopes of the study

Due to the limited time, this research confines itself to errors in written language, which are collected trom written tasks performed by second language high school students

4, Method of the study:

This is a quantitative research using compositions as a technique of eliciting data tor the analysis and statistical counting as measurement of results

5, Design of the study:

For achieving the aims stated above, the research starts with an introduction giving an overview of what is researched, why and how it can be done, Followed are three chapters presenting, the main part of the research,

In chapter one, literature related to the study is reviewed It is divided into 3 main

sections Section 1 introduces some Errors in language learning process ‘Ihe notion of errors

is discussed in the opinions of Corder, Duskova, and Richards Section 2 summarizes Second

Langnage Acquisition Perspectives on Error Correction in Second Language Learning In

section 3, the researcher provides some Written Error Correction Strategies, which are suggested by the former Scction 4 and section 5 mention the effectiveness of corrective fecdback stralogics and how lowers uptake

Chapler two is composed of two paris: roscarch design and discussion of rasutts, In the first part, the rescarch method is clearly described with specific procedures in collecting and analyzing data The stalistical resulls arc shown up to determing the most oflfective comzative feedback among those applied in the research

1 Errors in language learning process

1.1.1, Definition of errors

According to Corder (1975:112), an error is referred to as a linguistic form which is

cither superficially devianl or inappropriale in Lerms of the large language Besides, Janes (1998: 1} provisionally detines a language exror as an unsuccesstil bit of language

In an article about some problems of definition, identification, and distinction, Lennon (1991; 181), from the university of Kassel, suggested that notwithstanding native speaker

It can be therefore, said that it is not easy to define what can be considered to be errors

in terms of linguistics, In order to limit the scope of the research and to have a clear, consistent sel of corpus as the subject of the research, the researcher wauld like to propose this working definition: The language usages which arg, to some extent, contrary to the general rules or styles in Linglish, or any deviated forms or structures that cannot account for the Linglish model of usage assumed by céucaicd users are considered crroncous, ungrarmmatically or unacceptable, thus being regarded as errors

1.1.2 Exrors and mistakes

‘A distinction is sometimes made between an error, which results ftom incomplete knowledge, and a mistake made by a learner when writing or speaking and which is caused by lack of allention, fatigue, carelessness, ot some other aspecls of performance Mistakes are of

no significance to the process of language leaning However, the problem of determining, what is a learner's mistake and what a learner’s error is one of some difficulty and involves a much more sophisticated study and analysis of exrors than is usually accorded them,

Corder (1967; 59) made a distinction between a mistake and an error Whereas a mistake is a random performance slip caused by fatigue, excitement, ete, and therefore can be

13

readily setf-corrected, an error is a systematic deviation made by learners who have not yet mastered the rules of the second language A learner cannot self-correct an error because it is a reflective product of his or her current stage of second language development or underlying competence In other words, he associales orrors with faihues in competence and mistakes with failures in performance

1.1.3 Exror Analysis im second language acquisition

Frrors are now viewed as natural and important part of learning process bscausc they can yield information about language This positive attitude towards errors is especially important in the wake of the Communicative Language Learning and Teaching Many rescarchers on errors in sccond language Icarning have been donc by several scholars like

Corder (1967), Richard (1992), and Spelunker (1992)

Error Analysis is the study and analysis of the errors made by second and foreign language learners Error Analysis may be cartied out in order to

- _ identify strategies which leamers use in language Icarning

- identify the causes of learners’ errors

+ oblain information on common difficultics in language Tearing, as an aid to teaching or in the preparation of teaching materials

Error Analysis developed as a branch of applied linguisties in the 1960s, and sct out to demonstrate that many Jeamers’ errors were not due to the learners’ mother tongue but reflected universal icarning stratogics Error Analysis was therefore offered us an alternative Lo conttastive analysis Attempts were made to develop classifications for different types of errors on the basis of the different processes that were assumed to account for them A basis distinction was drawn between intralingual and Interlingual errors

An Intralingual error is one which results Grom faulty or patlial learning of the Target language, rather than itom language transfer Intralingual error may be caused by the influence

of one target language item upon another For example, a leaner may produce He is comes, based ona blend of the English structures /7e is coming, He comes tntralingual errors can be

classificd as follows.

