Students writing Correction Techniques

Introduction

As a global medium of communication, English's significance has increased, especially in the present political, economic, and social contexts. Additionally, with the evolution of information technology, English has become a world citizen language. According to Hossain (2015), in any part of the world, English is being taught as a core subject regardless of many students still lagging in achieving comprehensive productive skills, including speaking and writing. For decades, the communicative method used in the school curriculum and universities aims to develop four critical skills including writing, reading, speaking, and listening. Therefore, appropriate planning, implementation, and monitoring can enable all students to achieve the highest language proficiency in the four critical skills. Similarly, learning and teaching English for non-English speakers, especially in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL), is essential for effective communication and enables students to cope with the increasing national and international English demands skills. Some of the skills which are vital for students learning English as a second language include writing skills. According to Tran (2013), students learning a second language face many challenges in writing. Similarly, regardless of many writing difficulties, the study reveals that corrective feedback is a controversial topic, especially for L2 classrooms. Researchers show that it can be harmful, while others indicate that it is suitable for language development in several ways. This research reveals that it is important to consider giving feedback on student written errors. In another study, Balachandran (2018) states that the biggest challenge in learning a foreign language is experienced in the process of learning the language. Similarly, the study reveals that various techniques and approaches are invented to make learning and teaching productive skills easier for both learners and teachers. Some of the corrective writing skills useful in teaching a second language include Writing Correction Code' (WCC) where correction codes are used to explain to learners what to do. Another strategy is exemplification which functions by giving examples. Therefore this paper aims to explore the Writing Correction Code' (WCC) and exemplification correction Techniques of correcting L2 Student Writing and experience.

Writing Correction Code

Error correction codes are the utilization symbols and abbreviations to inform L2 learners of both the writing error and the errors made. According to Tran (2013), error correction is vital since it allows language teachers to provide useful feedback and minimize the disheartening and negative impacts of correcting writing errors without reducing the effect of error correction. The correction is vital for teachers who are very meticulous with perfection. The study also reveals that correction error code is essential in sharpening writing skills and enabling learners to eliminate errors. The strategy ensures that learners are conscious about writing mistakes and errors and effectively rectify them themselves. Schuitemaker-King (2012) also states that the strategy applies the notion that when learners are actively involved in the process of self-correction, they do it effectively. Therefore, it is evident that the error correction codes strategy is advantageous in correcting students' errors. However, in a study by Allen and Negueruela–Azarola (2010) in error correction codes, language teachers can only highlight and locate the error, thus making the method ineffective in correcting students' errors and making students avoid such mistakes. The study also reveals that using error correction codes is vital since it enables the teacher to highlight points that have been taught in class, thus allowing the students to correct their errors effectively. Therefore, it is evident that WCC contributed to improving language usage and eliminates writing errors. Additionally, error codes are essential in helping students correct their writing. This method has been propounded in the literature as an appropriate strategy to facilitate error correction. Bitchener and Knoch (2010) state that the technique is believed to help learners correct their errors. The study also reveals that it is vital to correct learner errors and give them the right answers. The strategy is essential since it provides learners cues to fix their own mistakes. Thus methods also are vital in enabling learners to further linguistic competence. In a study by Tran (2013), American learners who used error codes to correct the German language errors had more significant improvement in writing than learners who had their errors corrected by their educators. The research indicates that coded feedback is useful for weak students. Benson and DeKeyser (2019) examined Japanese English learners who helped correct errors and found out that students who used these error correction codes were compared to those who did not utilize this strategy. Also, the study revealed that Japanese learners found coding errors useful in helping learners correct the mistakes. Tran (2013) states that the process underlying language development due to error correction has not yet been understood. This view proposes that the mechanism might not effectively be used in determining the effectiveness of improving the language. However, the study also reveals that learner’s grammatical errors are corrected and that the correct form of language is provided to learners through feedback. This feedback is vital in enabling students to use the corrected form of grammar in the future. Furthermore, error-correcting codes in writing are vital in increasing students ‘performance in error correction. A study by Bitchener (2017) states that this strategy is vital since it has positive effects on promoting learners ‘self-correction and improves students’ written production. However, other than just highlighting errors learning should take place before students learn to self-correct themselves. Similarly, the method is vital in creating a common understanding of grammatical knowledge. The strategy enables learners to correct the errors since they were taught grammatical rules and terms. According to Kim and Emeliyanova (2019), the method is based on assumption that the learner already knows the terms and concepts linked to the grammatical terms used in the correct code before the introduction of these codes. Also, it is vital to ensure that, both learners and teachers use the same meta-language and understand the meaning of grammatical terms. However, regardless of the error corrective strategy, Bitchener (2017) states that the transfer of information from educators to students via corrective feedback does not take place due to the many complexities of the language development system thus making the correction strategy difficult to practice. The study also reveals that the strategy is vital in helping learners acquire common grammatical knowledge understanding. Therefore, the correction code is vital in helping learners to correct their errors; hence being vital in correcting students' errors. Nevertheless, the correctional codes are vital in providing practice sheets. To ensure the marking codes' use, teachers require to ensure that learners are clear on their grammatical rules. Therefore, teachers need to develop a list of correction codes that learners can make better use of. According to Rastgou et al. (2020), teachers need to teach learners these symbols and provide learners with ample practice until they master the linguistic terms and correct themselves. With effective teaching, learners can develop accuracy when the code is used consistently throughout lessons. Moreover, the studies reveal that learners prefer coded feedback (Allen & Negueruela–Azarola, 2010). Similarly, learners get the opportunity to understand their mistakes and to correct them as well. Also, learners are encouraged to take more responsibility for their learning, thus creating better learning. Benson and DeKeyser (2019) state that this strategy is very difficult to apply due to students' diverse nature learning styles. This shows that this strategy is limited since various students have different learning styles; thus, the codes cannot be applied effectively. Therefore, regardless of a contrasting view on the error-correcting strategy, the error-correcting approach is vital and contains very many positive aspects that can be adopted in teaching students learning a second language.

