Introduction Error correction is a delicate balance, and not for the faint-of-heart. Error correction of ELL students is a useful tool in the hands of a skillful educator. It can point a learner toward discovering correct answers, motivate and push them to work a little harder, and engage a receptive student with useful and informative feedback. Error correction, however, is NOT a punishment. Nor is it an opportunity to denigrate or shame a learner – consciously or unconsciously. Most of us want to be corrected constructively, thoughfully, and respectfully. ELL students deserve no less. In this essay I will discuss error correction in the context of ELL instruction. Specifically I will describe the Error Correction Hypothesis, strategies for error correction and corrective feedback that instructors can use with ELL students, how and when to provide appropriate feedback regarding errors, and the possible effects of error correction on the student’s affective filter. The Error Correction Hypothesis The question of whether receiving error corrective feedback can actually hurt an ELL student’s ability to learn is the focus of the Error Correction Hypothesis. Stephen Krashen, in his Affective Filter Hypothesis, puts forth the idea that learners have an Affective Filter which is triggered by emotional variables such as anxiety or stress. Once activated, this filter can operate as an unintended barrier, hindering one’s ability to receive input, and therefore learning. As a result, Krashen advocates for limited error correction in second language instruction, and primarily as a clarification in meaning. On the other hand, Vigil and Oller believe that error correction is necessary for ELL students. In their Communication Feedback... ... middle of paper ... ...ry.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1978.tb02409.x/abstract Johnson, K. (1988). Mistake Correction. ELT Journal, 42(2), 89-96. Lennon, P. (2006, October 27). Investigating Fluency in EFL: A Quantitative Approach*. Wiley Online Library. Retrieved February 8, 2014, from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1990.tb00669.x/abstract Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. M. (2006). How languages are learned (3rd ed.). Oxford [england: Oxford University Press. Nation, I. S., & Newton, J. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking. New York: Routledge. Tomasello, M., & Herron, C. (n.d.). Transfer Errors: The Garden Path Technique., Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1989. ERIC - Feedback for Language Transfer Errors: The Garden Path Technique., Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1989. Retrieved February 8, 2014, from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ400841
Much research was completed for the making of this article. It was found that ELL’s need time to develop oral English proficiency, teachers need to use ongoing authentic formative assessments throughout the year due to
After reviewing the ELL’s interview for semantic errors, I realized the student would leave out or misuse pronouns while answering interview questions. When the student talks about his little brother staying at home, he interchangeably uses the words he/she. At times, the student would also make semantic errors when using negative contractions. During the interview, the most common error made was the uses the word don instead of don’t. For example, “I’m thinking, I don know….”. He errors when using negative semantics when answering the question, “Do you know what you want to be when you grow up”.
...gies that can be implemented to diminish the achievement gap. Some strategies include pairing up the ELL student with a buddy in the class and incorporating the use of group work to help the student feel more comfortable asking questions and for help; also allowing the ELL student to practice their English with their peers.
Teaching ELL students can be a challenging role, but it is an important one. I realize how dedicated these teachers are to their students. I also realize how important the proper training is to the teacher and think I will be better prepared because of the classes I am taking. Even though teaching ELL can tough, it is a very rewarding experience. I look forward to helping the ELL students in my own classroom and can use the information from this survey to continue to support their growth.
...ell can work together to solidify the learning environment for the student in need and create a better learner as a result.
