INTRODUCTION
Rationales
In today's society, English is very important For many people, learning English is essential Teaching and learning revolve around developing four abilities, with speaking being the most difficult for students to master since it demands them to create words spontaneously or without enough time to compose suitable and proper utterances.
Errors and error correction have received much attention in speaking workshops throughout the years (Ellis, 1994) Various authors have distinct points of view Some people regard a error as a regular occurrence They say that humans can't help but make errors and that they may even learn from them. Making errors is a natural part of learning, and correcting them wisely can help you achieve better results in the classroom On the other hand, others see an error as a negative that must be avoided As a result, language teachers have always had a negative attitude regarding it They generally have the most authority to automatically correct students' faults, even though students appreciate and expect teachers to correct them.
Correcting learners' vocal faults is one of the most challenging duties for most language teachers since it involves greater subjectivity owing to individual factors (Cohen, 1998) Error correction is complex and perhaps baffling when individual elements are considered crucial aspects in speech As a result, errors correction must be done correctly, lest learners become discouraged from learning and practicing the language.
Although error correction has been a subject of research for a long time, many linguists have focused mainly on the sources of errors, whether or not to correct spoken errors, and error correction approaches However, there is limited study on effective error-correction procedures in general and in speaking classes.
The issue above of error correction in speaking classes, as well as the information vacuum in the research domain, piqued my attention and prompted me to conduct the following study: “A study on error correction strategies in
Speaking classes at Le Hoan High School 10th Form Students”.
Aims of the Study
The present study is taking place in Le Hoan High School The study's primary goal is to discover effective error-correction procedures in speaking classes To be more explicit, the purposes of this thesis are to:
+ to examine how teachers correct their students' oral faults
+ to identify acceptable error-correction strategies in speaking classes
+ to make suggestions for repairing oral problems in speaking classes
Scope of the Study
Students' language, whether spoken or written, is deemed productive.Errors can happen in both speaking and writing classes Due to time, ability, and data availability constraints, we wish to analyze the current situation of errors correction at Le Hoan High School's speaking classes and identify acceptable error-correction procedures for use in a real-world setting Because the participants in this study were limited to students in the 10th form at Le HoanHigh School, their views on appropriate error-correction strategies in speaking classes may not represent all students at Le Hoan High School in particular, or all students are learning English in general.
Research Questions
The following research questions are addressed to attain the study's objectives:
1 What kind of oral blunders do students frequently make in speaking classes?
2 When and how are oral errors in the classroom corrected?
3 What are the best ways for correcting errors in speaking classes?
Methods of the Study
We study the associated materials to meet the study's objectives, which is a technique of establishing the study's theoretical basis The study employs both qualitative and quantitative methodologies Survey questionnaires and classroom observation are used to collect data for study analysis and debate The data collection findings of survey questionnaires on 10th form students and English teachers at Le Hoan High School are analyzed using the quantitative approach.
In addition, the data from classroom observation forms are analyzed using a quantitative manner (COFs) We then synthesize and analyze the COFs.Relevant information to support the study will be obtained by employing each strategy.
Significance of the Study
Errors by students are essential in both English as a foreign language (EFL) teaching and learning since they constitute indicators of their learning progress.
As a result, this thesis will provide a novel contribution to second language acquisition (SLA), specifically in the area of error correction in speaking classes Pedagogically, the findings of this study may assist English teachers in better understanding spoken faults and how to remedy them They change their teaching and use suitable error-correction tactics as a result of this to improve error-correction effectiveness As a final-year linguistics student, the researcher will have a thorough understanding of the process of teaching and learning EFL in general and errors and error correction in speaking classes in particular These will aid in improving instructional efficiency.
Structure of the Study
The research is divided into three sections:
Part I, Introduction, the motivation, goals, scope, research questions, research methods, importance, and organization of the study are all included in this section.
Part II, Development, is divided into four chapters:
Chapter 1, Literature Review, discusses many topics related to the research issue, such as teaching and learning methods to speaking The overview of errors that follows goes through the definitions of errors as well as the many sorts of errors This chapter also contains perspectives on acceptable error- correction tactics, including when, what, who, and how to effectively correct errors.
Chapter 2, Methodology, displays the current situation of English teaching and learning, as well as the facts of error correction in Le Hoan High School's 10th grade speaking sessions and basic information about the study themes It also focuses on the devices and techniques used to collect data.
Chapter 3, Findings, presents and analyzes the data from the surveys and classroom observation in great detail.
Chapter 4, Discussions and Recommendations contains some discussion and interpretations of the study's findings In addition, this chapter offers some suggestions for successful error correction in speaking courses And by using the three-stage concept, it incorporates error correction practice into speaking classes.
Part III, Conclusion, offers a description of the study and some practical implications for correctly addressing faults in speaking classes This section also discusses the study's weaknesses and recommends future research.
DEVELOPMENT
LITERATURE REVIEW
The focus of the literature review will be on error correction in speaking classes It will be covered in a single chapter Following the introduction, the theoretical assumptions and findings from previous empirical research will be discussed to discuss teaching and learning approaches to speaking The following section will go over the many perspectives on errors Following that, a literature review on error correction will be presented to determine which error- correction procedures are most suited for speaking courses The literature review will be concluded with a chapter summary.
