Error Correction

[Abstract] One of the most time-consuming and frustrating things for language teachers is that they correct students’ errors time and again and, it seems that no immediate effect have on the students’ language learning. In my article, I first review the basic prevailing theories about errors treatment, and then by discussing the significance of language errors, I recommend some policies for teachers to have towards errors, hoping that they will be of some help to language teaching.

[Keywords] language learning attitudes errors

1. Brief review of theories about errors

Attitudes towards errors are totally different, which can be either negative or positive or neutral. Traditional methodologists suggested that learning a language should avoid making errors, and errors were seen as unsuccessful learning and kind of failure while correct utterances were immediately praised, so as to prevent the formation of had habits. And language teachers should focus on students’ errors, then design drills that are vital to the formation of new habits and try hard to prevent errors from coming up. If errors do appear, they should be immediately corrected in case they should amount to wrong habits.

But later, Chomsky started a strong attack upon the upper theory. In his opinion, most of the errors, especially in modern communicative teaching methodology, are largely tolerated and even neglected. This kind of approach is totally contrary to the former, which give learners an infinite freedom to explore the language world, without any discipline and rules.

2. My view on errors the significance of errors

As far as I am concerned, I don’t think that learner’ errors should be corrected as soon as they are made in order to prevent the formation of bad habits. As Corder said, “All learners make mistakes. This is not confined to language learner.” Just like some modern methodologists, I agree to regard errors as learners’ progress, or at least, as a learning step (Edge, 1989), “because errors are not to be regarded as signs of failure, but as evidence that the student is working his way towards the correct rules”(Hubbard, 1983). The process of language learning is the same as a baby’s learning to walk. At the beginning, the baby falls often, stumbles everywhere; as he practices more and grows up, he can walk with adults’ help and, finally walk alone, then run . Learning a new language is by no means an easy and quick job, enormous patience and endless efforts are needed, together with various errors, of course.

Let’s take learning English for example. When a Chinese has his first contact with English, he learns from the very simple letter “ABC”. As time goes by, he begins to say a few words, make some simple sentences, then write articles, talk to others in English. In such a long learning process, no one can avoid making mistakes and producing wrong sentences that are full of errors. Errors that happen in the process of learning can be viewed as windows to the language acquisition process; as overt reflections of a learner’s internalized knowledge of the language; an inevitable part of acquiring a second language; indeed, for some, errors are the best evidence that acquisition is taking place. (Gaies 1987) We learn through errors, make more progresses by producing fewer errors. Because we know that different errors occur at different stages of learning process, which shows the learner’s different language proficiency.

In addition, errors should be respected. Studying errors can also provide useful information which will help teachers make decision on how to deal with errors by adapting teaching procedures and methodology. Johansson (1975) argues that an analysis of the learner’s error gives us evidence of his competence in the foreign language. We also gain valuable information concerning learners’ difficulties at different stages. Such information is important for the planning of courses and the construction of teaching materials.

For the importance of errors, Corder(1981) has given us a clear summary by pointing out three different ways:

First to the teacher, in that they tell him, if he undertakes a systematic analysis, how far towards the goal the learner has progressed and, consequently, what remains for him to learn. Second, they provide the researcher evidence of how language is learnt or acquired, what strategies or procedures the learner is employing in his discovery of the language. Thirdly (and in a sense this is their most important aspect) they are indispensable to the learner himself, because we can regard the making of errors as a device the learner uses in order to learn. It is a way the learner has to test his hypothesis about the nature of the language he is learning. (Corder 1981)

Learners’ errors always accompany the dynamic learning process. Corder (1981) suggests that “making of errors is an inevitable and indeed necessary part of the learning process”. Different kinds of errors can reveal learners’ different developmental stages that learners stay at. In this sense, familiarizing with the classification of errors will beneficial for our further understanding learners’ learning process. Therefore, by categorizing errors, learners will understand better what kind of weakness they need to avoid; by analyzing errors, learners will know what they need to strengthen and pay attention to in the future study.

3. Recommended policies for teachers to have towards errors

That errors can be tolerated does not mean that we teachers should allow errors to go uncorrected without any intervention. After all, teachers’ guidance still plays an important role in language teaching, and language learners do need some help when they go to some wrong way of learning a language.

So how should we teachers treat students’ errors? In my opinion, it depends on what teaching purpose we have: to practice speaking skills or to improve writing ability.

For practicing speaking skills, language errors should be tolerated and even be ignored so that communication purpose can be realized. If we teachers view every errors as obstacles of communication and interrupt students’ utterances constantly, students’ desire and enthusiasm for speaking a new-learned language will diminish sooner or later. Besides, rudely interruption will strongly destroy learners’ self-confidence and make them feel embarrassed and even angry. Language learning is a creative process, a cognitive activity rather than a matter of habit. Errors are an indispensable part of the learning process itself. Without errors no true language can take place. The guiding principle for me in communicative classes is to treat whatever they attempted to say with respect. Because in the language classroom, the learners should be encouraged to use the target language as much as possible and the teacher should not frequently point out or correct the errors which do not hinder communication or cause misunderstanding. In my opinion, too much correction of minor errors by the teacher not only interrupts the flow of thoughts and the speed of expressions, but also upset the students and destroys their self-confidence. Just as Julian Edge said, “If they don’t get lots of opportunities to make mistakes, they will have little chance to work out better rules.” That is to say, if there are no errors, there will be no learning steps, no further development and no future achievement. So while the students are speaking. I ignore most errors made by them, except serious ones that interfere with communication. If a student succeeds in conveying his meaning with a few errors, it was not a serious thing. The purpose of students’ activities is to practice communication, not grammatical accuracy. Defective but effective communication can be taken as an approach.

For example, in my oral English lessons, I would play a role as an organizer and listener. In the process of presentation by the students, I would listen quietly with an encouraging smile and approving nodding. I would not always correct every error the students made on the scene, so as to set up psychology security and ensure the fluency of their expressions. Instead, I note down the errors respectively for later correction. Then I identify the type of those errors, pragmatic errors or linguistic ones. If the errors fall into the latter, I would again subdivide them into different category: pronunciation, grammar, semantic, syntax. For different type, I could mark with different sign, such as “P” for pronunciation, “G” for grammar, “Se” for semantic and “Sy” for syntax. In this way, making notes becomes much quicker and clearer, and much easier for teacher to give a thorough explanation. When all the oral practice finish, I would focus on some errors by demonstrating correct examples. Also, I would give students some wrong sentences and let them correct. Usually, by group-discussion, most of the wrong examples can be correctly revised. So it can be concluded that group-correction is an effective way to help students realize their own errors, trigger their learning interests and enable them to prevent from making similar errors in the future.

For improving writing ability, many English teachers, like most teachers around the world, feel responsible for correcting every error in their students' writing. It has been shown in research, however, that students learn better if they are encouraged to write freely without always being corrected. Red marks on papers don't encourage writing. The opposite is true. Pages covered with red ink are disheartening to the students who has put hours of effort into the exercise and mean extra work for the teacher. Correcting errors in students' writing often discourages further revision. So, let's please leave the correcting for later drafts. In student compositions, for example, it is best for the teacher just to comment on the content rather than to correct errors of grammar. But, it is important that teachers show their students how to edit their writing in order to produce a final draft. Then how can we evaluate writing as teachers? Ilona Leki (1990) has said that writing teachers have three personas: teacher as real reader, teacher as coach, and teacher as evaluator. So, teachers need to decide which role to take at which stage. First drafts require a different approach from later drafts.

In addition, self-correction is useful for the student and convenient for the teacher. A large number of errors are performance errors caused by the constraints of the composing process and they can be corrected by the students themselves after writing is completed or after further study. 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, such as word tense or spelling. For difficult areas such as choice of lexical items or discourse context, cultural background information, giving the students more teaching guidance and detailed explanation would be a better solution.

When a composition had been marked, it would be handed back to the student for immediate correction in class. The student can conduct self-correction, and he is allowed to ask his classmates for help. He is also free to seek help from his teacher. So, during a writing process, what is involved is a combination of self-correction, peer-correction and teacher-assisted correction. This combination creates a harmonious and pleasant atmosphere, which can reduce the nervousness of students, build up their confidence, and improve their concentration when learning new language and help form emotional bonds between the students and the teacher. In this environment, it is easier for students to converse with one another in English so that they can improve their ability to use the language. All in all, correction is a way of reminding students of the forms of standard English. It should not be a kind of criticism or punishment.

While it is important to correct errors, and students expect to be corrected to some extent, it’s also important not to focus so much on error correction that you miss the parts that are done well. Students need to see that they’re making progress, that they are actually learning something and getting better. A simple decrease in the amount of correction (in direct proportion to the decrease in errors) doesn’t tell them this. The teacher occasionally needs to pat them on the back and give them a big old “Well done” or “Nice work”.

4. Conclusion

Various studies have showed that errors are a natural part of language learning. Making errors during the language learning process is unavoidable. This is true of the development of a child’s first language as well as of second language learning by both children and adults. Language errors are not monsters. We should not be afraid of making errors when learning a new language; and we should not correct all errors immediately when they appear, for the formation of speaking standard language habit will not be affected as long as we treat them wisely and calmly. To help students to learn a language more smoothly and effectively, teachers should not only be clear about the certainty of making errors, but also treat them with respect. My suggestion is that we avoid always blaming and criticizing students for their errors; rather, we should make full use of these errors and treat students’ errors in an appropriate way.

References:

[1] Corder, S. P. 1967. The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics 5: 161-170.

[2] Corder, S. P. 1981. Error Analysis and Ingterlanguage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[3] Allan, D. 1991. Tape journals: bridging the gap between communication and correction. ELT Journal 45/1: 61-66.

[4] Gaies, S. J. 1987. The investigation of language classroom processes. In M. H. Long and J. C. Richards (eds.), Methodology in TESOL. New York: Newbury House Publishers.

[5] Richards, J. C. 1971. A non-contrastive approach to error analysis. ELT Journal 25/3: 204-219.

[6] Johnson, K. 1988. Mistake correction. ELT Journal 42/2: 89-96.

[7] James, C. 1998, Errors in Language Learning and Use. Addison Wesley Longman Limited.

[8] Gass, S. M. and Selinker, L. 1994, Second Language Acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Ellis,R.1997.SecondLanguageAcquisition. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

[9] Leki, I. 1991, The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes. Foreign Language Annals Edge, J. 1989, Mistakes and Correction, London: Longman.