The study: Spoken error correction in Thanh Binh 1 high school a case study

Chia sẻ: Đỗ Hồng | Ngày: | Loại File: PDF | Số trang:41

Thêm vào BST

Báo xấu

74
lượt xem 11
download

Download Vui lòng tải xuống để xem tài liệu đầy đủ

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.

Chủ đề:

Bình luận(0) Đăng nhập để gửi bình luận!

Lưu

Nội dung Text: The study: Spoken error correction in Thanh Binh 1 high school a case study

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.
11  BB prompt Use the model sentence written on the board during the presentation stage to remind („prompt‟) the student of the form, word order, contraction, etc. Note: not enough teachers‟ points at the board to elicit correct- it‟s a very easy way to do correction-don‟t forget about it! Student: I‟ve been here since two years. Teacher: [point at the word „for‟ on the board] Student: Oh. Sorry. I‟ve been here for two years.  Student-to-student correction Try some of above technique first, but if they don‟t work, use other students in class who can answer correctly to help the student who has made the mistake. Point at a good student and then point at the student who need help and say, „Help her‟ or „Help him‟. Student 1: I can football Teacher: [uses finger correction to show „play‟] Student 1: I can football Teacher: [point to student 2 and then to student 1]. Help him. Student 2: I can play football Student 1: I can play football  Modeling (Teacher-to-student): Back chaining. Try any of above technique first, but if you have no success, repeat a good model for student to copy. Use these techniques for pronunciation mistakes and students who have problems because the sentence is too long. Use back-chaining, linking and other pronunciation techniques such as showing the student the shape of your mouth. Student: I li‟ a cup o‟ tea.
12 Teacher: I li‟? Student: [silence] Teacher: Who can help her? Student: [silence] Teacher: Ok. Listen to me. I‟d like a cup of tea. I‟d like a cup of tea. Student: I li‟ a cup o‟ tea. Teacher: Tea. Repeat. Student: tea Teacher: cup of tea Student: cup of tea Teacher: like cup of tea etc.  Indirect correction During pair-work and group work, go around from group to group, with a notebook and pencil. Listen to the group for a while, then write down one or two bog mistakes (if there are any) that they are making. At the end of the lesson, or start of the next lesson, write the mistake in the board or read them out to the class. Get the students to correct the mistakes. Moreover, Decisions about giving appropriate techniques for spoken errors also depend on the stage of the lesson, types of error made, and the student who is making that error. “A distinction is often made between accuracy and fluency. We need to decide whether a particular activity in the classroom is designed to expect the students‟ complete accuracy- as in the study of a piece of grammar, a pronunciation exercise, or some vocabulary work for example - or whether we are asking the students to use the language as fluently as possible. We need to make a clear difference between „non-communicative‟ and „communicative‟ activities whereas the former are generally intended to ensure correctness, the latter are designed to improve language fluency” (Harmer, 2001). The following
13 techniques for error correction during accuracy and fluency are suggest by Harmer (2001) Correction during Accuracy work Correction is usually made up of two distinct stages. In the first, teachers show students that a mistake has been made, and in the second, if necessary, they help the students to do something about it. The first set of techniques we need to be aware of then is devoted to showing incorrectness. These techniques are only really beneficial for what we are assuming to be language slips rather than embedded errors. The students are being expected to be able to correct themselves once the problem has been pointed out. If they cannot do this, however, we need to move on to alternative techniques. Showing incorrectness: this can be done in a number of different ways.  Repeating: here we can ask the student to repeat what they have said, perhaps by saying again? Which, coupled with intonation and expression, will indicate that something is not clear.  Echoing: This can be a precise way of pin-pointing an error. We repeat what the student has said emphasizing the part of the utterance that was wrong, e.g. *Flight 309 GO to Paris? (said with questioning intonation). It is an extremely efficient way of showing incorrectness during accuracy work. Statement and question: we can, of course, simply say that‟s not quite right, or Do people think that‟s correct? to indicate that something has not quite worked.  Expression: when we know our classes well, a simple facial expression or a gesture (for example a wobbling hand), may be enough to indicate that something does not quite work. This needs to be done with care as the wrong expression or gesture can, in some circumstances, appear to be mocking or cruel.  Hinting: A quick way of helping students to activate rules they already know (but which they have temporarily „disobeyed‟) is to give a quiet hint. We might just say the word „tense‟ to make them think that perhaps they should have used the past simple rather than the present perfect. We could say „countable‟ to make