1 Approaches to Teaching and Learning Speaking
Language instruction has long been seen to aid in developing linguistic competence The methodology, on the other hand, has significantly changed. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) has recently been the dominant approach to language instruction, owing to its emphasis on meaning and communication in the target language and its student-centered approach CLT is without a doubt the technique employed by most language teachers today, according to Davies (2000) Language acquisition is viewed as a protracted process of exposure and communicative use of the language, with many unavoidable faults, under this approach Furthermore, student autonomy is widely seen as critical to language acquisition success Language students' success is determined by their capacity to communicate in the target language.
As a result, the communicative competency of students is critical to language teaching and learning.
“Accuracy refers to the ability to speak a language properly, without or with few errors while fluency is the capacity to speak fluidly, confidently” writes Bailey (2005), Hinkel (2006) says that a communicative approach to education necessitates both fluency and accuracy in speaking in a second language As a skilled speaker communicates with both fluency and correctness, balancing fluency and accuracy is critical (Bailey, 2005) In speaking classes, however, Norrish (1983) claims that fluency is more important than correctness since students are able to get their message across even if there are some flaws in their speech rather than pausing their flow of speech to correct them It is advised that if numerous faults occur in speaking courses, those that hinder communication be remedied (Edge, 1989).
Language scholars and teachers are still debating whether to stress fluency, correctness or both Accuracy or fluency may be emphasized during practice. The majority of faults in accuracy work should be remedied right away. Ignoring the correctness of students is not a good idea since successful communication requires a certain level of accuracy Hedge (2000) asserted that it is critical not to disrupt students' attempts to communicate in fluency practice. Hence non-instant correction is better than immediate correction To be specific, teachers are urged to wait until completing the exercise to rectify errors.
The communicative approach differs from prior teaching techniques, even in terms of error correction There is a low emphasis on form in CLT and a lack of attention to error repair It is usually dealt with by focusing on the meaning if that happens Errors can be beneficial in that they allow teachers to assess the cognitive progress of their students Furthermore, if they are effectively remedied, their learning can improve Because communication classes are defined by activities in which students communicate by engaging and completing tasks or activities with other students, it is desirable to focus on error correction in the later situations of the lesson or the post-activity situation (Hymes, 1972) During such exercises, the teacher's responsibility is to facilitate and then supervise, generally without interruption.
In CLT, it is standard practice not to interrupt a student to react to an error if she or he is successfully expressing the message despite the problem Bailey
(2005) proposes dealing with errors correctly when they obstruct communication However, the researcher's previous experience as a second language student in some contexts and experience from class observation as a final year foreign language student has revealed that many language teachers still confront their students' errors daily and make a significant effort to correct those errors.
Errors are defined in a variety of ways Depending on his or her viewpoints and areas of study, each researcher defines errors in his or her way “Error is any deviation from a selected norm of language performance, no matter the characteristics or cause of the deviation,” writes Krashen (1982) Hendrickson
(1980) defines ‘error’ as “an utterance, form, or structure that a particular language teacher deems unacceptable because of its inappropriate use or absence in real-life discourse.” As a result, a error might be a violation of a phonological or grammatical norm and an improper form or phrase in a specific scenario. Given that the current study's goal is to rectify oral errors, knowing all of the real causes of errors isn't critical Consequently, the word 'error' is used in this study to refer to language that deviates from Standard English and/or is regarded erroneous.
Errors and mistakes are unavoidable aspects of learning These two names appear identical at first, yet they are incredibly distinct.
According to Corder (1967), "errors occur due to the lack of knowledge of the proper rule" "Although I enjoy cities, I love the countryside." is an example of this This phrase indicates that the speaker did not understand how to employ concessive clauses correctly or that he/she may have transferred an excellent grammatical rule from his/her native tongue.
Errors can show evidence of learning They tend to be systematic and not self-correctable, while mistakes are non-systematic and self-correctable
According to Tanner and Green (1998), A mistake is “a slip of the tongue;the student knows the correct form but has temporarily forgotten it” As a result, supermarket yesterday," for example, is an example of a blunder This happened because the speaker failed to utilize the past tense form of the word "go" when making the statement.
Student errors can be classified according to several factors According to Burt (1975), errors are classified into: global errors and local errors The former relates to grammatical faults that “affect overall sentence organization, such as wrong word order, missing, wrong, or misplaced sentence connectors” The latter, on the other hand, affects individual parts in a phrase without interfering with communication, such as faults in noun and verb inflections, articles, auxiliaries, etc Errors may be classified into four primary groups based on their linguistic levels:
Grammatical errors can obstruct communication by emphasizing the need for grammatical precision in both speech and writing In fact, the conventional concentration in ELT on grammatical error repair has been an enormous distraction for any language teacher when it comes to error correction On a larger scale, morpho-syntactic errors can reduce overall intelligibility and have a negative impact on communication The statement "I love my cat more than my wife" made by a speaker might be perplexing 'Errors' at the phrase level are frequently performance 'errors,' for which quick teacher criticism is not always appropriate (Lee, 1990) "I singed French, but I didn't feel it is French," one speaker stated.
Discourse errors are caused by a failure to follow the norms of speech and reflect a student's cultural and pragmatic understanding of language usage.
“Now I’m learning English news I like them”, for example Because the speaker mistook "news" for a plural word, this is a case of cohesive device abuse.