Exemplification

Exemplification is a strategy that utilizes vivid, specific, and vivid examples to add more information to persuade, explain, illustrate and, defining an idea. It provides firm support and gives evidence to prove an idea. Giving various examples to learners helps explain what, when, where, why, and how information should appear in a paragraph (Mukhopadhyay, 2020). The strategy provides a useful correction tool for grammatical structure and vocabulary phrases. In most cases, exemplification is often used to provide positive feedback and always focus on selecting various errors to correct. Tran (2015) states that a teacher using this strategy should highlight the texts in multiple colors, suggesting different errors. This highlighting enables learners to improve and may not become discouraged from making errors and correcting them. Based on the Self-correction and Peer correction approach, correcting students creates debate, and there is also the danger of making students lose motivation. Similarly, correcting students impact the flow of the class (Ganji, 2009). This indicates that regardless of the strategy being vital in correcting students' writing, it also has challenges in that students' continuous correction might make them lose morale, thus diminishing their English performance. Also, Ganji (2009) states that when students need their mistakes to be corrected and in this case, engaging students and correcting their errors motivate them to continue learning. In second language learning, traditional teaching instruction often focuses on language aspects, vocabulary and, grammatical rules other than learning the language in meaningful discourse for successful communication. Therefore, writing is very vital in second language learning (Amara, 2018). However, the teacher should ensure that during the correction of errors using exemplification, accurate and appropriate examples are provided. Also, language should be accurately be presented. All examples should also give the teacher multiple opportunities to introduce vocabulary and grammatical knowledge, thus eliminating errors. Therefore, using exemplification repeatedly, students can review their vocabulary, and students have a chance to observe and self-learn (Sakiroglu, (2020). Similarly, Amara (2018) states that exemplification includes an interactive video where the English educator provides authentic material of specific language aspects. Also, multimedia can be easily be used as a teaching resource for students. This view reveals that the strategy is effective, thus increasing student performance. However, regardless of any benefits, Ha and Murray (2020) state that exemplification might create negative consequences since it might be confusing to students, thus limiting its efficiency. It can make students embarrassed when they are not able to think of ways to correct their errors. Therefore educators should be aware of the dangers of using randomly selected examples in their teaching. However, regardless of the drawback, exemplification is an effective teaching strategy and correcting their mistakes. Earl (2012) states that the use of exemplification suits many students. There are a variety of exemplification techniques that are used in teaching students. Some of these strategies include sentences, brief examples, and sentences. In exemplification, teachers give various examples and illustrations, thus making ideas and errors very clear. For example, the use of diagrams can be very vital in illustrating errors in students writing. This strategy also allows teachers to back up what they are saying with examples that are persuasive to students. Through examples, teachers demonstrate inductive and deductive reasoning. Exemplification occurs in several rhetorical situations, including in conversations. For instance, writing errors like grammatical errors can be emphasized, making learners master grammar, thus avoiding such mistakes. Amara (2018) also states that exemplification can help learners continue developing their L2 skills and proficiency. Also, it helps learners increase their metalinguistic knowledge. The study reveals that, while students were asked about error feedback preferences, they revealed that indirect feedback was the better way of correcting their errors. This view suggests that exemplification, which gives indirect feedback, is vital to enhancing language teaching (Earl, 2012). The study also reveals that the strategy plays a constructive role among lower-level students. Regardless of the many benefits, Jun (2006) states that there is a debate on the efficacy of grammar instruction and exemplification in reducing writing errors. The study also reveals that, even when mistakes have been exemplified and covered, students may not use them accurately in their writing. This view shows that the strategy is limited and does not always have all the aspects of correctness. However, the error-correcting method is effective in correcting errors among second language learners.