- overgeneralization

- developmental

- induced errors + crvors of avoidance

Vietnamese learners of English mzy produce such errors:

@) He was died last year, ( interference from mother tongue “bị”)

(**) L prefer this book than that one ( interference from mother tongue “han”)

Corder (1974) elaborated the procedure for Enor Anelysis, distinguishing five stages, as

follows:

- selection of a corpus of language

+ identification of errors in Lhe corpus

- classification of the errors identified

- explanation of the psyeholinguistic causes of the errors

+ evaluation or crror gravity ranking of the errors Choon (1993) gives some suggestions on carrying out an crtor analysis rescarch, According lo her, one has to identity the errors first, then the exxors are classified according to categories such as : semantic errors ( wrong words, wrong forms, etc.), grammatical errors ( tense, prepositions, các), global crrors and local errors, She suggested [hal “the system of classifying errors should be flexible” ( Choon, 1993:2) The last step is determining how much they deviate from the target language norm, to what extent they affect commmnication Error

An

is can help language teachers marmer the specific and common language problems students have so that he or she can know what should be focused more in a syllabus Choon (1993) advised teachers to conduct Lxror Analysis at the beginning of the course when the items have nol been fully Tearnl and remedy these first

By classifying errors that learners made, researchers could leam a great deal about the second language acquisition process by inferting the strategies that the learners were adopting For learners themselves, errors are “indispensable” since the making of errars can be regarded

as a dovive the leamors usc in ordor to learn ( Selinkor, 1992: 150),

1.2 Second Language Acquisition Perspectives om Krror Correction in Second Language Learning

The crucial point is that the teacher’s role in student writing is not the last event in the

process Feedback nmst be interactive to be genninely effective, and this requires us to find ways of coreting papers which bolh cncourage students to think about what they have done and lead them to improve on it

Corrective feedback (CH) is an area that bridges the concerns of teachers and SLA researchers Teachers are concerned with whether or not to correct learners’ errors, and when and how to do il, SLA rescarchers are concerned with whether corrective fecdback has any effect on learners’ imerlanguage development and what type of CF is most effective According to Ur (1996), corrective feedback is allocated a very different role in different methods

Audictingualisim ‘negative assessment is to be avoided as far as possible sinas it fonctions as ‘punishment’ and may inhibit or discourage learning”

Humanistic methods: ‘assessment should be positive or non-judgemental’ in order to

‘promote a positive self-image of the learner as a person and language leaner’

Skill theory: ‘the learner needs feedback on how well he or she is doing’

1.2.2, Second Language Acquisition Perspectives on Error Correction in Second Language Learning

Error correction in 1,2 writing is a sourec of great concern ta writing instructors and af controversy to researchers and composition theorists Over the past twenty years, approaches

to responding to students’ grammar problems have included “opposing extremes of obsessive attention to cvcry single student cxror and beginning neglect of linguistic accuracy” (Ferris & Hedgeock, 1998, p 198) Real-life teachars, however, have always known that students’ errors are Iroublosome, that students thomsclves arc very concerned about accuracy and that responding, effectively to students’ grammatical and lexical problems is a challenging, endeavor taught with uncertainty about its long-term fiectiveness Teachers of L2 composition who regularly provide grammar oriented feedback would doubtless report that this is one of the most time-consuming and cxhausting aspeets of their jobs, Because of the perceived importance of error correction and the amount of emphasis both teachers and students place on it, it is reasonable tơ ask whether grammatical correction is effective and appropriate at all, and if'so, what the best ways are tơ approach it

Truscott’s thesis and major points (1996: 328-329) arc stated clearly: Grammar correction has no place in writing courses and should be abandoned ‘Lhe reasons are: firstly, roscarch ovidonoe shows that grammar correction is ineffective, secondly this lack of effectiveness is what should be expected, given the nature of the correction process and the nature of language icaming, thirdly, grammar correction has significant harmful effects Finally, the various argnmncnts offered for continuing i all lack meriL He conelndes thal nol only is grammar corrcetion ineffoctive, it is actually harmful to students (and teachers), He

claims that correction causes stress and demotivate students and it takes up too much teacher

and student lime which could be more productively and pleasantly spent on other aspecls of writing

There is tremendous variability in students’ ability to benefit from grammar instruction

and feedback and to learn to self-correct, and many students have made dramatic

improvemenls in their accuracy over (he course of a wemester ( Ferris, 1995a) TL is vilally

17

important for teachers to commit themselves to selective error feedback and to a strategy for building students’ awareness and knowledge of their most serious and frequent grammar problems Careful prioritizing increases teachers’ chances of being accurate and thorough in their focdback (hocause they arc focusing on urily a few problems al a tire)

As noted by Ferris & Hedgeock (1998: 202), efforts to find answers to the question

“Does error conection work?” must consider three crucial factors: (1) 1s grammar feedback and instruction carried ont selectively, systematically, and accurately? (2) Are individual student differcneos (including language proficicney, learning, styles, rotivation and attitude,

studies which

first Ianguage, etc.) adequately considered and accounted for? and (3) /

assess the effectiveness of error correction designed and executed appropriately?

