Errors made by tenth graders at Thuan Thanh II High School in their writing in English = Những lỗi học sinh lớp 10 trường THPT Thuận Thành 2 gặp phải khi học vi

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
*********************
ĐỖ VĂN LẬP

ERRORS MADE BY TENTH GRADERS AT THUAN THANH II
HIGH SCHOOL IN THEIR WRITINGS IN ENGLISH

NHỮNG LỖI HỌC SINH LỚP 10 TRƯỜNG THUẬN THÀNH II GẶP
PHẢI KHI VIẾT BẰNG TIẾNG ANH

M.A MINOR THESIS

FIELD: ENGLISH TEACHING METHODOLOGY

CODE: 601410

Hanoi, 2012


TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PART ONE: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale for the study

1

2. Objectives of the study

3

3. Scope of study

3

4. Method of the study

3

5. Design of study

4

PART TWO: DEVELOPMENT

5

CHAPTER ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW

5

I.1. Approaches to teaching writing

5

I.1.1. Process approach

5

I.1.2. Product approach

6

I.1.3. Genre approach

7

I.2. Major elements of writing

8

I.2.1. Cohesion

8

I.2.2. Coherence

9

I.3. Errors in writing

10

I.3.1. Previous studies on error analysis

10

I.3.2. Errors vs mistakes

11

I.3.4. Types of errors

11

I.3.4. Sources of writing errors

13

I.3.3.1 Intralingual and developmental factors

13

I.3.3.2. Interlingual transfer

15

I.3.5. Importance of errors to teaching and learning writing

15

CHAPTER TWO: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

18

II.1. Participants

18

II.2. Instrumentation

18

II.2.1. Survey questionnaire

18
v


II.2.2. Writing test

19

II.3. Data collection procedure

19

II.4. Methods of data analysis

20

CHAPTER THREE: DATA ANALYSIS

21

III.1. Survey Questionnaire Analysis

21

III.1.1. The students‟ attitudes towards learning writing

21

III.1.2. Students‟ perceptions of writing tasks in the textbook

24

III.1.3. Students‟ attitudes towards the teacher‟s writing lessons

25

III.2. Errors analysis of students’ writing papers

25

III.2.1. Errors in language

26

III.2. 1. 1. Grammatical errors

26

III.2.1. 2. Lexical errors

32

III.2.2. Errors in organization

34

CHAPTER FOUR: MAJOR FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

37

IV.1. Synthesis of the findings and discussions

37

IV.2. Implications

39

PART THREE: CONCLUSION

41

1. Conclusions

41

2. Limitations of the study

41

3. Suggestions for further study

42

REFERENCES

43

Appendices

46

Appendix1: Questionnaires for students

I

Appendix 2: Writing tests

III

Appendix 3: Verb- related errors

IV

Appendix 4: Preposition- related errors

V

Appendix 5: Article -related errors

VI

Appendix 6: Pronoun -related errors

VII

Appendix 7: Lexical errors

VII
vi


Appendix 8: Errors in sentence structures and usage
Appendix 9: The students’ writing papers

vii

VIII


PART ONE: INTRODUCTION
This section devotes to five introductory parts: rationale, objectives, scope,
method and design of the study.
1. Rationale for the study
Basically, language learning involves the proficiency in the four language
skills: reading, writing, listening, and speaking. The four skills are divided into
receptive skills (listening and reading) and productive skills (speaking and writing).
It is undeniable that writing plays an important role in English language learning.
As one is aware, language is learned. Consequently, the ability to produce good
writing pieces is not an innate skill but has to experience a set of teaching and
learning practices.
It is possible to regard the writing ability as a type of communicative
competence. Writing is to convey messages to readers, but the conveyance of
information from the writer to the audience is not always smooth. In other words,
writing effectively is not an easy task to master. In principle, language learners must

be provided with input data before they produce the results. In the same vein,
students‟ learning to write usually stick to accumulate amount of writing knowledge
over time such as vocabulary, grammatical structure, writing styles and genres.
Learners‟ achievements in writing may be assessed in terms of their self-practice
and writing products and many other criteria depending on different learners,
situations and requirements.
Writing as a skill should not be confused with the act of writing. The skill
does not include writing separate sentences simply, but is writing series of sentences
which have intended meaning and connections. Therefore, writing will be under
learners‟ control as long as they are taught with and learn through comprehensive
and effective methods.
The importance of writing is undeniable in language teaching and learning.
There are a large number of benefits that students can receive from teaching and
learning writing. The first one is that learning is an effective way to enhance
1


grammatical constructions, vocabulary, and idioms whereby learners can improve
their capacity of producing native-like writing pieces. Secondly, writing means that
learners have to engage in using language and making effort to express ideas, which
activates learners to explore their own way to write effectively. Thirdly, as writing
and thinking have close relationship, writing forms a valuable part of language
course (Raimes, 1983). It is certain that there are more reasons for language leaner
not to neglect writing no matter how the skill is difficult dry.
In order to realize learners‟ proficiency in writing, it is hard to find another
more effective way than examine their writing papers. Assessing their writing
products can help the teacher measure how far learners travel in their language
learning and what remains for them to strive for. Not only writing pieces which
have good organization, clear expression of ideas and are free of errors but also
those containing full of errors and incoherent ideas provide the teacher with

