By M. Enamul Hoque
Introduction
People first learn their native languages through making all kinds of errors and mistakes, and getting the necessary correction and help from their parents and teachers. The same thing happens when people are learning their foreign languages. In this research paper, I would like to discuss whether or not linguists believe that teachers should correct their students’ errors, and if so, what to correct, how to correct, and when to correct.
First of all, I would like to clarify the meaning of these two words – error and mistake, before going into more depth of the discussion. Many people will see these two words with similar meanings, but when we are talking about errors and mistakes in language learning, they are representing two different things. Mistake means that learners already know or understand the usage of the language, but unintentionally say or use it in the wrong form or way. However, learners will be able to notice it and self-correct it immediately, and this is called a mistake. On the other hand, the error means that learners use the wrong term, word, or form, and they are unable to recognize the problems. At this time, an error is made and it is needed for somebody to point it out to the learner to correct it (Brown, 2000, p.217-18).
It is fascinating to see how error treatment has evolved all these years. Just a half century ago, when language teachers were enthusiastic about audio-lingual method, nobody had really considered or worried about error treatment. When using audio-lingual method, it came with different sets of dialogues; teachers only needed to guide students to practice all kinds of drills from the set dialogues, and did not need to think about how to deal with errors because students would not have the chance to make any (Hendrickson, 1978, p.387-88).
However, linguists eventually realized that the ALM was not working for people whose learning purposes were communication not memorization of a set of dialogue could deal with, and they started to modify their teaching methods to focus on communication. Due to this change, students began to make different errors while they were practicing and learning the language, and this transformation made many linguists take into account about how to deal with students’ errors. Previously, when teachers were still using ALM, the errors were avoided, but with the new teaching approach, some linguists strongly argued that learners’ errors should be corrected immediately, and those errors were not learners’ responsibility to recognize but teachers’ to correct (Hendrickson, 1978, p.387-88).
What the Literature Says
While teachers were still experimenting with different teaching methods, there were two different voices about how to treat students’ errors. One group of linguists thought that the errors students made did not need correction; however, another group of linguists felt that teachers had the obligations to correct students’ errors.
The former group of linguists suggested not to correct students’ errors because they felt it was wasting of time for teachers to do that and the outcome was not sufficient since students were still making the same errors over and over again. The other main point the linguists were arguing about is that the error correction would hinder learners’ willingness to speak up in the class because they would be afraid of making any errors and being corrected by teachers. As a result, student’s tensions and anxieties would build up, they would become hesitant to speak and they would develop a lack of confidence in learning the language (Lyster, Lightbown & Spada, 1999).
While one group of people did not think correcting students’ errors was appropriate, there was another group of linguists who thought that correcting students’ error was essential for the learners to acquire the language. Just like children, when they tried to learn their native language, they made all kinds of mistakes and got corrected from their parents and teachers (Bartram & Walton, 1991, p.12-13). But the questions are how to do it – what types of errors should receive the top priority treatment, how and when to correct.
Many linguists thought that teachers should first treat students’ errors when they impede the communication (Bartram & Walton, 1991, p.32-40). In other words, when listeners have difficulty to understand the meaning of the message that students are trying to get across, teachers put their focus on making semantic feedback other than correcting syntactic ones (Hanzeli, 1975, p.431-32).
According to Bartram and Walton (1991, p.30-31), different ways of treating students’ errors will have different learning outcomes for students, and teachers need to build up a trusting and confiding relationship with their students. Students need to know from the beginning of the class that making errors and mistakes while they are learning a language is some sort of necessary process, and there is no need to feel ashamed of or embarrassed. Everybody knows something a little bit better or different than another person, so when language teachers give out their feedbacks on errors, they are not judging but supporting their students. When errors occur, teachers can remodel it by saying it correctly, paraphrase it by saying it in different ways, or prepare a grammar lesson at the end of a class for students (Mantello, 1997).