Specific qnestions for firther research might include (but are certainly not Limited to) the following: Do toachers respond accurately 10 studenls” crrors? Does Irainirys and practice help them to do so more effectively? Are students more able to make progress in monitoring for certain types of errors than others (¢.g., morphological or syntactic errors versus lexical errors)? Which individual student variables affbct learners’ willingness and ability to benefit fiom error coucetion, and can student problems be mitigated by thoughtful pcdagogical practices? Which methods, fechniques, or approaches to error correction lead to short or long- tenn student improvement, (assuming that studonl, teacher, and contextual variables are adequately controlled for)? Teachers keep their own experiences and intuitions in mind, listen

to our students, and consider their needs in deciding if, when, and how to provide error feedback and correelion te 1⁄2 studenl writers As teachers, we can only hope that we will continu: to find answers and discover ways to respond morc thoughtfully and cfitetively to

our student writers’ needs

1.3 Written Error Correction Strategies

How teachers corest second language (L2) students’ writing is a topic that has attracled enormous inferest fom researchers and lsachers alike, Mowever, as a recent review

of feedback on L2 students’ writing (Hyland & Hyland 2006) makes clear, despite all the research there are still no clear answers to the questions researchers have addressed IIyland

and Ilyland observed: while fesdback is a central aspect of I.2 writing prog7ams across the world, the research literature has not been equivoeally positive about its role in L2 development, and teachers often have a sense they are not making uss of its full potential A basic distinction necds ta be made between the aplions involvod in (1) the Leacher’s provision

of CF and (2) the studenis* response to this (edback, Clearly, CF ean only have an imnpaet if students attend to it, Thus, any account of CF must consider both aspects,

‘Two dimensions of corrective feedback: 1 Strategies for providing corrective feedback

2 How students respond lo the feedback From these aspects above, researchers have given out 5 Strategies for Corrective Feedback

1.3.1 Direct carrective feedback

With this stratogy, the teacher provides the student with the correct form As Ferris (2006) notes, this can take a number of different forms crossing out an unnecessary word, phrase or sorpheme, inserting a missing word or morpheme, and writmg the correct form above or near to the erroneous form

An exemple

the dog stole bone from buichor He escaped with having Lone When

the dog was going through bridgs over the river he found dog in the river

‘This approach to corrective feedback has some advantages and disadvantages, which are

discussed below:

19

+ Advantages: | provides learners with explicit guidance abmit how to correct their errors Ferris and Roberts (2001) suggest direct CF is probably bettar than indirect CF with student writers of low levels of proficiency

- Disadvantages: + it requires minimal processing on the part of the learner and thus, although it might help them to produce the correct form when they revise their writing,

it may not contribute to long-term leaming

1.3.2 Indirect corrective feedback

This can be done by underlining the crrors or using cursors 40 show omissions in the

students text or by placing a cross in the margin next to the Line containing the error In effect,

this involves deciding whether or not to show the precise location of the error I'he teacher will need symbuls for spelling, wrong lense usage, concord, wrong word order, ote Whatever the symbols are the students should understand clearly what they mean, When the teacher fizst uses the system of symbols, she may underlines the word in the text and put the symbol in the margin Later it wilt only be necessary to put the symbol in the margin for the students to identify the error

An exanple: A dog stole X bone from X balcher He escaped with X having XX bone, When the dog was going X through XX bridge he found X dog in the river

This approach to corrective feedback has some advantages and disadvantages, which are dis

ed belaw:

- Advantages: caters to ‘guided learning and problem solving” (Lalande, 1982) and

cncourages students to reflect about linguistic forms

— considered more likely to Jead to long-term learning (Eerris and

Roberts 2002)

- Disadvantages; + learners cannot correct if they do not know the correct form

+ Leamers may be able to correct but will not be certain that they

ale correct.

1.3.3 Metalinguistic corrective feedback

‘This involves providing learners with some form of explicit comment about the nature of the crors they have matte:

- Using of error codes (Le abbreviated labels for different Kinds of errors placed over the location of the error in the text or in the margin)

Examples: art,x 3; WW A dog stole bone ftom butcher He escaped with having bone,

Prep; art Whenthe dog was going through bridge over the river he art, found dog in the river

- Metalinguistic explanations of their e1rors (e.g numbering errors and providing

metalinguistic comments at the end of the text)

A dog stole bone from butcher He escaped with having bone When the dog

was going through bridge over the river he found dog in river

(4), (2), (51, (6) — 'a' bafore the noun when a person or thing is mentioned for the first tine (3), (2) ~ ‘the’ before the noun when the person or thing has been mentioned previously

(4) — you need ‘over’ when you go across the surface of something; you use ‘though’ when vou go inside something (e.g ‘ga through the forest’)

Robb et al (1986) suggested that the use of error codes no mors effective than three other types of CF they investigated (ic direct fecdback and two kinds of indircet focdbaek)

Besides, Ferris (2006) supposed that error codes helped students to improve their accuracy

over time in only two of the four categories of error she investigated, Ierris and Roberts (2001) pointed out that error codes helped students to setf-odit Uhcir writing bul no more sa

than indirect feedback

Overall, then, there is very limited evidence to show that error codes help writers to achieve greater accuracy over time and if would also seem that they are no more effective than other iypes of CF in assisting selfˆcdiling

21

1.3.4, Focus of the feedback:

Focused conective feedback means correcting just one type of error It provides multiple corections of the same error and is more likely to be aitended to Moreover, it is more likely to develop understanding af the nalure of the error

Whereas, unfocused corrective feedback means correcting all or most of the errors It

addre:

specific features as focused CF

azange of crrors, so while it might not be as cffcctive in assisting learners to acquire

1.3.5 Reformulation

‘This involves a native-speaker rewriting the student’s text in such a way as ‘to preserve

as many of the writer's ideas as possible, while expressing them in his/her own words so as to tmake the pice sound nalive-tike” (Cohen 1989: 4) The writer then revises by deciding which

of the native-speaker’s reconstructions to accept

In essence, reformulation involves twa options ‘direct correction’ + ‘revision’ but it

differs ftom how these options are typically executed in that the whole of the student’s text is rofertmutated thus laying the burden on the learner to identify the specific changes that have been made

Examples: — Original version As he was jogging, his tammy was shaked

Reformulation As he was jogging, his tummy was shaking

Tummy shaking Error correction: As he was jogging his tammy was shaked

1.4, Effectiveness of corrective fecdback strategies

An inercasing namber of studies have also been investigating whether certain types of comective feedback are more likely than others to help L2 students improve the accuracy of their wriling Many studies have distinguished belween direct and indirect feedback strategies and investigated the extent to which they facilitate greater accuracy, Direct or explicit feedback occurs when the teacher identifies an ermor and provides the correct form, while

to make a further distinction between those that do or do not use a code Coded feedback

points to the exact location of an error, and the type of error involved is indicated with a code

(for example, WW means an error in the use of word order) Uncoded feedback refers to instances when the teacher underlines an error, circles an error, or places an error tally in the

margin, but, in each case, leaves the student to diagnose and correct the error,

The studies by Lee (1997) and Ferris and Roberts (2001) did have control groups

which received no corrective feedback Ferris and Roberts (2001) examined the effects of

three different feedback treatments (errors marked with codes; errors underlined but not

otherwise marked or labeled; no error feedback) and found that both error feedback groups

significantly outperformed the no-feedback control group, but, like Robb et al (1986), they

found that there were no significant differences between the group given coded feedback and

the group not given coded feedback

Furthermore, it needs to be noted that Ferris and Roberts (2001) investigated text

revisions rather than new pieces of writing over time Discussing the findings of the study,

Ferris (2002) reported that direct error correction led to more correct revisions (88%) than indirect error feedback (77%) Over the course of the semester, however, it was noted that

students who received indirect feedback reduced their error frequency ratios substantially

more than those who received direct feedback Compared with this growing but far from

conclusive body of research on the written feedback strategies of teachers, virtually no

research has investigated the effect of other feedback strategies, such as teacher—student

conferences, peer-editing sessions, and the keeping of error logs (Ferris, 2002)

1.5 Error Correction and Learners’ Uptake

Learners’ uptake is the student's response to the feedback Uptake refers to different

types of student responses immediately following the feedback, including responses with repair of the nontarget items as well as utterances still in need of repair (Lyster & Ranta,

23

1997), An essential feature of CF is how the student responds ta the corrections provided The student’s response fequently takes the form of revision of the initial draft an important stage

in writing process Much of the research that has investigated written CF has centered on

whether students are able to make usc of the feedback they ro

ive when they revise One approach has been to describe and classify the types of revisions that students

make Ferris (2002), for cxample, identified a mamber of revision categorics in the redraits of

146 ESL students’ essays Overall, Ferris found that 80.4 per cent of the errors subject to CF

wore climinated in the redrafted compositions by correcting the error, by deleting the text containing the exror, or by making a correct substitution 9.9 per cent of the errors were incorrectly revised while in a further 9.9 per cent no change was made, This study (along with

a mumber of others) suggests that CF is effective in helping students to eliminate errors in rodrafts of their writing

However, from the perspective of L2 leaming, such research is of limited interest, as Truscott (1996) pointed out, as showing that CF helps students to correct their errors in second drafts tells us nothing about whether they are able to use them in new pieces of writing

Revision can also be viewed as part of written CF

Chandler (op cit, 2003) compared indirect CF plus the opportunity to revise with indirect CF where there was no opportunity to revise Chandler reported that accuracy improved ffom the first to the fifth piece of writing significantly more in the group that was required to comest the crrors than in the group that just reecived indication of their errors Also, this increase in accuracy was not accompanied by any decrease in fluency Chandler noted thal ‘what scorns to be a crucial factor is having the sladents do something with the error correction besides simply receiving it’

In the Chandler study, the no-revision group was simply handed back their corrected writing It is possible, however, that if they had been asked to carefuully examine the corrections, they would have shown similar iinprovamnents in accuracy lo (he group that revised following the CF Clearly, corrections can only work iff writers notice and process them,

CHAPTER 2: THE STUDY 2.1 Research questions: Basically the research seeks ta answer the following questions:

1 What are the typ

writing?

2, Low to overcome those errors?

3 What arc the cffectivencss of teachers’ corrective feedback and students’ uptake?

of common errors thal high school students aflcn commit in

2.2 The setting of the stuity

The study was conducted at Huynh Thue Khang High School, Vinh, Nehe An, in which the 11th form students are learning basic English with the very new course book named

‘Tieng Anh IL by Moang Van Van, Lloang ‘Thi Xuan Iloa, Dao Ngoc Loc, Vu Thi Loi, Do

Pronunciation and Grammar and Vocabulary

2.3 Informants

The subjects involved in this study were onc hundred students ( age 16-17) from two

intact low intermediate classes L1A I and [1A 5 ( there are SO students in each class) ‘hey

were selected purposefully fo be more exact, these students were learning Lnglish as a compulsory subject and the rescarcher hersdtf was a (cachor cmrordfy teaching this group The writing syllabus is mandated by the Ministry of Education and Training

‘The reasons for the selection is that the selected subjects are accessible AM these students have been learning Unglish for more than 5 years and most of them have got acquaintance with icaching and Isarning methods at middle level The number of 100 students duc to the fact that this number can provide both the variety and the objectiveness of the answers she would get from the informants, Ifa greater number of participants were involved, the reliability of the data colfccted might have beon greater but it would go beyond researcher’s management

2.4 Instrumentation

Students’ writings were the main instrument of data collection for the present study

Error tescarch workers cmploy a varicly of ways lo provoke errors They, for instance, ask the

study subjects to translate selected sentences or passages into the target language, to rewrite

sentences with guided words or phrases or tell a story by looking at pictures All of these are done under control and aimed at cliciting ciors of ccrtain points which they assume the learners may find it difficult These are not objective because the errors are charaoteristically mechanic Fikerion (1977) disapproves of using thom, holding that they have a defect, He suggests employing fee compositions written without help under supervision, for these contain the most natural use of language despite the fact that the writers may avoid producing linguistic structures about which they feel uncertain

With the idoa that actual orrors wilt come up in sponlancous production cilher by means of speaking or writing, the researcher, for the purpose of the study, selected fee compositions as a means of eliciting natural errors with the help of the subjects who were requested to write in English on one of the given topies The foons is laid on narrative and descriptive as well as cxpositive writing since they arc belicved to suit the students’ up-to-date level An attempt was made to choose such topics as to allow the subjects to write compositions as fiecly as possible wilh their own motivation, Almost no psychological effects namely anxiety or pressure fiom anything were assumed to exert on them since the situation is much the same as that when they are given composing time in class sessions