According to Hendrickson (1981), education must be linked to strategies of language presentation Repairing errors in the written medium should be approached differently from correcting faults in the spoken style Each form of conversation necessitates various corrections at different appropriate times. When it comes to spoken discourse, knowing when to correct is critical to the student's confidence and the flow of the conversation Methods for addressing spoken faults are also given much thought If the exchange is interrupted by corrections, it is exceedingly difficult for a spontaneous dialogue or interaction to occur in oral communicative language As a result, fast rectification of speech faults should be discouraged for fear of hurting students' confidence A better strategy would be to educate students to be aware of their abilities to monitor and remedy their own errors.
Pronunciation and/or intonation faults are examples of phonological errors.
In the following line, for example, the speaker mispronounced the term [waste] as [water]: “Some threw water in the forest they got a fine” This made it challenging for the listener to follow along Because such errors may have a meaning-differentiating function in the SLA process, they must be corrected as soon as possible Few teachers expect students to be able to create a native sound system in their second language This is a location where fossilization is more likely to occur However, communication might break down if a phonologically-induced error is severe enough to compromise intelligibility. This is when proper correction, such as implicit comments from the audience, is critical in identifying the speaker's inaccuracy.
Lexical errors can also obstruct communication and comprehension This sort of error can readily occur in conjunction with others A speaker's error in the line “I read many books interesting” is an example The wrong word order is a typical sort of lexical error The following statement contains a more significant lexical error: "The man raised from the ground." That is a misapplication of the verb "raise." In this scenario, the word "rose" is appropriate Lexical errors, like morpho-syntactic errors, are errors that teachers frequently correct Correcting lexical errors is simple for teachers since all they have to do is spot the change in meaning and offer the proper term.
3 Error Correction Strategies in Speaking classes
METHODOLOGY
1 An Overview of the Research Site
Le Hoan High School, founded in 1967, is located in Xuan Lai commune, Tho Xuan district, Thanh Hoa province This public school has 28 classes with over 66 teachers of different subjects Currently there are approximately 1.133 students of three grades: 10, 11, and 12 Grade 10 has 9 classes, Grade 11 has 10 classes, and Grade 12 has 9 classes On the average, there are about 38 to 45 students in a class Most of the students come from the nearby villages
The number of students in the 10th grade is 378 They are now 16 years of age The students learned English as a foreign language for four years at Junior High School and are all learning English, with from three to four English classes a week
The 10 th form students are now using Tieng Anh 10, the standard syllabus, written by Hoang Van Van et al It follows two popular approaches, namely student-centred approach and communicative approach There are 16 units in the textbook Each unit contains 5 lessons: Reading, Speaking, Listening, Writing and Language Focus Obviously these textbooks focus on linguistic knowledge as well as skill formation and development Speaking skill is taught in one lesson of a unit Its primary goal is to improve communicative competence, that is, the ability to communicate in English
All the 7 teachers of English at Le Hoan High School are Vietnamese, aged from 30 to 45 Most teachers have more than 10 years of seniority in teaching English All of them are female Four of them got formal training The rest are in-service graduates.
1.4 Learning Situation in 10 th Grade
The major teaching tools utilized in English classes include a chalkboard,textbooks, and in the last three years, teachers have begun employing tapes in listening classes Physically, the classrooms are congested, leaving little opportunity for activity arrangement Furthermore, there are no competitions or outside activities in which pupils can participate Furthermore, the majority of pupils do not recognize the significance of English English exams are used to assess a student's language skills The students' speaking exam, on the other hand, is not implemented In general, the pupils' command of the English language is limited They also have insufficient academic exposure to English, resulting in poor conversational abilities As a result, teaching English in general and speaking English, in particular, has been fraught with challenges.
In speaking classes, the error correction is arbitrary When students make errors, each teacher reacts differently The majority of them make haphazard corrections Due to a lack of expertise in teaching approaches, they seldom use suitable error-correction procedures To be honest, their error-correction tactics are inadequate and ineffective They either never correct faults made by pupils or correct nearly all errors made by students in unfavorable ways As a result, error correction is inefficient and potentially harmful.
2 The Subjects of the Study
The study's participants are 7 English teachers who educate pupils in the 10th grade A total of 82 students from Le Hoan High School, where we carried out the research, have also been chosen Teachers and students will assist the researcher by filling out questionnaires and conducting their courses as normal so that the researcher may observe and collect the most trustworthy data.
The study's participants are a group of 82 students from Le Hoan High School's 10th grade They are from the 10A1 and 10A2 grades In terms of origin, most of them are from the rural They aren't the same when it comes to English proficiency in general and speaking ability in particular In speaking classes, just a few of them are good and dynamic, while the others are inert and silent.
The 7 teachers of English who are currently teaching the 10th form are asked to complete the questionnaires for teachers All of them are female Their ages range from 30 to 45 They have been teaching English at Le Hoan High School for more than 10 years.
In order to get the needed information, the two instruments are employed. They are questionnaires and classroom observation
Two sets of questionnaires were created to look at how error-correction is done and to collect feedback on acceptable error-correction procedures from the participants Each one has 13 questions that must be answered in order to address the research questions Each questionnaire has six items on a five-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree," with "strongly disagree" being the most extreme (see Appendix 1; 2) The pupils were given a questionnaire that had seven questions and six statements written in English. With questions from 1 to 7, each has three to five options for the students to show their choice(s) by circling the letter(s) They have the option of selecting several responses They just check one box for each of the statements from 8 to
13 to express their views The following are the three primary sections of the student questionnaire:
Part 1 is designed to gather some background information on the pupils. Part 2 consists of 7 questions designed to help students offer information on how to rectify errors in their speaking classes.