The educator is giving the student a tool so he or she can break down the process of his or her errors. Once a child can acknowledge the concepts they truly do not understand, then an educator assist the student with the correct methods. If the error involves simple calculation, then students can learn better habits as to take their time or be more cautious. They can also incorporate better lifestyle behaviors before taking a test such as, retiring to bed earlier the night before or eating a hearty breakfast in the morning. These types of assessment practices and customs can build positive self-confidence in children who in turn will succeed. On the contrary, if they have negative premeditated thoughts of impending doom they will be sure to fail. It is known that a positive attitude in any situation is the greatest foundation for success. Now that I have returned to school with the ambition of becoming an educator, I am extremely pleased to witness some of the positive evolutions regarding assessments. Stiggin’s point of view is very well noted and will stay with me throughout my teaching career. Although, I am very aware this is a subject matter that always has room for improvements and should continuously be under
First, Wright (2010) defines affective filter as “affective filter controls how much comprehensible input gets through to the learner” (p.39). If the affective filter of a second language learner is high, possibly due to things such as, anxiety or low self esteem, very commonly seen in ELLs, than less acquisition of language will take place. However, if the affective filter is lowered through proper teaching techniques and creating a comfortable and accepting learning environment, then more comprehensible input will be utilized and language acquisition will
English Language Learners range from Newcomers learning survival English and developing foundational literacy skills to Long-Term English Learners who have had 6 years or more of their education in English yet continue have significant language gaps. These students may speak English with little or no accent and still lack the vocabulary, grammar and grade level literacy to be successful in school. English language learners may remain silent in the classroom as they adjust to a new school, environment, and culture unless he is a native language comrade to interact with. The English language learners are concerned about decoding verbal and non- verbal communication as well as understanding the social culture framework of the school. Most of the time English language learners are observing during instruction, trying to repeat words used by others, memorizing simple phrases and sentences, tired by midday or be frustrated attending long lectures unaccompanied by visual and gestures, relying on first language translation used peer translation or bilingual dictionary, as the students begin to learner they become more involved in the classroom, they can respond non-verbally to commands, statements, and questions in simple form. As their oral comprehension increases, they begin to use simple word and phrases and may use English spontaneously. They can understand short conversation on a simple topic when reading students can understand a narrative text and authentic materials, although they will be below
What students need is encouragement and an environment where they can grow. If continuously told that they are incorrect they will feel ostracized, and will be afraid to take the steps necessary to improve themselves in reading and writing in standard English. Rather than making students ashamed of their language, we should seek to teach a transition from that language into Standard English.
This study investigated how both teachers and ESL students perceive written corrective feedback (WCF), focusing on their perception about the usefulness of different types and amount of WCF as well as their reasons for having such perceptions.
Second language learners often encounter linguistic problems as evidenced in the errors they make in the process of learning another language. Because errors regularly occur in the language classrooms, students and teachers often find themselves confronting with error correction. Error correction, which is also called corrective feedback or negative feedback (Ortega, 2008), has become a topic of great interest to me because of my own experience as a multilingual language learner learning two languages (English and Tagalog) simultaneously as a child in addition to my L1, which is Cebuano. My own experience as an ESL teacher for nine years has also prompted me to read the literature on this topic. The review of literature found in the next pages reveals that most studies addressing this issue were conducted in various settings particularly in inner and expanding circle countries like the U.S. Canada, and Japan. However a study, investigating Filipino ESL students’ attitude toward error correction was never found and reported in any of the various ELT and SLA journals. It is therefore the goal of this paper to supply this gap in the literature.
There are three main theories of child language acquisition; Cognitive Theory, Imitation and Positive Reinforcement, and Innateness of Certain Linguistic Features (Linguistics 201). All three theories offer a substantial amount of proof and experiments, but none of them have been proven entirely correct. The search for how children acquire their native language in such a short period of time has been studied for many centuries. In a changing world, it is difficult to pinpoint any definite specifics of language because of the diversity and modification throughout thousands of millions of years.
In the twentieth century, the avoidance of the using L1 in classrooms dominated teachers’ minds; as well it was implemented in many policies and guidelines of language teaching (Cook, 2001). Thornbury (2010) listed a set of arguments against using L1 in L2 classrooms mainly for that the translation of L2 into another language will play negative effects on students’ learning process. He pointed out that the use of L1 will result learners to have a cognitive dependence on their mother tongue at the expense of developing independence TL learning. Although the two language systems are not equivalent in many aspects, students may have an awareness of the notion of equivalence of the two languages if translation serves to convey meanings. Some argue that the use of translation to convey the meaning of the TL is more efficient and more memorable. However, Thornbury (2010) sees the opposite. He stated that the simple and direct way of translation will make L2 knowledge less memorable since the process lacks mental efforts in working out meanings.
Curtin, E. M. (2006). Lessons on effective teaching from middle school ESL students. Middle School Journal, 37(3), 38–45.
Stojkovic, S., & Lovell, R. (2013). Corrections: An introduction. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc