Nghiên cứu ứng dụng sư phạm

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES ********************* NGUYỄN THỊ THU HIỀN AN ACTION RESEARCHON TEA

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

*********************

NGUYỄN THỊ THU HIỀN

AN ACTION RESEARCHON TEACHER’S ERROR CORRECTION IN YOUNG LEARNERS’ SPEAKING LESSONS AT ENGLISH HOUSE

CENTRE, HANOI

Nghiên cứu ứng dụng sư phạm: Vấn đề giáo viên chữa lỗi với học sinh nhỏ tuổi

trong giờ học nói tại trung tâm English House, Hà Nội

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 60140111

Supervisor: Dr Trần Thị Thu Hiền

HANOI - 2017

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this thesis “An Action Researchon Teachers‟ Error

Correction in Young learners‟ Speaking lessons at English House Centre, Hanoi” is

my own work and effort has not been submitted anywhere for any purpose In addition, the contributions of my colleagues and students are involved Other sources of information have been used and acknowledged I cede copyright of the thesis in favor of Post-graduate Department-Vietnam National University

Hanoi, 2017

Signature

Nguyễn Thị Thu Hiền

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Dr Tran Thi Thu Hien who has enthusiastically helped and encouraged me during the period of writing this research paper Her guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this thesis I could not have imagined having a better mentor for my study

Besides my supervisor, I would like to thank all of the instructors in my M.A course at the Post-Graduate Studies, College of Foreign Languages, Hanoi National University With their precious and professional lecturers and tutors, I can understand thoroughly difficult basic concepts regardless English teaching methodology

I am also very grateful to my colleagues at English House center, Hanoi, who have created favorable conditions for me and have helped me on this research

I also give my sincere thanks to all 16 students accompanying with me during the 12-week of the research Without them, I could not have these data as convincing evidence for my study

Last but not the least, I would like to thank my family: my parents and to my sister for supporting me spiritually throughout writing this thesis

Hanoi, 2017

ABSTRACT

The present study intended to find out common spoken errors made by young learners and effective ways to correct these errors To this end, 16 Vietnamese young students aged 8 to 10 were selected from the learners who are studying at Movers level Initially, Movers speaking test was used as a pre-test for assessing the participants speaking skills and finding their typicalerrors or participants which were administered Then, they received the conventional classroom error-correction on speaking skills After 12 weeks of instruction, Movers speaking test was done again by 16 chosen students, and the post-test for speaking was implemented The raw data gathered was subject to statistical analysis The findings and results collected are evidence to support the effectiveness

of action research on oral error correction

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Declaration i

Acknowledgements ii

Abstract iii

Table of contents iv

List of tables and figures vii

PART ONE: INTRODUCTION 1 Rationale 1

2 Objectives of the study 2

3 Research questions 2

4 Scope of the study 2

5 Significance of the study 2

6 Structure of study 3

PART TWO: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1 Error correction 4

1.1.1 Definition of errors 4

1.1.2 Types and sources of errors 4

1.1.3.The complexity of error correction 6

1.1.4 Corrective feedback……… ………7

1.1.5 Oral error correction for young learners……… ……8

1.2 Young learners of English……… ………9

1.2.1 Characteristics of Young learners of English………… ……… ……9

1.2.2 Teaching Speaking skills to Young learners……… ……… …10

1.3 Action research……… …… ……11

1.4 Chapter summary 13

CHAPTER TWO: METHODOLOGY

2.1 Setting 15

2.1.1 English House language center, Hanoi 15

2.1.2 Participants 15

2.2 Data collectioninstruments 15

2.2.1 Pre-test and post-test 15

2.2.2 Interview for teachers…… 16

2.2.3 Classroom observation 17

2.3 Data collection and analysis 17

2.4 Action plan 18

2.5 Chapter summary 19

CHAPTER THREE: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 3.1 Pre-test result… 20