Part 3 has 6 statements allowing students to express their views on spoken error-correction strategies.
The questionnaires, which were given to 7 teachers, contained 7 questions and 6 statements in order to collect data Teachers can pick from three to five alternatives for each inquiry They just circle the letter(s) to answer questions 1 through 7 Of course, they have the option of selecting several responses They just check one box for each sentence from 8 to 13, indicating their viewpoint. The teacher questionnaire is divided into three main sections:
Part 1 elicits the some background information from the teachers
Part 2, with 7 questions, is designed for the teachers to give the facts of error-correction in their speaking classes.
Part 3 deals with the teachers’ opinions of error-correction methods in speaking classes.
Aside from surveys, a classroom observation is another tool utilized to get more data for the study concerning the work of error correction in speaking courses The researcher plans to watch the courses 10A1 and 10A2, in which two different English teachers teach with varying talents The information will be gathered for four lessons, two for each class Each class is 45 minutes long. The students should not be aware that they will be monitored in class The students and teachers go about their business as normal Furthermore, the researcher must not interfere with the teachers, students, or activities, known as non-participating observation Classroom Observation Forms (COFs) are used to record the specifics of error rectification (see Appendix 3).
The data collecting for this study began in the first week of the second semester The second semester started on February 07, 2022, and the school year began on September 05, 2021 Students in the 10th form have been studying in
Le Hoan for one semester They've adjusted well to their new surroundings in general and the teaching and study of English in particular Teachers have also learned a great deal about their students.
FINDINGS
This chapter will show and evaluate the findings of the questionnaires and class observation The data is analyzed using the characteristics of the teacher and student questionnaires, as well as COFs To begin, all of the information gathered from the questionnaires and COFs is analyzed to gain a sense of the big picture The data will subsequently be calculated and shown in tables Finally, the data will be methodically analyzed and examined.
1 Presentation and Analysis from the Questionnaires
The first section of the student questionnaires aims to obtain some background information about the students The second part's material is devoted to investigating the facts of error correction in speaking classes It comprises 7 questions, each of which allows pupils to pick what they believe to be true for them Table 1 shows the findings of the student surveys, which are examined as follows:
1 How often are errors corrected in your speaking classes? a Always 47 57.32 b Usually 29 35.36 c Sometimes 5 6.10 d Seldom 1 1.22 e Never 0 0
2 Which kinds of errors are often corrected? a Lexical errors 19 23.17 b Grammatical errors 37 45.12 c Discourse errors 12 14.63 d Phonological errors 79 96.34
3 When there are many errors in learners’ speech, which types are corrected? a Errors hindering communication 25 30.49 b Errors beyond learners’ ability 39 47.56 c Errors of common types 34 41.46 d Errors of high frequency 18 21.95
4 When does your teacher often initiate error correction? a At transition periods 12 14.63 b At the end of the lesson 0 0 c During the activities 82 100 d In the next lesson 0 0
5 Who usually corrects errors? a You yourself 8 9.75 b Your classmates 17 20.73 c Your teachers 79 96.34
6 How does your teacher correct errors in speaking classes? a Showing the errors and then giving direct corrections.
43 52.44 b Showing the errors and giving hints for students to correct.
27 32.92 c Pointing out the errors without correction.
9 10.98 d Correcting errors in an encouraging way.
7 What does your teacher do in order to correct errors effectively? a Try to be friendly and helpful 46 56.10 b Get insights into students 30 36.59 c Give students support for self- correction.
Table 1: Students’ judgement on error-correction in their speaking classes.
As seen in the table above, 57.32% of students believe that teachers always fix errors in speaking classes, whereas 35.36% believe that error correction is always done in speaking classes Only a tiny percentage of students (6.10%) indicated that rectifying errors occurred in their classes on sometimes. Specifically, a small percentage of students (1.22%) said their teachers seldom fixed errors, and no student said their teachers never corrected errors In general, error correcting practice was performed often in speaking classes.
When it came to the types of faults that were corrected, the majority of students (96.34%) said that phonological problems were the most important to fix in speaking classes With 45.12%, correcting grammatical problems came in second Lexical and discourse problems were corrected in 23.17% and 14.63 % of cases, respectively.
In the third question, students were asked to respond to a question regarding which errors should be fixed if there were too many spoken errors.
According to 47.56% of pupils, their teachers always corrected faults above their abilities This suggests that the more difficult an error is to remedy, the more likely it will be Students chose to fix frequent errors 41.46% of the time, while 30.49% said errors that hampered communication were rectified The percentage of pupils who had high-frequency errors that needed to be addressed was 21.95%.
In terms of error correction time, we can observe from the table that 100% of the teachers frequently corrected the students' faults right away This implies that when the pupils were speaking, the error correction was always done while they were speaking Only a small percentage of teachers (14.63%) corrected errors during transition times Surprisingly, neither the end of the class nor the next lesson included any error correction.
A closer examination of the data in question 5 revealed an exciting finding concerning the corrections used in speaking courses The vast majority of teachers (96.34%) self-corrected errors Peer correction (20.73%) and self- correction are entirely outnumbered by this kind (9.75% ).
The direct correction was the most popular form of error correction, accounting for 52.44% of the total The indirect correction was used by a smaller number of pupils (32.92%), indicating that indirect correction was used to deal with errors Only 10.98% of teachers concentrated on the flaws without making any corrections, whereas 47.56% positively fixed problems.