14 them think about a concord mistake they have made. This kind of hinting depends upon the students and the teacher sharing metalanguage (linguistic terms) which, when whispered to students, will help them to correct themselves.  Reformulation: an underrated correction technique is for the teacher to repeat what the student has said correctly, reformulating the sentence, but without making a big issue of it, for example: Student: I would not have arrived late if I heard the alarm clock. Teacher: If I had heard… Student: … if I had heard the alarm clock. In all the procedures above, teachers hope that students will be able to correct themselves once the teacher has indicated that something was wrong. However, where students do not know or understand what the problem is because we are dealing with an error or an attempt that is beyond the students‟ knowledge or capability, the teacher will want to help the students to get it right. Getting it right: If the student is unable to correct herself, or respond to reformulation, we need to focus on the correct version in more detail. We can say the correct version emphasizing the part where there is a problem (e.g. Flight 309 GOES to Paris) before saying the sentence normally (e.g. Flight 309 goes to Paris), or we can say the incorrect part correctly (e.g. Not „go‟. Listen, „goes‟). If necessary we can explain the grammar (e.g. We say „I go‟, „you go‟, „we go‟, but for „he‟, „she‟ or „it‟ we say „goes‟, for example „He goes to Paris‟, or „Flight 309 goes to Paris‟), or a lexical issue (e.g. We use „juvenile crime‟ when we talk about crime committed by children; a „childish crime‟ is an act that is silly because it‟s like the sort of thing a child would do). We will then ask the student to repeat the utterance correctly. Feedback during fluency work  Gentle correction: if communication breaks down completely during a fluency activity, we may well have to intervene. If our students cannot think of what to say, we may want to prompt them forwards. If this is just the right
15 moment to point out a language feature we may offer a form of correction. Provided we offer this help with tact and discretion there is no reason why such interventions should not be helpful. Gentle correction can be offered in a number of ways. We might simply reformulate what the student has said in the expectation that they will pick up our reformulation, even though it hardly interrupts their speech, for example: Student: I am not agree with you... Teacher: I don‟t agree... Student: I don‟t agree with you because I think... It is even possible that students can learn something new in this way when they are making an attempt at some language they are not quite sure of. We can use a number of other accuracy techniques of showing incorrectness too, such as echoing and expression, or even say I shouldn‟t say X, say Y, etc. But because we do it gently and because we do not move on to a „getting it right‟ stage - our intervention is less disruptive than a more accuracy-based procedure would be. Over-use of even gentle correction will, however, be counter-productive. By constantly interrupting the flow of the activity, we may bring it to a standstill. What we have to judge, therefore, is whether a quick reformulation or prompt may help the conversation move along without intruding too much or whether, on the contrary, it is not especially necessary and has the potential to get in the way of the conversation.  Recording mistakes Such observation allows us to give good feedback to our students on how well they have performed, always remembering that we want to give positive as well as negative feedback. One of the problems of giving feedback after the event is that it is easy to forget what students have said. Most teachers, therefore, write down points they want to refer to later, and some like to use charts or other forms of categorisation to help them do this, as in the following example: Grammar
16 Words and phrases Pronunciation Appropriacy In each column we can note down things we heard, whether they are particularly good or especially incorrect or inappropriate. We might write down errors such as *according to my opinion in the words and phrases column, or *I haven‟t been yesterday in the grammar column; we might record phoneme problems or stress issues in the pronunciation column and make a note of places where students disagreed too tentatively or bluntly in the appropriacy column. We can also record students‟ language performance on audio or videotape. In this situation the students might be asked to design their own charts like the one above so that when they listen or watch they too will be recording more and less successful language performance in categories which make remembering what they heard easier. Another alternative is to divide students into groups and have each group watch for something different - for example, one group focuses on pronunciation, one group listens for the use of appropriate or inappropriate phrases, while a third looks at the effect of the physical paralinguistic features that are used. If teachers want to involve students more - especially if they have been listening to audiotape or watching the video - they can ask them to write up any mistakes they think they heard on the board. This can lead to a discussion in which the class votes on whether they think the mistakes really are mistakes. Another possibility is for the teacher to transcribe parts of the recording for future study. However, this takes up a lot of time!
17 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 3.1. Research questions The study is to answer two following questions: (1) Do teachers use correction techniques to deal with students‟ spoken errors?If yes, Are the techniques used appropriately? (2) What effects do suggested correction techniques bring to teachers when using them 3.2. Research participants 3.2.1. The researcher The study is done by Phan Huu Phuoc, English 2008B class, Foreign Language Department, Dong Thap University. 3.2.2. The subjects The subjects of the study are English 10 and 11 textbook, five teachers of English 10 and 11, and 186 students of grades 11 including 11A1, 11A2, 11A3, 10A1, 10A2 and 11CB4 at Thanh Binh 1 High School. Three of the teachers have more than 7 years in teaching. One has more than 30 years in teaching. Other has 18 years in teaching.In general, Generally speaking, they are really experienced teachers. 3.3. Research instruments 3.3.1. Interviewing (see Appendix 1) Interviewing is an effective and basic research tool in social science. In this thesis, interviewing is used to obtain ideas and information about teachers‟ spoken error correction they used to deal with students errors during their teaching time. In this interviewing, most of the questions are yes/no question with explainations in order to get teachers‟ opinions for correcting students‟ spoken errors.
