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
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).
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
3. Research methods
Interviews and observations are used to collect data. Documentary analysis is
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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),
(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
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
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
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
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.
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‟
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‟.
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
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.
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?
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.
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
Student: I li‟ a cup o‟ tea.
Teacher: I li‟?
Teacher: Who can help her?
Teacher: Ok. Listen to me. I‟d like a cup of tea. I‟d like a cup of tea.
I li‟ a cup o‟ tea.
Teacher: Tea. Repeat.
cup of tea
cup of tea
like cup of tea etc.
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
techniques for error correction during accuracy and fluency are suggest by
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
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
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.
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:
Words and phrases
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
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!
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
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
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‟
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
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
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
. 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
. 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
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?
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
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
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
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