The seventh question was intended to inquire about efficient error- correction strategies used by their teachers The students were given four alternatives to choose from With 56.10%, they ranked teachers' friendliness and helpfulness as the most significant of the possibilities With 54.88%, teachers' support for self-correction came in second According to a smaller percentage of students, teachers should get insights about pupils, such as language competency, needs, preferences, and so on, according to a smaller percentage of students (36.59%) Correcting errors on a case-by-case basis was the least important, accounting for only 15.58% of the total.
The third section of the student questionnaire consists of six statements about errors correcting procedures Table 2 contains the obtained data, which will be studied in detail as follows:
8 Too much correction inhibits students from speaking, while too much tolerance causes errors to become fossilized.
9 When deciding which faults to repair, repeat and shared errors take precedence.
10 Constant, quick correction detracts from the objective of speaking.
11 Teachers should note student errors and come back to them later.
12 Implicitly correcting faults encourages pupils to reflect more on their errors.
13 The teachers employ error- correction tactics that are both constructive and encouraging and provide models for pupils to fix.
Table 2: Students’ opinions of effective error-correction methods in speaking classes.
Statement 8 discusses the negative consequences of overcorrection and error tolerance There were an equal number of pupils who agreed and disagreed Each is responsible for 32.93% of the total Only 17.06% of them expressed strong agreement with the concept The smallest percentage (7.32%), on the other hand, was adamantly opposed With 12.20%, the rest were undecided about the statement.
The following statement is intended to elicit student feedback on whether persistent and common errors should be prioritized The notion was supported by 47.56% of them, with 35.37% strongly supporting it A tiny percentage of people (9.75%) couldn't decide whether they agreed or disagreed Only 7.32% of them disagreed, and no kid was vehemently opposed.
In terms of the negative effects of frequent instant correction, 63.41% of students opposed or strongly disagreed, while just 25.61% supported the viewpoint Furthermore, 10.98% of the students were still hesitant to take a firm stance.
Statement 11 dealt with the use of non-immediate correction, and most students (31.70%) disapproved of the concept, with 4.88% expressing severe opposition Those who agreed and strongly agreed were 30.49% and 19.52%, respectively A total of 18.29% of students were undecided regarding the effectiveness of non-immediate correction.
When asked if they thought implicit error correction would help students reflect more on their errors, the majority of students (78.05%) said yes Only 9.75% of students are opposed to the concept A few more students (12.20%) were undecided about the concept.
When it comes to error-correction tactics, the majority of students (93.90%) believe that positive and encouraging strategies and error-correction models should be implemented On the other hand, a small percentage of students, 6.10%, opposed the notion We can observe from the chart that no student was undecided regarding this statement.
DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The study's primary findings will be extracted from the results reported in the previous chapter, and then some detailed comments will be offered Finally, in this chapter, some suggestions for successful error correction in speaking classes will be provided.
1.1 Teachers’ Awareness of Error Correction
Despite the current tendency in language education, the study's findings revealed that most teachers routinely faced their students' faults and attempted to decrease them They were continuously correcting faults that had little effect on intelligibility Furthermore, the teachers had a negative attitude about making and correcting errors They didn't always correct errors in a pleasant manner. They liked to appoint students to rectify faults since it forced them to work Too much nomination, on the other hand, would make students more passive They were terrified of being ridiculed or chastised by peers if they made a error.
Furthermore, conventional teaching approaches continued to impact the teachers strongly That is, they talked too much and offered long explanations, which wasted time and made the pupils confused Because the pupils have a hard time understanding what they're saying, they're sure to make errors In language schools, it also appears that there is a significant gap between theory and practice.
In terms of corrective methods, teachers tended to use teacher correction more than peer or self-correction This evidence contradicts Bailey's conclusion
(2005) More student correction, in his opinion, should be implemented.Teachers demonstrated errors and assigned pupils to remedy them through practice For most students, however, we're unable to rectify the errors As a result, teacher correction was used since it was deemed successful and time- saving by the teachers Furthermore, excessive teacher correction made students overly reliant on them.
When it came to error correction, it was discovered that teachers frequently utilized immediate error correction In other words, most errors were corrected during the activities or while they were in process The motivation of the students was ruined as a result of this Non-immediate correction, on the other hand, was used less frequently since it needed more time and effort from both teachers and pupils Furthermore, the teachers lacked the patience to wait for the students to fix their errors.
The study's findings revealed that the teachers employed explicit and implicit correcting strategies In most situations, however, explicit error correction was performed They tended to offer clear correction for all faults, particularly phonological and grammatical problems.
When it came to giving corrections, it was discovered that a lot of effort had gone into correcting complicated language problems, including grammar and phonological faults This led the pupils to believe that the teacher was uninterested in their thoughts and viewpoints during their speech.
When it comes to educational challenges, high-class sizes provide a dilemma for most teachers to correct faults, as the more pupils in a class, the more errors are made during their speech Extensive courses for 38 to 45 students pose a significant challenge in rectifying faults.
In actuality, the textbook is the only material used in the classroom by the teachers Without alteration or expansion, the teachers utilize direct copies from the textbook Many tasks appear to be beyond the majority of pupils' abilities, resulting in frequent blunders Furthermore, input activities are limited, resulting in a lack of linguistic expertise linked to the topic among the pupils This also contributes to the pupils' inability to avoid making errors.