2.5 Procedures

2.5.1 Data collection

This study is limited to the investigation of the impact of 3 written enor comrection strategies on students’ uptake and students had 3 tasks to do at the class, each of which was appticd to onc task, The subjects were invited to copsrate in the collection process Afler giving a clear written model, the rescarcher asks students to write compositions in given time

around 40 minutes During the composing time, they were encouraged to do if on their own

and nol lo consull any diclionaries, or granumar books

Tlowever, it is often advantageons to correct the written work in front of the whole class One useful way of doing this is to ask the students to do the written work ina paper and collect them when the time is over The main unit of analysis was the error treatment sequence, which contains teacher and student turns in the following order:

Jcarner error teacher feedback

learner uptake, with either repair of the error or needs-repait

This ordor reflects what usually happons when a teacher responds to an utterance containing

an error and when the student attempts to respond to the teacher’s feedback move

2.5.1.1 Tagk 1: (Direct corrective feedback applied)

With this strategy, the teacher provides the students with the coreet for above or near to the erronzous form

- After having their tasks corrected for the first time, the teacher counts errors

- Then, the teacher hands back written work, students have chance to look at the papers carefully without bringing them back home

- Next, they rewrite the tasks and hand in 2 days later

- The teacher gets the papers hack, she keeps reading and correcting the second time,

ther count the srors carnmitted

+ Return the papers to her students and let thern have @ look at the papers for a white

+ Ask her siudents to wrile the task for the third time with the sare way beliore

+ Collvot the papers, and count the errors remaining

2.5.1.2 Task 2: (Indirect corrective feedback applied)

- After collecting and having students” written work underlined for the first tame, the feacher

counts CHOIS

- Then, students get them back home,

27

- Next, they rewrite the tasks with their awn correction, and hand in 2 days later

- The teacher gets the papers back, she keeps reading and underlining the second time, then

coiml the crrors cornrnlted

- Return the written work to her students

~ Ask sludenis to wrile the new papers for the third lime basing on the old ones

- Collect the papers, and count the errors remaining,

2.5.1.3 Task 3: (Afetalinguistic corrective feedback applied)

Becanse of the big sive of the class, the researcher herself only uses the first form, Using of error codes

For instance WO I very uch like you

- After collecting students’ written work for the first time, the teacher labels for different kinds of errors placed over the location of the error in the text or in the

Tuargin, then cous errors

- Next, they rewrite the tasks with correction and hand in 2 days later

+ The teacher gets the papers back, she keeps teading and labeling errors for the

second time, then count the errors still committed

- Return the papers to her students

+ Ask students to waiie the new papers for the third ime basing on the oll ones with their own correction,

- Collect the papers, and count the errors remaining

the same ones as ever favored by researchers on this field: identification, labelization, transferation to indexes and classification, Especially, the exor recognizing and identifying model of Corder (1975) was employed

Firstly, ali the papers were carefully read and deviated forms or structures were identified and marked During this process, the problem in recognition was overcome An interpretation was made to reconstruct what the subjects in their writings intended Superficial well-formed sentences or structures were considered in reference to their surrounding contexts and the contont of the compositions Having boon labeled as wrong use of propositions, subject-verb agreament, etc, the errors were then transferred to separate index each according

to their class respectively Finally, occurrence frequency counting was performed for each type of errors, and the effectiveness of each strategy of exror correction were put forwards for

comparison

2.5.3 Presentation pf results:

Students were asked to do 3 tasks dealing with writing composition related to the main topics of specific units in their English book The time allowance for doing all these three tasks is about 40 ininutas at the class Besides, thors are some points lo he noticed before tha result was presented, Firstly, the research makes no claim to completeness because what we

intended is not a statical count but a pure examination of error sources, As a result, it is

uncertain that errors of all kinds have been covered Secondly, the data-collecting process helped in climinating slips duc to carclessness or performance mistakes induced by psychological factors Some errors presented in the table below might derive from the same source Thus, in the analysis process, (hey ware nalurally excluded Thirdly, in this stndy, most

of the errors focus locally on parts of sentence

Nevertheless, the rescarchor herself is doing the survey on the students of 11" form, and she wants to pay much attention to what course book’s grammatical points are around and how sludents uptake, so [hat the study mainly discusses 10 snblypes: Subject-Verb agreement, Tenses, Word order, Prepositions, ing forms and infinitives, conditional sentences, reported speech, Omission of “that” in that-clause subject, Relative clauses, Cleft sentences