Personal Experience

Having pursued a degree in Teaching English to Speakers of other languages (TESOL), I focus on two different TESOL settings, which I regularly visited while in the UK. During my placement, I have been able to teach multi-cultural cohort with L2 speakers studying alongside their L1 peers for GSCE (General Certificate of Education. In one of my classes, I decided to apply the writing correction code to improve students' understanding. In the teaching, which took about three weeks, I prepared a correction code, which I explain to my students what they were going to do and why. I gave the students a copy of the codes and we discussed each one (Yugandhar, 2014). Furthermore, I gave the students a worksheet with some errors and asked the students to correct the mistakes on it using the code. For the next three weeks, I gave out a task either as homework or as classwork. All the classwork was collected and corrected using the prepared correctional codes. All the errors were underlined and codes added for learners to notice - underneath the margin (Yugandhar, 2014). The outcome showed that students thinking was greatly improved and students could correct their mistakes. Also, it was evident that the correction codes inspired the learners to look at writing as a skill that can be improved. Moreover, the practice students’ English performance improved, and students achieved language proficiency by paying more attention to language correctness. Also, the students showed significant improvement in revising their writing and accomplish proofreading tasks more attentively. This outcome is similar to a study by Corpuz (2011), which reveals that error correction is an essential component of L2 acquisition for the learning process to be effective. The research also shows that error correction codes are an opportunity to encourage learners to improve error realization, which is vital in avoiding errors in the future. Therefore, my personal experience and literature justify the effectiveness of writing correction code. Also, having learned from a reputable institution, I am equipped with empirical evidence and theoretical tools appropriate for understanding L2 student writing correction techniques. From the learning, I realized that second language learners face a lot of challenges. Challenges in writing are visible; thus, teachers need to look for a better method of giving feedback on student written errors. Similarly, I learned that it is essential while exemplifying errors to classify them to ensure that learner’s problems are diagnosed at any stage of their development. It is also vital to ensure that changes in error patterns are monitored as they occur over time. From my studies, I also observed that some of the errors that improved extensively include misspelling. The strategy provides a solution to improving listening skills, thus developing spelling skills. Also, the stately reduces the error of redundancy. This is a kind of lexical error found, especially when students are not aware of a proceeding semantic meaning in the subsequent words. Also, writing creates the error of formation where learners use the wrong words in their composition. For instance, where the student writes, "students have various thinks, idea, and ideal," the error is created due to word-formation. This can be corrected using exemplification. According to Paquot (2008), exemplification utilizes vivid and specific examples to include more information to persuade and explain some ideas. Moreover, in my first year, I learned that this exemplification strategy is vital since it encourages learners to think about their language errors and correct themselves. Also, excellent examples enable learners to look at writing as a skill that can be improved and train them to look for improvement areas. Also, my understanding is similar to Ryan (2012). The study reveals that self-correction is among the best forms of error correction; thus, teachers should encourage students to notice their errors and make attempts to correct themselves. This is achieved via exemplification and other strategies. Therefore, it is evident that exemplification is justified as an appropriate strategy for correcting errors in writing.

Conclusion

English as a medium of communication increases its significance in the political, economic, and social context. English is being taught in any part of the world regardless of it still failing to achieve comprehensive productive skills among non-speakers. Teaching and learning English as a second language has many challenges, especially in writing. However, some strategies improve and correct writing errors, including writing correction code and exemplification. Writing correction code uses symbols and abbreviations to inform L2 learners of both the writing error and the mistake. This strategy allows language teachers to provide useful feedback and minimize the disheartening and negative impacts of correcting writing errors without reducing error correction. Also, it is vital in sharpening writing skills and enabling learners to eliminate errors. More importantly, the strategy ensures students are conscious about writing mistakes and errors, thus effectively rectifying their mistakes. Furthermore, evidence has proved that when learners are actively involved in the process of self-correction, they do it effectively. Therefore, the error correction codes strategy is vital in correcting errors, thus improving language usage and eliminating writing errors. Another strategy is an exemplification, a technique that utilizes vivid, specific, and vivid examples to add more information to persuade and define ideas. It is vital in explaining what, when, where, why, and how information should appear in a paragraph. It is essential in that it is a useful correction strategy that helps students correct their writing errors. Furthermore, it helps in increasing students ‘performance in error correction and providing practice sheets. From my experience, I have noted that writing correction code improved my student’s understanding. Also, the outcome showed that students thinking was much improved, and students could correct their mistakes. Even students had increased improvement in revising their writing and accomplish proofreading tasks more attentively. On my knowledge of exemplifying, it improves correction of errors and encourages learners to think about their language errors and correct themselves. Therefore writing correction codes and exemplification are among the best forms of error correction; thus, teachers should encourage students to notice their errors and make attempts to correct themselves. Therefore, these strategies are justified as appropriate strategies for correcting mistakes in writing.

Take a deeper dive into Striving for Excellence: A Personal Statement for MSc Management with our additional resources.

References

Allen, H. W., & Negueruela–Azarola, E. (2010). The professional development of future professors of foreign languages: Looking back, looking forward. The Modern Language Journal, 94(3), 377-395.

Amara, N. (2018). Correcting Students’ Errors: Theory and Practice. Current Educational Research, 1(05).

Balachandran, A. (2018). Perspectives and Practices Regarding Written Corrective Feedback in Swedish Context: A Case Study.

Benson, S., & DeKeyser, R. (2019). Effects of written corrective feedback and language aptitude on verb tense accuracy. Language Teaching Research, 23(6), 702-726.

Bitchener, J., & Knoch, U. (2010). Raising the linguistic accuracy level of advanced L2 writers with written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 207-217.

Bitchener, J. (2017). Why some L2 learners fail to benefit from written corrective feedback. Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning, 129-140.

Earl, L. M. (2012). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Corwin Press.

Ganji, M. (2009). Teacher-correction, Peer-correction and Self-correction: Their Impacts on Iranian Students' IELTS Essay Writing Performance. Journal of Asia TEFL, 6(1).

Ha, X. V., & Murray, J. C. (2020). Corrective feedback: Beliefs and practices of Vietnamese primary EFL teachers. Language Teaching Research, 1362168820931897.

Hossain, M. I. (2015). Teaching productive skills to the students: a secondary level scenario (Doctoral dissertation, BRAC University).

Jun, S. W. (2006). Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, and practice. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(1), 146.

Kim, Y., & Emeliyanova, L. (2019). The effects of written corrective feedback on the accuracy of L2 writing: Comparing collaborative and individual revision behavior. Language Teaching Research, 1362168819831406.

Mukhopadhyay, L. (2020). Use of exemplification in ESL students’ self-assessment reports: Can they help to argue better?. Linguistic Frontiers, 3(1), 28-38.

Paquot, M. (2008). Exemplification in learner writing. Phraseology in foreign language learning and teaching, 101-119.

Rastgou, A., Storch, N., & Knoch, U. (2020). The Effect of Sustained Teacher Feedback on CAF, Content and Organization in EFL Writing. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 8(2), 41-61.

Ryan, C. (2012, January). Exemplification and deconstructive writing: dancing with Massumi, Derrida, and others. In AARE-APERA 2012: Proceedings of the Joint International

Conference of the AARE and the APERA (pp. 1-10). Australian Association for Research in Education.

Sakiroglu, H. Ü. (2020). Oral Corrective Feedback Preferences of University Students in English Communication Classes. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 6(1), 172-178.

Schuitemaker-King, J. (2012). Teachers' strategies in providing opportunities for second language development (Doctoral dissertation, University Library Groningen][Host]).

Tran, Y. (2015). ESL Pedagogy and Certification: Teacher Perceptions and Efficacy. Journal of Education and Learning, 4(2), 28-42.

Tran, T. H. (2013). Approaches to Treating Student Written Errors. Online Submission.

Yugandhar, K. (2014). Practicing correction codes to improve English writing skills. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature, 2(8), 7-1