3.1.1 Phonological errors 20

3.1.2 Grammatical errors 21

3.1.3 Lexical errors 21

3.2 Interview result……… ……….……… ………22

3.2.1.Common oral errors 22

3.2.2 Suitable time to correct spoken errors 23

3.2.3.Ways to correct errors 24

3.2.3.1 Phonological errors……… … 24

3.2.3.2 Grammatical errors……… ……… 24

3.2.3.3 Lexical errors……… ………24

3.3 Classroom observation result 25

3.3.1 Teacher A 25

3.3.2 Teacher B 26

3.3.3 Results 27

3.3.3.1.The type ofthe errors 27

3.3.3.2 Corrected and ignored errors 28

3.3.3.3.Correction practices 30

3.4 Post test result 31

3.4.1 Phonological errors 32

3.4.2 Grammatical errors 32

3.4.3 Lexical errors 33

3.5 Discussion… 33

PART THREE: CONCLUSION 1 Recapitulation 36

2.Implications 36

3 Limitations of the study 38

4 Suggestions for further study 38

REFERENCES 40

APPENDIX 44

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Action research cycle

Figure 2.1: Steps of data collection procedures

13

18

Figure 3.3: The percentage of types of errors 28

Figure 3.5: Distribution of corrected and ignored errors 29

Figure 3.7: Errors between the pre-test and post-test result 32

Table 3.2: Appropriate time to correct errors 24

Table 3.4: Teacher A, Class No 1

Table 3.5: Demographic Teacher B

Table 3.6: Teacher B, Class No 2

26

26

27 Table 3.7: Oral errors made by participants at the post-test 31

PART ONE: INTRODUCTION 1.Rationale

Over the last few years, the role oforal error correction has received considerable attention amongst language learners Many teachers have found that correcting learners‟oral error is the most challenging task Some following issues are raised: which errors should be corrected, how to correct these errors and when correction should be made without demotivating learners (Lourie, 2010) Compared

to other skills, speaking needs greater effort from the learners because it must follow a process and to get feedback to see the immediate improvement

While there are still negative views toward teaching children as some people may consider teaching English to young learners is as doing little as singing songs, playing games and telling some stories, this thesis may bring a new perspective on teaching English to young learners, as it is not easy to deliver the lesson no matter what the level of the learners is

Secondly, it is asserted that error correction is one of the dilemmas for teachers Brown (2000) suggests that the feedback a learner gets upon making errors benefits him in developing the knowledge The danger of over-correction is that students may lose motivation and even destroy the flow of the class or the activity

by correcting every single mistake (Jones, 2004)

Finally, there are a number of researchers studying error correction; however there are not many researchers having studied on young learners As other learners, young learners also make mistakes when speaking or writing or even make more mistakes Being a teacher who often works with young learners, I experience the difficulties of learners and always desire to help them improve their language ability

With all the reasons mentioned above, this thesis was chosen and seriously carried out in order to find out common spoken errors made by young learners and effective ways to correct these errors and to improve the way of teaching and learning, especially in term of speaking skills for young learners

2 Objectives of the study

The objectives of this study is to identify common spoken errors of young learners at English House Centre Besides, this paper also targets at finding out and evaluatingthe way teachers in English Housedeal with young learners‟ spoken errors

4 Scope of the study

This study focuses on errors which young learners often make in speaking English and how corrective feedback is applied at English House centre, Hanoi Therefore, other approaches in teaching speaking skill for this kinds of students in other institutions will not be included in this study

5 Significance of the study

This research was completed to find out common spoken errors andassess the effectiveness of using a corrective feedback in improving speaking skills for young students at Movers level.It is believed that the findings of this study will be the reference for other teachers as well Besides, it would be duplicated in other classes

at the centre for further benefits to other students Last but not least, it would be a primitive road for others‟ further studies in the future

6 Structure of study

This research will include three main parts, which are introduction, development and conclusion

Part one: Introduction - presents the rationale, objectives, research questions, scope,

significance and organization of the study

Part two: Development – includes 3 chapters

Chapter 1 – Literature review – provides theoretical basis for error correction

(definition, types and sources of errors, the complexity of errors correction, corrective feedback and oral errors correction for young learners) and young learners of English (characteristics, teaching speaking skills to young leaners)

Chapter 2– Methodology – consists of setting such as an overview ofEnglish

Houselanguage center, participants Research method, data collection instruments, data collection, data analysis procedure and action plan are described

Chapter 3– Findings and discussion – reports the findings of the survey and

discusses the prominent aspects

Part three: Conclusions - includes recapitulation, implications, limitations of the

study and recommendations for further studies

PART TWO: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1 Error correction

1.1.1 Definition of errors

“Error” has been a favour topic in the field of English teaching for a certain period of time According to Thornbury (2002), error is a consequence of insufficient knowledge of the target language learnt, while Richards and Renandya (2002) consider errors as the practice of using target language in a faulty way in terms of a native speaker norms.James (1998) judges an error according to grammatical correctness and he connects errors to ignorance, inferring that error is the study of linguistic ignorance, in which the learners do not recognize and how to deal with their ignorance

There is a distinction between „error‟ and „mistake‟ According to Luoma (2004), an error is made because the learner does not know what is correct, so it cannot be self-corrected, whereas mistakes can be self-corrected when the learner pays attention during their language performance.Duff (1990) states that mistakes are caused by lack of attention while performing the second language, and Chavez (2003) agrees on this as he adds that the mistakes are appeared during conversation because of the hesitations, lapses in memory or the slip of the tongue Lyndsay (2006) suggests two ways to distinguish between an error and a mistake, the first one is to examine the consistency of learner‟s performance, to see if he sometimes use the correct form or the wrong one If he always uses it incorrectly, then it is an error The second way is to ask the learner to correct his own utterance, and if he can perform self-correction, then it is a mistake

1.1.2 Types and sources of errors

As regards the types of errors, the model of Lyster and Ranta (1997)focuseson three following types of errors: grammatical, phonological and lexical errors

- Grammatical errors:This error occurs because of the deviation of learner‟s

utterance from the grammatical rules of the language This can be related to sentence structure, verb tense, preposition, article or singular/plural form

- Phonological errors:These errors are the confusion caused by either the

native or the target language, in which the speakers can have wrong pronunciation or stress of the sentence In other words, they are the pattern of sound errors in the process that children are learning to talk

- Lexical errors: These errors are the results of the speakers not knowing the

appropriate translation of the target word, which leads to wrong word choice during conversation

In the study of Richards (1971), he discusses some error types as follows:

- Interference errors: which are caused by the impacts of the first language or

second language that the learners obtained This can be the native language or the other foreign languages that the learner is studying and this causes errors when they study another language

- Intra-lingual errors:such as overgeneralization or ignorance of rules restriction

Overgeneralization is defined as the creation of a deviant structure on the basis

of the experience on structures in the target language, while the ignorance of rules restriction is the failure to recognize and obtain the restrictions of existing structures

- Developmental error: this includes the hypotheses that the learners try to build

up about the target language, but on the basis of the limited knowledge Lindsay (2006) also agrees that this error is generated due to the faulty perception of the learners on the language

Likewise,Corder (1974) describes some types of errors on the basis of sources of errors as follows:

- Language transfer or interlingual interference: This error is caused by mother

tongue as the learners apply knowledge from one language to another Mother tongue has big influence in learner‟s language since there are both positive and negative influence.Hyland& Annan (2006) state that students who are fluent and good at expressing ideas in their native language can also have imagination and ideas when studying foreign language, whereas at the same time being dependent too much on mother tongue can also lead to grammatical error or wrong pronunciation

- Intralingual interference: this kind of errors occurs when the learners have not

really acquired the knowledge, and sometimes the students fail to recognize the rules which should be applied (Bordag, 1998)

- False hypotheses: the learners do not fully understand a distinction in the target

language (for example: the use of "was" as a marker of past tense in "One day I was travelled.")

In the context of the study, classifications on the types of errors of Lyster and Ranta (1997) are applicable

1.1.3 The complexity of error correction

The issue of students' errors in the second language and how to deal with them still remains a concern for most ESL teachers Lightbown (1985) also mentions that "isolated explicit error correction is usually ineffective in changing language behaviour"

In particular, the progress of correction may not as successful as what the teacher expects There are some of the factors related to the lack of success of error correction: the complexities determining what constitutes an error in a specific situation, and in consistently representing to the learner and having the learner correctly interpret what the error is

Tsang (2004) states that teachers mostly used recast and explicit correction in error correction but they may not lead students to repair while repetition was the most frequent types of feedback which resulted in repairs During his research, phonological errors were commonly repaired through the recast and explicit correction, whereas negotiation works for most grammatical errors Also, it is asserted that using different types of feedback may be more effective than giving only single correct form In contrast, Lasagabaster and Sierra (2005) analyze whether the error correction strategies facilitate students‟ learning and whether the students find these corrections effective

1.1.4 Corrective feedback

Ellis (2009) considers corrective feedback as the feedback that the students obtain on the linguistic error that they generated in the process of studying a second language Lyster & Sato (2013) confirms that corrective feedback is the pivotal role

in process of promoting individual growth, and the input of language learning mostly generated from teachers, learning materials and students in learning environment It means that the teachers must realize their correction behaviors in the classroom and create the way they correct spoken errors They also suggest some corrective feedback types as follow:

- Explicit correction:Teachers indicate the student‟s error in a direct way and

provide them a correct form (Sheen, 2011).For example:

S: Two book

T: …Two books

- Recast: Teachers correct error in implicit way Teachers give the correction, but

do not point out the students‟ utterance is incorrect For example:

S: He don‟t like chocolate

T: Yes, he doesn‟t like chocolate

- Clarification request: Teachers give a sign that the utterance has not been

understood such as hmm? Or Excuse me?, Pardon?

- Metalinguistic clues: Teachers ask the question like “Do we say it like that?”,

give students some information to correct their utterance without giving a

correct form

- Elicitation: Teachers elicits the correct form directly or offer them “Can you say

that again?”

- Repetition: Teachers repeat the students‟ utterance but change the intonation

Teachers say the error with a rising tone For example:

S: Do you likes my picture?

T: likes?

Two studies by Lyster and Ranta (1997) and Lyster (1998) were applied in the children from 9 to 11 years old gave a result about expansions Expansions which are a type of recast did not cause students‟ uptake Lyster (1998) also points that recast causes ambiguous to learners Therefore, it was assessed as the ineffective corrective feedback in communicative classroom, however it is commonly used by teachers when correcting pronunciation and grammatical errors According to Siauw (2016), the most effective type of feedback for lexical error can be elicitation, clarification request, repetition and metalinguistic feedback, while recast can be commonly used for mispronunciation and grammatical errors

1.1.5 Oral correction for young learners

There are some different views about spoken correction to young learners Richards (2015) states that if there is a perfect teaching methodology, the errors can never be appeared, while other researchers argue that we live in an imperfect world, therefore errors must appear as it is natural process of learning Corder (1967) also argues that these points of view are consistent with the same theoretical viewpoint about language and language learning, psychologically behaviorist and linguistically taxonomic Their application, to language teaching is best known as the audio-lingual or fundamental skills method From his viewpoint, most errors are

not generated from the negative transition from native language, and with children,

we often do not pay much attention to their errors

In addition, some papers contend that implicit corrective feedback in communicative language teaching classrooms can have a direct influence on learners‟ output accurateness (Spada, 1990) Additionally, Speidel (2000) also mentions that when teachers give implicit corrective feedback such as extend, expand, reformulate, recast, they provide corrections and modeling to learners‟ linguistic errors

However, Chaudron (1977) asserts that the most effective corrective feedback will first locate errors accurately and then immediately reject them, under the form of error repetition with emphatic tone Then after that, the metalinguistic is provided to motivate the learner‟s self-correction Even if the student cannot perform self-correction, the original question was rephrased, and other students in the class were asked to help

1.2 Young learners of English

1.2.1 Characteristics of Young learners of English

As established by Phillips (1999), the term „young learners‟ refers to children from first year of schooling, which include children from six or seven years old to twelve years old In this research, young learners mean children aged 8-10 who are mostly at the level Starters and aim at Movers – TESOL Cambridge Test In pedagogical side, the most important aspect in teaching young learners is the characteristics of young learners

Klein (2005) and Coltrane (2003) characterized young learners based on their naughtiness, noisiness, ability to pay attention and hands-on learning experiences Agreeing with these characteristics, Cakir (2004) adds that young learners are bodily kinesthetic and visual learners, therefore they can obtain knowledge best by seeing and making things

Additionally, Hung (2012) describes the characteristics of children who study English as follows:

- Children are active and need physical movement: Children do not have

ability to sit quietly and listen to the teachers, however they will be more willing to try and persist at new activities than adult learners Therefore, teaching for children should include different physical activities to keep them active during the lesson

- Children do not have much attention: They have short attention so that

teachers should give various activities to break their boredom

- Children are comfortable with routines and enjoy repetition: Children can

receive new things quickly, but easy to forget Teaching children need repetition regularly to help them remember the lesson

- Children learn through watching, listening, imitating and doing things:

While adults learn through acquiring and analyzing knowledge consciously, children learn through intuition Therefore, the activity to enhance the observation and imitation must ensure the accuracy, especially pronunciation

- Children are playful and creative: Children are curious, active and creative

in a natural way They desire to discover the world around them with different things and communicate with people They satisfy these through the physical activities and experiencing things

From these characteristics of young learners, Hung (2012) claims that spoken interaction is the main goal in teaching English for children Everything that is done

in the classroom must contain a communicative intent These skills will be practised through different activities (such as playing games, singing, telling stories…), different types of study (such as class work, pair work, group work…), different kinds of exercises… to achieve the target

1.2.2 Teaching speaking skills to young learners

Speaking is the progress of building and sharing meaning through the use of verbal and non-verbal communication, in different contexts Speaking is a vital part

of foreign language learning and teaching According to Ur (2000), speaking is the most important of all 4 skills because when a person is claiming that he knows a language, he must be able to communicate in that language Likewise, Philips(1999) states that speaking in young learners is not only a skill, but also a medium in which language is understood, practiced and learnt

However, teaching speaking to young learners may also have difficulties arised from the physical imperfection, such as the difficulty from the teeth (The baby teeth has fallen out while the adult teeth has not been replaced), or some may wear braces (Slattery, 2001) On the other hand, Pinter (2006) also states that children slowly develop the capability to interpret the meaning and are more concerned with their own understanding than with the needs of their listeners, therefore the teacher must have careful selection and preparation.It is expected that teachers of young learners are assumed to equip the students with activities that involve

tasks and activities such as playing games, singing through songs, poem, rhyme and chant

Djigunovic (2012) highlights that when teaching children, they can easily adopt the attitudes from people around them such as parents, siblings and teachers – who have significant impacts on their behavior When teaching speaking skill, in which the interaction between the teachers and the learners is maximized, the learners can easily follow the teacher‟s behavior and obtain their words, therefore all activities in the class must be treated seriously Similarly, it is required that teachers must plan to use specific words and phrases related to the activities set for the learners, which will enable them to learn quickly and in a meaningful way Since young learners can imitate adults, teachers must play alongside their students, using the new vocabulary and helping them to practice

1.3 Action research

Action research has become a popular term in the field of education Action research is an interactive way to collect information It can be taken in a school setting It can be used to search for the real problem in school, to improve an instruction or increase student‟s achievement Wallace (1998) states that action research is a strategy for teacher to compose changes and improve professionally by analyzing on their own everyday teaching Likewise, Harmer (2002) contends that action research is a series of procedures that the teachers get involved in due to their effort of improving teaching styles, and this helps them evaluate the success of certain activities It is also defined that this term comprises of two main definitions,

in which research refers to the analysis and evaluation of the methods being used, while action is the practice of using curriculum, teaching and learning (Kemmis, 1982)

In his research, Patrick (2013) states that action research has “practical, problem-solving emphasis” to improve “educational practice”, therefore it is reflective Also, since it involves analysis from particular educators, with the students and their own colleagues, not by any other people, people in the research can learn from their experiences Additionally, action research is participative and members of the system are required to participate actively, so it can comprise vital learning outcomes and have effective problem-solving solutions, which can build up scientific knowledge and theory (Aoife, 2008) Therefore, these are major reasons why action research is selected

In a model of action research by Ferrance (2000), there are six steps: identify the problem, gather the data, interpret data, act on evidence, evaluate the results, next steps

Figure 1.1: Action research cycle

As illustrated in the figure above, the process starts with the identification of the problem area This is followed by gathering data, from which a pre-test during thirty minutes is executed so as to confirm the problem stated in stage The researcher also did some interview with teachers in the center to gather the data After that, the data collected from the pre-test and the interviews is analyzed to create the hypothesis and from that to compare and contrast with the post-test The next step of this action research study is to act on evidence, in which the design of a plan will allow to make a change Then, there will be evaluation on results to see if the data provides supporting evidence, and if it does not support, then what else can

be done to have better result The final step of the action research is to plan for additional improvements, revisions in the next steps

1.4 Chapter summary

In this chapter, the distinction between error and mistake is classified, and there is a literature review about types and sources of errors Specifically, Lyster and Ranta (1997) research is used to identify types of errors in teaching speaking skills for young learners Since errors cannot be disappeared as it is natural process

in learning a language, types of corrective feedback such as explicit correction,

Problem identification

Data collection

Data interpretation

Act on evidence

Evaluation

on resultsSpiral to the next steps

recast, clarification request, metalinguistic, elicitation and repetition are considered

to correct students‟ errors Additionally, along with different characteristics in comparison with adults, teaching a language, especially speaking skill to young learners, may encounter difficulties such as lack of attention and physical imperfection Hence, it may require thorough analysis and preparation from the teachers when delivering the lessons

CHAPTER TWO: METHODOLOGY

2.1 Setting

2.1.1 English House centre, Hanoi

English House is a language center and founded in 2012 in Hanoi The center majors in teaching students from primary to high school Teaching young learners is the strength of English House centre as more than half of students in English House are young learners from 6 to 11

The researcher has been working there since December 2014 Being a teacher in English House language center, the researcher has specialized in teaching young learners for two years

2.1.2 Participants

There are sixteen students who take part in this research They are groups of students from 8 to 10years old All of them are primary students in Hanoi They have learned at thiscenter over 1 year When starting studying in the center, their levels were at Starters Theyhave takenthis course to develop their English and achieveMovers level at the end of the course.Their course book is Kid‟s Box 4by Caroline Nixon and Michael Tomlinson, published by Cambridge University Press (2009) When starting the research, the participants have finished six among eight units of this course At the end of this course, the children will take the Movers test

to assess their English level

2.2 Data collection instruments

2.2.1 Pre-test and post-test

First of all, a pre-test is conducted to identify the students level of English and common spoken errors The course students are taking part in targets Movers level For this reason, the researcher uses Mover sample test – Speaking part

(Appendix 3) for pre-test and post-test In this test, students are asked to involve in

4 parts:

Part 1: Students identify five differences between two given pictures

Part 2: Students are given the name of the story and they must tell a story based on

the given pictures

Part 3: Students look at a series of four pictures., odd one picture and say why it is

different

Part 4: Students talk about their weekends by answering the question “What do you

do at the weekends?”

2.2.2 Interview for teachers

To collect more data about error correction, the researcher will interview five teachers who are teaching English to young learners in English House centre The interview will mention the waysthe teachers deal with and correct their students‟ errors As established by Jaber (2002), the interview provides deep information and knowledge that the researcher is looking for, and for those interviewees who have experience in their own field, this can provide more accurate results and evaluation Therefore interviews with teachers are conducted Along with the identification of the common oral errors,the most noticeable concerns about error correction will be

“When” and “How” it is taken In terms of the question „When‟, error correction can be carried out in two strands, which are immediate or delayed corrections In terms of the „How‟, the teachers will be questioned about the way they correct their students‟ errors

There are some main questions during the research process, which are:

- What are the common oral errors of young learners at English House centre?

- Which oral errors should be corrected?

- When do you correct your students' errors?

- How do you correct your students‟ errors?

2.2.3 Classroom observation

Ary (2009) asserts that the major advantage of observation in doing a research is that it provides an actual record of what is happening, and this is extremely useful with young learners since all things can be observed naturally Therefore, after doing the interview, the researcher continues to observe to see how the teachers‟ correct students‟ error After collecting all the data, it is analyzed to design the action plan The plan is shown that how the teacher deal with each kind of error This action plan is applied in the researcher‟s class

The following four questions are those on which the observations were based:

Q1 What is frequency of teachers „correction in the classroom?

Q2 When do teachers correct learner errors?

Q3 Which errors do teachers correct?

Q4 How do teachers correct learner errors?