According to the students, the outcome demonstrated that they were lazy and did not work hard in class When their teachers summoned them to remedy faults, they frequently responded with "No, I can't," remained mute, or waited for help from their peers Teachers have no option but to fix the faults in these circumstances.
To be used in language classrooms, especially in speaking sessions, proper error-correction procedures must be considered in light of the issues described above Correcting errors instantly, unselectively, and explicitly most of the time, without regard for the students' factors, is an ineffective method If this condition persists, error-correcting activities will be impractical, if not counterproductive.
Error correction in speaking classes requires special attention since each student will react differently to teacher corrections The primary goal of most speaking classes is to teach students how to utilize the language fluently and accurately inappropriate situations As a result, it is recommended that errors be addressed effectively and strategically The following are a few suggestions:
Teachers should be aware of the viewpoint that errors should not be tolerated or rectified excessively Error correction should not be used as a form of judgment or punishment but rather as a tool to help students become more accurate and less reliant on standard English Teachers should remember that errors are a normal and vital part of learning Because not all errors indicate a student's failure to learn, teachers should use them to improve classroom performance Teachers must enhance their teaching skills regularly by attending conferences, seminars, and refresher courses, studying online, and/or upgrading teaching methods through books, journals, and magazines, among other things.
When correcting errors, the degree of linguistic skill of the students should be considered Teachers should pay more attention to less-advanced pupils, as they require more assistance and may profit more from corrections These pupils should be encouraged to speak the target language Teachers should utilize error-correction procedures that require students to reflect on their language understanding for L2 proficient students The sorts of error-correction procedures that stimulate student-generated fixes are suitable for these students. When pupils make an error, it is important not to condemn them Teachers should congratulate children on their responses, then ask them to repeat them and tell them the proper answer As a result, individuals are less fearful of making errors and are more confident while speaking English Making constructive corrections and recognizing students' improvement in L2 speaking is vital in repairing errors Students' desire to speak will be boosted by constructive criticism and genuine compliments When students make errors or seek to communicate their views and opinions, they should be encouraged.
The pupils would be discouraged from speaking if there were too many adjustments Teachers are recommended to be more forgiving of their students' verbal blunders because they may have a unique challenge with their capacity to recognize errors and be interrupted while speaking Furthermore, it is thought that when teachers forgive students' errors in speaking sessions, they are more likely to feel competent in utilizing the target language.
2.4 Making Pre-speaking Activities Effective
CONCLUSION
Summary
This study aimed to look at efective error correction in 10th-grade students' speaking classes at Le Hoan High School, determine what suitable error- correction tactics are, and offer some recommendations, applications, and pedagogical implications to help improve the situation The data show that errors correction is a significant issue for teachers and students Because the teachers were unaware of the faults and how to correct them in speaking courses, the effect of error correction was minimal A solid command of error- correction tactics and how to employ them correctly in speaking classes will lead to success in fixing errors in this circumstance A variety of error-correction techniques have been suggested However, because there is no ideal technique, it is recommended that students use a combination of error-correction procedures when rectifying their speech faults Choosing errors to correct based on particular criteria, employing more student correction and implicit correction at appropriate times to not interrupt students' speech, and considering students' factors are all examples of reasonable error-correction procedures Error correction will significantly improve pupils' linguistic understanding and abilities The study achieves its objectives as mentioned in the research questions.
It's vital to emphasize that the goal of this study is to provide teachers with information on students' perceptions of spoken error correction It is crucial to evaluate the study's potential consequences for classroom practice The findings of this study might be applied to classroom practice in various ways.
To begin with, error correction methods in the language classroom cannot be rigorous Rigid and quick correction of every error during production may disrupt and change students' thought paths, resulting in significant psychological dissatisfaction.
Second, not all errors require correction Overcorrection is harmful to pupils; thus, disciplines should focus on the most severe faults so that students can use the target language appropriately and avoid making errors Furthermore, teachers should be sympathetic enough to accept inevitable blunders, particularly those that show that learning occurs The teacher's attitude toward errors will have good consequences on pupils, the most significant of which will improve their confidence and help them overcome their fear of making errors. Third, correcting errors is a good idea Teachers' perspectives on error correction are thought to impact their actions Hence teachers should be encouraged to learn about and develop insights into the subject Correcting a student's speech faults should be done to promote learning and enlist the participation of other pupils Teachers choose the language to use for converting depending on the circumstances to establish learning-friendly settings.
Finally, a thorough grasp of the nature of errors is required before a systematic approach to eliminating them can be devised As a result, teachers should be aware of the error system Only when teachers understand why a error occurred can they begin to repair it in an organized and suitable manner.
Limitations of the Study
There are various limitations to this study that should be mentioned in this debate For starters, external dependability is jeopardized since the teacher's and researcher's joint roles may cause data analysis to deviate The teacher may have his expectations about the study's findings Nunan (1992) wonders if an independent researcher could replicate the research and develop the same results.
Second, more systematic and extensive studies are required, considering various levels of explicit and implicit correction The current study only looked at two types of punishment: explicit and implicit The focus on possibilities may be expanded to incorporate various levels of implicitness and explicitness encountered in classroom contexts.
Third, problems such as time, manner, and kind of correction are so vast and complicated that short research like this cannot adequately explain them.Furthermore, further in-depth research might be conducted to determine which children with which types of language skills would gain the most from correction.
