On Correcting Errors In Student Written English Work

When students learn English, they always make many errors. Many linguists hold a view that students' written errors should be corrected, and error correction can make students learn more effectively. But who should correct student written errors, teachers or students themselves? There is no current standard existing on this question.Some linguists think teachers should assume the responsibility for correcting their students'written errors; but others argue that supplying all the correct forms on students' written work mayactually hinder rather than facilitate the process of language learning. They suggest it is effective to. use small groups of students to correct written errors. They consider this method can save teachers'time, freeing them for more helpful instruction.This paper intends to set out an experimental study to find if group correction is more effective than teacher correction.Three theories were used to support group correction: the theory of Bruffee's collaborative learning, the theory of Piagets constructivism, and the theory of Carl R.Rogers' humanistic psychology of personality.The 70 students, coming from the two intact classes (Class 1 and Class 2). took part in the experiment. Before the experiment, pre-test was administered to all the students in the two classes. The results of z-test showed student language competence of the two classes was at the similar level.Class 1 was the experimental class, and Class 2 was the control class In the control class, the students' written errors were corrected by the teacher herself. The teacher supplemented these corrections with marginal notes that explained why particular errors were incorrect, such as errors in spelling, lack of subject-verb agreement, and inappropriate style. Under these circumstances a dialogue between the teacher and the students was not possible, and the students had no opportunity to contribute to the discussion.In the experimental class, the students' written errors were marked, discussed, and corrected by the members of the small group. The group worked as a team and went through their own written assignments. The teacher emerged occasionally to visit the groups, listened to their debates, lookedat their corrected work and facilitated if there was a deadlock or if clarification was needed.In this study, the author used the diagnostic charts to record student errors. An error chart can shows one student s name, class, error types and the number of his errors. Every student taking part in the experiment had his or her diagnostic chart, and his or her errors were recorded on his or her own diagnostic chart. In order to record the student errors. 70 diagnostic charts were used. Every time, when the work of correction is finished, the teacher recorded each student written errors on his or her charts. At the end of the experiment, all errors of each student were typed according to his or her diagnostic chart. Thus, 70 examination papers were formed. The teacher then organized students to test. The number of errors which were corrected successfully by the students was counted.Error correction does not always connect with success in language learning. Sometimes error correction meet with success, students seem to understand their errors and never make the same errors in their written work. But at other times the teacher find that students still repeat the same errors in their WTitten work. In this study, the author wants to know how many students' written errors are corrected successfully in both classes respectively. Statistical analysis (z-test) was used to analyzing the validity of the study. The average success rate of correction of Class 1 was compared with Class 2 in order to reveal the results of the different treatments (teacher correction and group correction)This study attempted to answer the question of whether group correction is more effective than teacher correction. The answer appears to be a yes. The results indicated that the overall effective of group correction was better than that of a traditional one.There was another u...