Hendrickson (1978, p.389-90) and many linguists claimed that it is better not to stop or interfere students in a middle of a conversation or speech just because of some errors. The corrections which are done through breaking up students’ thoughts do not really have sufficient results; instead students feel less motivated and upset from the correction (Lyster, Lightbown & Spada, 1999).
I lean more to the foreign group’s belief than the first; I believe that students’ errors are signs of learning and depending on the types of errors and situations, teachers need to offer students the correct ways or usages of the language, and students have the rights to know. Teacher needs to know when, what, and how to correct a student’s error, but it is also easy to get carried away and lose the focus.
It is hard for me to believe in the first group’s opinion to abandon treatment of student errors. I also found that those shortcomings the first linguists group mentioned above could be solved by incorporating with some teaching strategies. For example, to improve the efficiency of error correction by students, teachers can be selective and systematic about the particular errors that they would like to deal with at that certain learning stage, and work with students from that point (Lyster, Lightbown, & Spada, 1999). The other problem they talked about was overwhelming students by correcting their errors. This is an important issue to consider when dealing with error treatment and I think building up a trusting and confiding relationship between teachers and students is fundamental.
From doing the research, I found much useful information on how to treat foreign language learners’ errors; however, this information could only serve as general ideas or basic knowledge for me to be a teacher because when I start to teach, the outer environment and situation (place – Taiwan vs America) will be different, and each student has various learning styles and personality. Due to these reasons, I need to adjust to each class by applying the varieties of error treatment methods that suit most of the students, so that they will not run away from English or me.
Future Teaching Implications:
From my past foreign language learning experience as a student, I got quite a few of errors and mistakes treatment from my teachers. Some of the corrections made me feel embarrassed and humiliated, and I wanted to run out of the classroom at that instant because of the way the teacher did it. Other times I felt insecure about my learning process because it seemed that the teachers were not correcting my mistakes and errors thoroughly.
As a teacher, I need to constantly monitor my students’ language, and in a split foreign, I need to distinguish “Is it a mistake or an error?” and “Should I make any correction movements or not?”.
After conducting this survey of research on error treatment, I now realize how hard the error correction task is for a teacher. As a teacher, I need to constantly monitor my students’ language, and in a split foreign, I need to distinguish “Is it a mistake or an error?” and “Should I make any correction movements or not?”. If I decide not to correct that error at that moment, then I need to keep in mind to review this problematic area with my students later. Beside these quick judgment calls, I have come up with some teaching strategies about how to deal with different types of students errors.
The first type of errors I will focus on is the one which confuses or impair the understanding of listeners. I agree with most linguists who suggest not interrupting student’s speech, but if the language that a student is using makes the other people confused, I will step in and try to clarify what he/she means. The reason why I think to correct this type of error is important is that students learn the language to be able to communicate and if people do not understand their messages, it loses the meaning of the communication.
I will deal with this type of problem by guessing what the student is trying to say, and using the correct form and words to remodel the sentence; or I will use different words with similar meanings (paraphrasing) to understand student’s intension. While I try to clarify the meaning, students get a chance to hear how to say a particular sentence or use a specific word correctly in a natural way. I think in the future I will encounter this type of situation a lot when I go back to teach in Taiwan because many Taiwanese students tend to translate the language directly from Chinese, especially when they are at the lower level.
For example, if a student say “I use my electronic translator to check new vocabulary every day,” other people may feel strange and not understand. I would then ask the student “Do you mean you use your electronic dictionary to check vocabulary?” Therefore, the student will know the correct word for his electronic device is “dictionary”, and everybody would understand what he was talking about.
Nevertheless, this communication problem is not easy to deal with. To use myself as an example, while I was learning English, I often made the same error several times a day; even though my teacher corrected me more than once, I still kept saying it wrong. I had countless experience about this, and amazingly one day out of blue, I started to say it right, and use it right. Although many linguists have suggested that error correction is just a waste of time, my personally experience shows that this is not true. Those corrections did work, but it just took time for my brain to process those information and time to digest. I think I am the best example of successful error correction.
