Nội dung

1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1. Motivation for the study One of the most crucial factors in keeping up with the development of society and the need of communication in the present day is the acquisition of at least a foreign language, especially English because English is the language of globalization, international communication, commerce, the media and pop culture. English is also the most widespread language on the earth (The Encyclopedia Britannica, 2006b). English is used widely in public or private sphere in more than 100 countries all over the world (The Columbia Encyclopedia, 2006d). Five thousand newspapers i.e. more than half of the newspapers published in the world are published in English (Yamaguchi, 2002 c). English learners can also update their knowledge faster and more effectively than others in different areas such as academic, science, technology because most of the information and knowledge in these areas are transferred in English. “Over 70% of the world‟s scientists read English (Hasman, 2007 c). “Following World War II, the economic and cultural influence of the United States increased and English permeated other cultures, chiefly through development to telecommunications technology and became the lingua franca of the world” (Crystal, 1997 a; Brutt-Griffer, 2002; Seidlhofer, 2003; McKay, 2003; Llurda, 2004; and Ha, 2005 a). In sum, the role of English language acquisition is more and more important. However, the process of English acquisition is not easy and ideal as the benefits that the language brings to learners. They must make great efforts to face not only some visible difficulties such as a large number of vocabularies, using learned words in writing speaking effectively and remembering difficult grammar structures as well as using it in suitable situations but also the unexpected and unrecognizable challenge that is making errors. Although learners try to study well, making errors during the learning process is natural and unavoidable. This “more tolerant modern approach” is based on the fact that errors are normal and unavoidable during the leaning process (Ancker, 2000b). 2 Gass and Selinker (2001) also write, though errors are “likely to occur repeatedly, they “are not recognized by the learner” (p.102). The fact is that errors are natural and unavoidable, so the role of teachers to correct students‟ errors is very necessary and important. Together with other kinds of errors, spoken errors are one of the most notable errors that need to be effectively corrected by teachers because English learners want to use English for communication well. First and foremost, their spoken errors must be corrected. Furthermore, having too many spoken errors will make communication activities unsuccessful. Therefore, when teachers can provide students with some effective corrections for their errors, that will not only help students find out errors and minimize them but also contribute to make students feel confident and be able to speak English correctly time by time. In fact, spoken error correction is necessary and useful, but the effectiveness and helpfulness of spoken error correction completely depend on not only what correction techniques teachers apply in teaching but also how the correction techniques are used, whether they are appropriately used or not, and when these correction techniques should be used. In order to know more about the reality of teachers‟ correction ways and check whether the used ways are appropriate or not, and suggest some useful correction techniques. Therefore, I put my attempt to do the thesis, namely “SPOKEN ERROR CORRECTION IN THANH BINH 1 HIGH SCHOOL - A CASE STUDY”. 2. Aims of the study The study is to observe teachers‟ ways dealing with spoken errors and compare whether their used ways correspond with theory of error correction techniques in methodology or not and suggest some implications and techniques for error correction. 3. Research methods Interviews and observations are used to collect data. Documentary analysis is also exploited. 3 The first used instrument in the study was a questionnaire for interviewing. Interviewing questions were designed to obtain many different answers and attitudes of teachers about spoken error correction, about the correction time, correction techniques, and necessities of the corrections. To strengthen the reality of the study, also at that time, five observations on five accidentally chosen lessons were carried with five different classes in order that the collected data were able to reflect variously spoken errors corrections with different classes and teachers. The data collected are grouped into themes and the compared against the theory of correction techniques in methodology textbooks. 4. Scope of the study This study is limited to four English teachers and 178 students at Thanh Binh 1 High School, Thanh Binh District, Dong Thap Province. The study was implemented in this school from December 4th, 2011 to April 2012. 5. Significance of the study This thesis may help teachers identify their used correction ways are effective and appropriate or not, and help them find more effective ways to correct students‟ errors. Teachers may also pay more attention to choosing what effective techniques to correct students‟ spoken errors and choosing when and how they should give corrections. It may not only make students minimize their errors but also learn from their errors and be able use English language better in communication thank to some effective and useful spoken errors correction techniques suggested. 6. Related previous studies Through the research process, there have been two studies related to the thesis “SPOKEN ERROR CORRECTION IN THANH BINH 1 HIGH SCHOOL - A CASE STUDY”. 4 In the study “ CONCEPTIONS OF ORAL ERROR CORRECTION: A CASE STUDY OF TEACHER‟S BEFIEF AND CLASSROOM” by Duong Thi Dung, She focused on finding out teachers‟ beliefs in correcting students‟ oral errors. Moreover, the study also recognized the reality of classroom practices of an experienced teacher regarding oral error correction. There is also identification between teachers‟ beliefs and classroom practices with oral error correction. The study is carried in in an Upper Secondary School in Bac Giang Province. The other study is “A STUDY OF ERRORS IN ENGLISH IN RELATION TO COGNITIVE STYLE AND CEREBRAL DOMINANCE” by Ikpreet Singh. It researched the differences in errors in relation to cognitive styles. Its aim is to study the errors committed by students of grade XI in written English work in vocabulary, spelling, punctuation, functional grammar and translation. Furthermore, the study collects opinions on the possible causes of errors by the sample from experts and practicing teachers. 