Suggestions for Further Studies
This research provides new avenues for error correction research Although the study has been done to establish acceptable error correction procedures for speaking classes, less attention has been paid to rectifying students' errors according to their requirements, desires, and preferences The result may be more rewarding for the students if the teacher pays close attention to students' variations and employs a variety of corrective tactics based on their requirements, desires, and preferences.
1 Allan, D (1991) Tape Journal: Bridging the Gap between Communication and Correction English Teaching Journal, 45(1), pp 61-66
2 Allwright, R (1975) Problems in the Study of the Language Teacher's Treatment of Learner Error In M.K Burt & H.C Dulay (Eds.), On TESOL 75:
New Directions in Second Language Learning, Teaching, and Bilingual Education, (pp 96-109) Washington, D.C.: TESOL.
3 Allwright, D., & Bailey, K M (1991) Focus on the Language Classroom:
An Introduction to Classroom Research for Language Teachers New York:
4 Bailey, K.M (2005) Practical English Language Teaching: Speaking New York: McGraw-Hill
5 Brown, H D (1994) Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to
Language Pedagogy New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents
6 Burt, K.M., & Kiparsky, C (1972) A Repair Manual for English Rowley, MA: Newbury House
7 Burt, H D (1975) Error Analysis in the Adult EFL Classroom TESOL
8 Carroll, S., & Swain, M (1993) Explicit and Implicit Negative Feedback: An Empirical Study of the Learning of Linguistic Generalizations Studies in SLA
9 Chaudron, C (1986) Teachers’ Priorities in Correcting Learners’ Errors in French Immersion Classes In R Day (Ed.), Talking to Learn: Conversation in
10 Chaudron, C (1987) The Role of Error Correction in Second Language Teaching In B.K Das (Ed.), Patterns of Classroom Interaction in Southeast
Asia, pp 17-50 Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre
11 Chomsky, N (1959) Review of Verbal Behaviour by B F Skinner.
12 Chun, A E., Day, R R., Chenoweth, N A., & Luppescu, S (1982) Errors, Interaction, and Correction: A Study of Native-nonnative Conversations TESOL
13 Cohen, A D (1975) Error Correction and the Training of Language Teachers Modern Language Journal, 59(8), pp 414-422
14 Cohen, A D (1998) Strategies in Learning and Using a Second Language. New York:Longman
15 Corder, S P (1967) The Significance of Learner’s Errors International
Review of Applied Linguistics (5), pp 161-170
16 Davies, P (2000) Success in English Teaching, Oxford: OUP.
17 Doff, A (1998) Teach English: A Training Course for Teachers: Trainer's
Handbook Cambridge: CUP in Association with the British Council
18 Edge, J (1989) Mistakes and Correction New York: Longman
19 Ellis, R (1994) The Study of Second Language Acquisition New York: OUP.
20 Fanselow, J F (1977) The Treatment of Error in Oral Work Foreign Language Annals, 10(5), pp 583-593 TESOL.
21 Ferris, D R (1995) Student Reactions to Teacher Response in Multiple- draft Composition Classrooms TESOL Quarterly, 29, pp 33-53
22 Ferris, D R., & Hedgcock, J (1998) Teaching ESL Composition: Purpose,
Process, and Practice Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23 Hammerly, H (1991) Fluency and Accuracy: Toward Balance in Language
Teaching and Learning Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters
24 Hedge, T (2000) Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom, Oxford: OUP.
25 Hendrickson, J M (1978) Error Correction in Foreign Language Teaching: Recent Theory, Research, and Practice Modern Language Journal, 62(8), pp. 387-398.
26 Hendrickson, J M (1980) Error Correction in Foreign Language Teaching: Recent Theory, Research, and Practice In K., Croft (Ed.), Readings on English as a Second Language, Second Edition Cambridge, Mass: Winthrop Publishers.
27 Hendrickson, J M (1981) Error Analysis and Error Correction in
Language Teaching Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.
28 Hinkel, E (2006) Current Perspectives on Teaching the Four Skills TESOL
29 Holley, F M., & King, J K (1974) Imitation and Correction in Foreign Language Learning In J H Schumann & N Stenson (Eds.), New Frontiers in
Second Language Learning Rowley, Mass: Newbury House Publishers.
30 Hymes, D (1972) On Communicative Competence In J.B Pride and J. Homes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics Harmondsworth: Penguin
31 Krashen, S., Burt, M., & Dulay, H (1982) Language Two New York: OUP.
32 Lee, N (1990) Notions of Error and Appropriate Corrective Treatment.
Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching, (14), pp 55-70
33 Lê Văn Canh, (2004) Understanding Foreign Language Teaching
Methodology Hanoi: VNU Publishing House
34 Littlewood, W T (1981) Communicative Language Teaching: An
35 Littlewood, W T (1984) Foreign and Second Language Learning:
Language Acquisition Research and its Implications for the Classroom.
36 Lynch, T (1996) Communication in the Language Classroom Oxford: OUP.
37 Maicusi et all, (1999) The Error in the Second Language Acquisition.
Encuentro: Revista de Investigación e Innovación en la Clase de Idiomas, 11, pp 168-173 Retrieved November, 4 th 2010 from: http://www encuentro journal.org/textos/ 11 17.pdf
38 Mitchell, R., & Myles, F (1998) Second Language Learning Theories. London: Anold
39 Norrish, J (1983) Language Learners and Their Errors: Essential
Language Teaching Series London: Macmillan
40 Nunan, D (1988) Syllabus Design Oxford: OUP.
41 Nunan, D (1992) Research Methods in Language Learning Cambridge; New York: CUP.
42 Nunan, D., & Lamb, C (1996) The Self-directed Teacher: Managing the
Learning Process In Cambridge Language Education Series Cambridge: CUP.
43 Richards, J C., Platt, J., & Webber, H (1987) Longman Dictionary of
44 Richards, J C., & Lockhart, C (1996) Reflective Teaching in Second
Language Classrooms New York: CUP
45 Selinker, L (1972) Interlanguage International Review of Applied
Linguistics in Language Teaching 10, (3), pp 209-231.
46 Skinner, B F (1957) Verbal Behavior New York: Appleton-Century- Crofts.
47 Stern, H H (1992) Issues and Options in Language Teaching New York:OUP.
48 Tanner, R., & Green, C (1998) Tasks for Teacher Education: A Reflective
49 Truscott, J (1999) What's Wrong with Oral Grammar Correction?
Canadian Modern Language Review, 55(4), pp 347-366 Retrieved November,
4 th 2010 from http://www.utpjournals.com/jour.ihtml?lp=product/cmlr/554/554-Truscott.html
50 Walz, J C (1982) Error Correction Techniques for the FL Classroom.
Language in Education: Theory & Practice, (50), Washington, D.C.: Center for
51 Hoang Van Van et al, (2010) Tieng Anh 10 Vietnam Education PublishingHouse.
APPENDIX 1 THE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENTS
The questionnaire is designed for the research into “ Effective error-correction strategies in Speaking classes for Le Hoan High School's 10th Form Students” This is not a test, so there are no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answers Your assistance in completing the questionnaire is highly appreciated All the information provided by you is solely for the study purpose, and you can be confident that you will not be identified in any discussion of the data
Part I: Give some information of yourself
Part II: Please circle your choice(s) in answering each of the following questions
1 How often are errors corrected in your speaking classes?
2 Which kinds of errors are often corrected?
3 When there are many errors in students’ speech, which types are corrected?
A Errors hindering communication B Errors beyond learners’ ability
C Errors of common types D Errors of high frequency
4 When does your teacher often initiate error correction?
A At transition periods B At the end of the lesson
C During the activities D In the next lesson
A You yourself B Your classmates C Your teacher
6 How does your teacher correct errors in speaking classes?
A Showing the errors and then giving direct corrections.
B Showing the errors and giving hints for students to correct.
C Pointing out the errors without correction.
D Correcting errors in an encouraging way.
7 What does your teacher do in order to correct errors effectively?
A Try to be friendly and helpful B Get insights into students.
C Give students support for self-correction D Correct errors selectively.
Part III: Below are some beliefs that students have about correction of errors Read each statement and then decide if you: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Not sure, Agree, or Strongly Agree Please show your choice by putting a tick (ü) in the space provided
8 Too much correction inhibits students from speaking, while too much tolerance causes errors to become fossilized.
9 When deciding which faults to repair, repeat and shared errors take precedence.
10 Constant, quick correction detracts from the objective of speaking.
11 Teachers should note student errors and come back to them later.
12 Implicitly correcting faults encourages pupils to reflect more on their errors.
13 The teachers employ error-correction tactics that are both constructive and encouraging and provide models for pupils to fix.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION!
APPENDIX 2 THE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHERS
The questionnaire is designed for the research into “ Effective error-correction strategies in Speaking classes for Le Hoan High School's 10th Form Students” This is not a test, so there are no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answers Your assistance in completing the questionnaire is highly appreciated All the information provided by you is solely for the study purpose, and you can be confident that you will not be identified in any discussion of the data
Part I: Give some information of yourself
Number of years of teaching:……… ………
Part II: Please circle your choice(s) in answering each of the following questions
1 How frequently do you correct student faults in your speaking classes?
2 What are the most common sorts of errors that are corrected?
3 How frequently do you rectify errors?
A During the activity B At transition periods
C At the end of the lesson D In the next lesson
4 What type(s) of correction is/are most commonly used?
A Teacher-correction B Peer-correction C Self-correction Others; (please specify) ……….
5 Which criteria do you use to pick errors?
A Errors hindering communication B Errors of high frequency
C Learners’ variables D Pedagogical focus of the lessons
6 How do you generally deal with errors?
A Rejecting what your students have just said.
B Showing the error and giving clues about how to correct it.
C Giving direct corrections of the errors.
D Ignoring the errors and only paying attention to the ideas.
7 What are some of the things you do often to ensure successful error correction?
A Use appropriate error correction strategies.
B Make suitable changes to the teaching material
C Give clear instructions with examples.
D Get insight of lesson focus.
Part III: Below are some beliefs that teachers have about correction of errors Read each statement and then decide if you: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Not sure, Agree, or Strongly Agree Please show your choice by putting a tick ( ) in the space provided.
8 Improved fluency is more significant than accuracy in speaking classes.
9 When learners' speech contains a large number of errors, errors should be addressed one at a time.
10 Teachers should think about how error correction affects groups of students or the entire class.
11 Indirect correction reduces learners’ error frequency ratios more than direct correction.
12 Errors above the students' level should not be rectified.
13 Knowing the elements that influence a student's performance allows teachers to determine whether to overlook or rectify faults.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION!
Types of Errors Timing of
Types of Error-correction Types of Error- correction Methods
Brief Description of Errors and Error Corrections