Another method that I will use to solve communication errors is increasing students’ chances exposed to an English environment. I will encourage them to listen to English songs or radio stations, and watch English channels with covered up Chinese subtitle outside of classroom. In the class, I will give them different articles to read with varieties of interests to increase their English proficiency level. The reason I incorporate these techniques is because I think the students’ communication errors are coming from their lower English level and lack of exposure to English. By maximizing their chances to read, listen to, and speak in English, they will less likely to produce communication errors.
Another problem area I will deal with is grammar. If a couple of students in the classroom often make the same or similar errors repeatedly, I will start to pay attention to the problem. I will not correct them directly, but rather design a mini lesson that refers to the particular grammar problem. I will try to deliver the lesson as soon as possible because I do not want other students to think that the way they say it is acceptable and adopts the same error. Sometimes a mini-grammar lesson at the end of class works to supplement and conclude that day’s lesson. However, if the error or the problem is major and needs more time to explain, it will be a 30 minutes lesson.
For example, if students are confused about when to use past tense, first I will write down different sentences in pairs – one with correct tense, and one with incorrect tense aspect, and have students to figure out which one is correct. After they are clear about when and how to use the past tense, I would then ask them to generate their own sentences in past tense, such as what they did yesterday, before the class, or anything happened before now. When they are done, I will ask them to share their sentences with the class, and pass around a big poster to let students write down their past tense sentences. After they all finish, I will hang the poster on the wall to remind students about the past tense they just learned.
Teachers often feel exhausted and disappointed about the result after correcting students’ error because those errors do not seem to go away.
I think this is a sufficient way to use when correcting errors and teaching students the grammar concept. Teachers often feel exhausted and disappointed about the result after correcting students’ error because those errors do not seem to go away. Students are making the same error over and over again. When I ask students to write down their own sentences using the just learned grammar rules, and put them on posters, they will feel ownership of what they have just produced. They will remember that sentence or even that grammar rule longer. And by hanging the poster on the classroom wall, this is another way of preventing students from making the same or similar mistake again. If the same problem occurs, I will point to the poster to remind students.
Conclusion:
Before doing the research on this topic, I had never thought about how hard it could be for a teacher to correct students’ errors. After studying about this topic, I found some linguists do not believe in error correction and think it is inefficient to correct students’ errors, while other linguists think in totally opposite direction.
Having gained so much knowledge from the research, I have some ideas about how to implement error correction in my future classroom. First main point to remember is not to interrupt student’s speech: even though, there is an error, as long as everybody understands. I will ask questions, paraphrase, or reformulate the sentence when I do not understand what student is trying to say. I will also use all kinds of supplement reading, listening, and speaking materials to boost student’s exposure to English, which I think will reduce their chances to make communication errors in the future. When dealing with frequently appearing grammar errors, I will set up grammar lesson to explicit state the rules and exceptions for students, and post the information on the wall, where students can see it constantly without any intensions.
Above are just some teaching techniques that I would like to try out in the future, but I believe there are many more excellent methods in dealing with students’ errors because each individual is unique and different. Some method may work out well for one student, but probably not for another. As a teacher, I will try to be flexible and open-minded in acquiring varieties of teaching and correcting methods.
Reference
Bartram, M., & Walton, R. (1991). Correction: a positive approach to language mistakes. England: Language Teaching.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Hanzeli, V. E. (1975). Learner’s language: Implications of recent research for foreign language instruction. The modern language journal, 59, 426-432.
Hendrickson, J. M. (1978). Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research, and practice. The modern language journal, 62, 387-398.
Lyster, R., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1999). A response to Truscott’s “What’s wrong with oral grammar correction”, Canadian modern language review (Vol. 55, No. 4).
About the Author:
M. Enamul Hoque has been an English language teacher for over 15 years in different Government institutes of Bangladesh. He is an Instructor of ELT in the Education and Training Wing, Ministry of Environment and Forest. He has MA in English from Dhaka University, and his Ph.D and M.Phil in Applied Linguistics and ELT from the Jahangirnagar University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.He has published widely on a variety of topics and is particularly interested in English language teaching and applied linguistics
Recent Comments