7. Organization of the thesis The study comprises five parts. The first part is the introduction, which consists of motivation of the study, aims of the study, scope of the study, research methods, and significance of the study, related previous studies, and organization of the study. The second part is the content of the study, which includes three chapters. Chapter 1 is about the literature review. In Chapter 2, methodology, research questions, participants, used instruments and research procedure of the study are presented. The last chapter is the findings and discussion. In this chapter, the results found answer to the research questions followed by some discussions. The last part of the thesis is Conclusion consisting of overview of the study, limitation of the study, some implications and suggestions for further study. 5 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1. Concepts of errors Concepts of errors are complicated because of its nature. Many different researchers have different concepts of errors which depend on their different considerations and the aspects of language they are approaching. Making errors seems to be natural during the process of learning and teaching foreign language. People consider it natural thing, so it should be avoided and dealt with. It is similar to something that is unexpectedly forgotten during the learning process. According to Dulay et al (cited in Duong Thi Dung), he states that “Errors are understood as the flawed side of the learner speech and writing, those part of conversation or composition that deviate from English model of usage assumed by educated”. However, “An error is a linguistic form or combination of forms which in the same context and under similar conditions of production would, in all likelihood, not be produced by the speakers' native speakers counterparts" (Lennon, 1991). Other concept of errors is focused on and exploited by the difference between linguistic form or combination of forms which are produced by native speakers and produced by foreign language learners in the same situation. Errors are also defined as something that learners haven‟t known or learned, so learners‟ making errors seem as a matter of course. “Error is a systematic deviation, when a learner has not learnt something and consistently gets it wrong.” (Norrish, 1987:7). Researcher considers errors deviant ones that appear while people are learning a foreign language. “Errors are systematic deviations from the norms of the language being learned.” (Cunningworth, 1987:87). Furthermore, errors are defined as something that learners meet when they are trying to master their foreign language. Errors have been viewed as language learners‟ speech that deviates from the model they are trying to master (Allwright & Bailey, 1991, cited in Hyang-Sook Park). The two definitions are (1) error is a systematic deviation, when a learner has not learnt something and consistently 6 gets it wrong‟ (Norrish, 1987:7) and (2) errors are systematic deviations from the norms of the language being learned (Cunningworth, 1987:87). In sum, various definitions of error have been presented by experts the differences lies only on the ways they formulate, consider them and approach language. 1.2. Types of errors Errors are classified into many types in different ways focused by different experts. Donald (2007 a) writes one way of categorizing errors is “by their linguistic type.” “Errors can be classified as simply productive (spoken or written) or receptive (faulty understanding).” (Donald, 2007 b). Chomsky (1986 b) points out that, errors are both receptive i.e. in listening and reading and expressive i.e. in speaking and writing. Lengo (1995) also adds errors can be “classified as „productive‟ and „receptive‟ ”. Productive errors are those which occur in the language learner‟s utterances; and receptive or interpretive errors are those whose result is the listener‟s misunderstanding of the speaker‟s intentions. However, others categorize errors based on the names of the skill or areas in which they are recognized, as, phonological errors (faulty pronunciation, stress, etc.), semantic errors, lexical errors (word choice), errors of substitution, punctuation errors, orthographic errors, etc. (Haneda, 2005), grammatical (prepositions, articles, reported speed, objectives, clauses, irregular verbs, tenses, possessive cases), syntactic (coordination, sentence structure, nouns and pronouns, word order), semantic, and substance (mechanics, punctuation and capitalization and spelling) organizational and discourse errors, etc. (Ali, 1996 a) Errors have been further divided into overt and covert (Corder, 1971), errors of correctness and appropriateness, as far as identification of error is concerned, and into pre-systematic, systematic and post systematic regarding their description (Corder, 1974). Another division was made by Dulay and Burt in 1974 according to which there are three types of error: the developmental ones which are based on the identity 7 hypothesis are similar to the errors made in Ll acquisition, interference errors and unique errors which cannot fall into either of the above mentioned categories. A further subdivision is introduced by Garman (1990: 109, cited in R. Jiménez Catalán) to distinguish the skill and modality affected: speech production errors from writing errors on one hand, and auditory comprehension errors from reading errors on the other. 