2.3 Data collection and analysis

In terms of finding students‟ oral errors, the errors are noted, counted and finalized The result is stored to be compared with the final result after the post test The interview and the class observation is conducted Based on this result and the participants, the researcher chooses the most suitable corrective feedback and apply

in the next ten weeks After ten weeks, the post-test result is compared and contrasted in terms of percentage The improvement of students in terms of accuracy will show the effectiveness of corrective feedback

Figure 2.1: Steps of data collection procedures

1

• The pre-test is conducted in the first week The interview and

class observation is conducted in this week (Week 1)

2 • The result is analyzed All errors are noted down (Week 1).

3 • The corrective feedback is applied in ten weeks (Week 2-11).

4

• The post-test is conducted after 10 weeks The result of the

pre-test and post-pre-test is compared to see if there is any improvement during the time applying the research (Week 12)

researcher will design a plan to correct these errors

Table 2.1: Action plan

When the framework of an action research is followed, an action plan must be clearly identified so that the researcher can follow and analyze According to Judith (2002), an action plan must address the issues through practical steps and it must lead to some identifiable outcomes Also, it is expected that through the action plan, changes and developments can be timely noticed because it has a clear timescale of when it should be started or ended With the action plan for error correction, a checklist of the proposed errors and the application of corrective feedback applied will be included

2.5 Chapter summary

In this chapter, there is a concentration on action research, since it is a by-step process to highlight the needs for learning practice Although there may be different descriptions of the steps in action research, the basic concept remains the same and the results can be seen timely for immediate action From this point of view, the researcher aims to conduct the interviews with the teacher and observe the class, to highlight some main questions, of what the common errors are, which one should be corrected, when and how to correct these errors

step-CHAPTER THREE: FINDING AND DISCUSSIONS

This chapter shows the results of the study and analysis of the data collected Discussed ideas are presented as follows:

3.1 Pre-test result

After taking the pre-test, the errors made by 16 students are classified and

identified with examples

their test

- Ending sounds:Students do not pronounce the ending sound when they are

speaking English For example: book without /k/, can‟t without /t/ Since Vietnamese word does not have ending sounds, this error derives from the habit of speaking mother tongue

- Mispronunciation:This error happens when students pronounce wrongly.For

example: With the words “park‟, they say /pak/ instead of /pa:k/ In the context of the study, the most wrong-pronounced word are “because”,

“computer‟, “beach”, “dolphin” and “stomachache”

3.1.2 Grammatical errors

Grammatical errors rank second after phonological errors The number of grammatical errors is 10 In the context of the test, there are three common errors found: preposition, sentence fragment and verb tense

- Preposition: Three out of sixteen students demonstrated confusion for using the preposition It can be shown in the examples as below: They play in the beach (instead of They play on the beach)

- Sentence fragment: Sentence fragments are groups of words that do not

express a complete thought They are only part of a sentence This error happened to 5 out of 16 students Actually, when speaking, they can understand the meaning of sentence fragment in some cases For example: They say “It not have a computer” instead of “It doesn‟t have a computer.” However, the meaning can be understood directly

- Verb tense: Nine out of sixteen students made this error This error occurs

when the learners use the wrong verb tense in a certain sentence For example:

The doctor is stand or the doctor standing (instead of “The doctor is standing.”)

The boy have an earache (instead of “The boy has an earache.”)

Jim go to the beach (instead of „Jim goes to the beach”)

Or use the wrong tense such as:

T: What do you do at the weekends? – S: I went to the beach

3.1.3 Lexical errors

In the test, there are only four students making lexical errors, which accounted for 25%, and in this error, the most common type is miscollocation, in

which the choice of a word to accompany another is inappropriate The number of

lexical counted is 4

In sum, phonological errors are the most common errors, it headed the list with 100% of student chosen The second most was the errors belonged to grammar and the last place was lexical errors which accounted for one in four as opposed to the first rank

3.2 Interview result

3.2.1 Common oral errors

The researcher asks five teachers about which errors should be corrected and the interview result showed that phonological, grammatical and lexical are the errors that all the teachers concern about 100% teachers think that their students always make mistake with pronunciation The grammatical error ranked the second with 60% while there was just under 20% of student making the lexical error (Figure 3.1)

Figure 3.1 The most common oral errors

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Phonological Grammatical Lexical

Common errors