18 The interviewing questions are designed to check whether teachers use correction techniques to deal with students‟ errors and recognize whether the time when teachers give the correction is appropriate or not. Other questions are aimed at obtaining information about steps used by the teachers and how teachers use techniques in correcting errors. English was used in all the interviews because correction techniques and steps of the correction teachers‟ answer are in English, so it is a good tool for teachers to complete the interviewing. It also makes the writer feel easy to analyse information. In fact, if the language choosen in the interviewing is Vietnamese, It is hard for the writer to translate teachers‟ ideas with exact meaning as what teachers want to share. Additionally, teachers also have one or two days to complete the interviewing, so teachers are able to give the better quality answers. The interviewing consists of seven questions: . Question 1 is to check the attitude of teachers when correcting students‟ errors, check whether teachers correct all the spoken errors students make or not. From teachers‟ explainations, the writer is able to make a comparison between teachers‟s ideas and the knowledge about error correction in methodology. . Question 2 is to identify the time teachers give the correction and have some information about the approriate time students should be received corrections by teachers.  Question 3 is to realize whether teachers use correction techniques to deal with students‟ errors as well as what techniques teachers use.  Question 4 is to show steps teachers use in correcting errors.  Question 5 is to check whether teachers use „indirect correction‟  Question 6 is to identify the time and the ways teacher use „indirect correction‟ if they have ever used.  Question 7 is to ask teachers to give the reasons for not using „indirect correction‟.
19 3.3.2. Observation The second type of data collection in the thesis is classroom participatory observation. Observation is the most basic research technique we can employ in our classroom (Miller, 2004). To be convenient for checking, the results of observations were recorded on observation sheets. The observation notes are designed with clear categories focused on spoken error correction purposes which the writer has planned so that they can be easy for the writer to observe and analyse collected data. Five periods of five different lessons were observed in five classes. The purposes are to identify whether use correction techniques to deal with student errors or not during each stage of the lesson.if teachers use them, check whether they are effectively used or not, and explore what kinds of errors teachers usually give corrections. This kind of observation sheet consists of three big items (see Appendix 2). . Item I is to identify whether teachers correct students‟ spoken errors or not and whether spoken error corrections are used without techniques or with techniques and effectively. . Item II is to explore what errors teachers usually correct, don‟t correct and check whether the used corrections are without techniques or with techniques and effectively.  Item III is to figure out whether correction techniques teachers use to deal with students‟ spoken errors are used effectively, ineffectively or not used. If teachers used correction techniques, what are they?
20 CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 4.1. Findings 4.1.1. Findings from the interviewing analysis and comparison Before doing the interviewing, five copies of the interview forms are delivered to five English teachers at Thanh Binh High School. The data collected are as follows: Interview questions 1. Do you correct all spoken errors students make? Why (not)? According to the answers of five teachers on the interview form, There has a similarity among these teachers that all of them have the same answer „No, I don‟t correct all spoken errors students make‟ for the yes or no question in question number one. In spoken error correction theory, it is not encouraged teachers to correct all the errors students make. However, teachers‟ explainations for this question are differently answered. There are two teachers who agree that teachers shouldn‟t correct the errors students make because “the students will lose their sef-confidence when speaking” or “I want student to speak naturally. Correcting all student errors makes students inconfident”. The two answers agree theory of error corrections. In fact, if teachers don‟t correct students‟ spoken errors, they will think that what they have spoken is correct, so they continue to make errors without being controlled by teachers. That will make students believe in what they have conveyed is absolutely true although there are a large number of errors in their speaking and they also leads students to incorrect language form. Certainly, students will repeat their errors in speaking or in doing tests later. Three other teachers pay more attention to the time for corrections. Two of them think that they don‟t enough time to correct all spoken errors students make. One tends to focus on giving their teaching lesson to student successfully. This idea partly agrees theory of error correction. Athough one of teachers‟ duties in class is to instruct students to understand the lesson, correcting students‟ spoken errors