1.3. Error correction theory Some people think that making errors is something negative, so it should be corrected strictly and immediately. If people don‟t correct it in that way, it will make bad results. However, in error correction theory stated by researchers, making error is a naturally accepted thing This “more tolerant modern approach” is based on the fact that errors are normal and unavoidable during the leaning process (Ancker, 2000 b), so the corrections should be given naturally, which makes learners feel more confident and encouraged in learning and joining in study activities. Rivers (1976 b) states “If a teacher is a perfectionist and tends to be too critical of every small error, the group or individual may perceive the task as an impossible one….” Being angry is not appreciated in correcting learners‟ error because that makes learners feel sad and disappointed when they creating errors. When correcting learners‟ errors, Ngo Ai Tuong states “Don‟t look be angry. Be encouraging. Say nicely, „No, not quite right‟.” Hendrickson (1979) concurs, “….correcting every error is counterproductive to learning a foreign language.” Whereas, “when teachers tolerate some student errors, students often feel more confident about using the target language than if all their errors are corrected.” “Therefore teachers need to create a supportive classroom environment in which their students can feel confident about expressing their ideas and feelings freely without suffering the threat or embarrassment of having each one of their oral and written errors corrected.” Walker (1973) for instance, found in his study that students preferred not to be corrected for each speaking and writing error because this practice undermined their confidence and forced them to waste so much effort on details that they used to lose the overall ability 8 to use language. Thus, correction turns to be a way to break the flow of conversation - especially when the teacher interrupts the student before he has finished his utterance-, and it is also a way to lower the student‟s motivation as only his failures and not his goals are highlighted. Errors should be not only corrected with encouragement but also corrected selectively, which means that teachers shouldn‟t correct all errors learners make. the “recent theory on language acquisition and teaching methodology supports the position that not all errors should be corrected, and those that are corrected should usually not be „treated‟ immediately (Rivers, 1964, 1968 and 1976 a; Holley and King, 1971; George, 1972 18 a; Chastain, 1976; Krashen, 1987; Doff, 1988; Allwright and Bailey, 1991; Lewis, 1993; Nunan and Lamb, 1996; Ur, 1996; Ancker, 2000 a). Moreover, Correction‟s ways given to students‟ errors are not similar for different skills. In fact, the features of each skill are different, so created errors in this skill is not the same as those made in other skills. Ferris (1995, 1999 and 2002 b) “the policy of restraint and selectivity in the correction of spoken errors may seem sensible indeed, but the same can‟t be said for the written errors.” The time teachers give corrections is also emphasized in the error correction theory. The question is whether teachers should deal with errors students made immediately or wait until they finish with what they are trying to express. If teachers give corrections at the time when students speaking, immediate error corrections may stamp down a learner‟s willingness to speak in class at all because it can interrupt the learner in the middle of a sentence. On the other hand, although delayed feedback can allow the learner time to finish what the learner is trying to say, the feedback may become less effective as the time between the error and treatment increases. 1.4. Correction techniques We all know that the roles of errors are very important and useful during the process of language acquisition. Although some people think that errors are negative things, Error is a good mirror which reflects not only what learners 9 know but also what they don‟t know. Ngo Ai Tuong, in her book “Methodology Course (2), Teaching Language Components & Skills” wrote that student errors are useful way of showing what they have and haven‟t learned. So instead of seeing errors negatively, as a sign of failure (by the students or teacher), we see them positively as an indication of what we need to teach. Obviously, if we try to prevent students from making errors we can never find out what they do not know (pp. 85). Because errors are regarded as important and positive things, error corrections techniques used to deal with students errors should also be positive and appropriate. Ngo Ai Tuong, in her book “Methodology Course (2), Teaching Language Components & Skills” also wrote that many correction techniques used by teachers are ingenious and intuitive. The important thing is that they should be appropriate for specific error and clear for learners. It is more important always to use the same set of techniques so that learners can become familiar with them. For correcting spoken errors, Ngo Ai Tuong indicates six appropriately positive spoken error correction techniques.  Finger correction The technique is described: Use each finger of your left hand to represent a word. Holding your palm towards you, your little finger represents the first word of the sentence and point to the „words‟ with your right hand. Move from right to left (backwards), so that the students „read‟ it the other way around, from left to right. Finger correction is commonly used to deal with missing contraction, missing words and too many words. [a] missing contraction e.g. „I have got a house‟ Show the first word (e.g. „I‟) with one finger and the word it‟s contracted to (e.g „have‟) with next finger. Squeeze the two fingers together to show the contraction (e.g. I‟ve‟) [b] Missing word. e.g. „I‟ve got a car‟ 10 Point the finger that represents the missing word in the sentence. [c ] too many words e.g. „I‟m agree with you‟ Point the finger that represent the unnecessary word in the sentence and pull the finger down to show „take the word away‟.  Question mark Use the question mark, in your voice/or your face. E.g. Student: I go yesterday. Teacher: [turns face to the side a bit and frowns] go? Student: Oh. Yes. I went yesterday  Alternatives Give the students an alternative: tell them the correct answer and wrong answer, put a question mark into your voice and get them to choose the right sentence. E.g. Student: He go to the market. Teacher: He go or goes? Student: He goes. Teacher: Say it again. Student: He goes to the market.  „S’ card Have a large „S‟ written on the card. Keep it in your top pocket. Every time a student forget an „s‟ at the end of the word, flash your „S‟ card them. Student: What this? Teacher: [show the „S‟ card] Student: What this? Teacher: Good.