valuable sources of reference for teaching writing.
There have been various studies regarding analysis of students‟ writing
papers. For instance, Darus (2009) implemented the analysis of English essays
written by secondary school students in Malaysia. The researcher finds that learners
often make mistakes in grammatical items such as verb tense, preposition, and
subject-verb agreement. Mungungu (2010) conducted a study regarding the analysis
of papers written by ESL Namibian graders 12. The researcher identifies the four
main categories of errors committed by such learners: tense, articles, prepositions
and spelling. The results found out by Mungungu are similar to what explored by
Azimah (2005) who also pointed out the most common types of mistakes
committed by learners are concerned with tense and prepositions. These studies are
conducted on different learners and learning environments.
As a teacher at a high school, I find that my students are weak at learning
writing. Many of them cannot write a paragraph; if some can write, their papers
contain many errors. I decide to conduct this study to fulfill the gap in the literature

2


and to explore what stands behind students‟ difficulties and what are their specific
errors in their writing pieces.
2. Objectives of the study
The study is conducted to explore the problems that the high school students
encounter whereby I can deal with such disruptions and find out the effective
teaching methods to improve students‟ writing ability. In order to realize the goals,
the following research questions need to have their answers:
1. What are the students’ attitudes towards learning writing?
2. What are the types of errors made by the tenth graders in writing an English
paragraph?
3. Scope of the study

This study is limited to the exploration of students‟ errors in writing short
paragraphs because in the English textbook 10, the highest requirement on them is
to write a short paragraph. The researcher will classify types of mistakes by the
learners and trace the root of their committing such errors. I will analyze
grammatical, lexical and mechanical errors. Based on such analysis, I will figure out
the solutions for the problems.
4. Method of the study
The writer will conduct a research to examine which writing errors tenth
graders often make and the causes of such errors. A questionnaire is designed to
elicit information of the students‟ attitudes towards learning writing. The questions
in the questionnaire are both close and open-ended. Based on the students‟ answers,
I will make some statistical data and do the analysis of such data. In addition,
students will do a writing test so that I can determine the real writing problems
facing the students. The requirement of the test is that learners write two paragraphs
of about 100 words. I will collect and analyze errors in these papers.
This is intended to be a quantitative and qualitative research study using
compositions as a technique of eliciting data for the analysis, statistical counting as

3


measurement of results. The causes of errors will be examined based on criteria
suggested by Richards (1971).
5. Design of study
There are three main parts in the study. The first one is the introduction, the
second is the development and the last one is conclusion.
The study starts with an introduction that gives an overview of teaching and
learning writing; the reasons why the issue is chosen for research and the way to
conduct the research. After introduction, there are four chapters presenting the study
in detail as the main part of the research.

In chapter one, some of the issues related to writing and errors in writing will
be reviewed. Regarding writing, main approaches to teaching writing and
components of teaching writing will be reviewed. Some of the main views
regarding writing errors such as types, causes and contribution of errors to learning
writing will be presented.
In chapter two, the method of the study is presented. It includes the
thoroughly descriptions of subjects, instrument and data collection.
The next chapter presents data analysis and discussions. In this part,
questionnaires and writing samples collected from students are analyzed to find out
students‟ typical errors and their causes in order to recommend effective strategies
for teaching paragraph writing.
In the last chapter, major findings will be summarized and some discussions,
limitations, and suggestions are also presented.

4


PART TWO: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW
In this chapter, some the issues related to teaching and learning writing
activities and error analysis will be reviewed briefly.
I.1. Approaches to teaching writing
I.1.1. Process approach
According to Trible (1996), process approaches lay emphasis on “writing
activities which move learners from the generation of ideas and the collection of
data through to the „publication‟ of a finished text.” However, the final product
should not be the central focus, and the teachers play the role of facilitating students
to brainstorming ideas, plan, revise, and edit. Badger and White (2000) supposes
that writing in process approaches is mainly concerned with linguistic aspects such
as revising, editing, knowledge of grammar, vocabulary and text structure.

Kroll (1990) affirms that student writers have to undergo a cyclonical
approach during their writing tasks. There are different views on the cyclonical
process, for example, Trible (1996) proposes four typical stages that students have
to go through, which are: prewriting, composing/drafting, revising, and editing. In
this process, student writers may go back to the first stage of prewriting after they
revise and edit their papers. According to Steele (2004), there are eight stages for
students to experience during their creation of writing pieces.
 Brainstorming: Students may discuss to work out as many ideas as possible
to meet the requirements of the writing tasks.
 Planning/structuring: Students figure out the most appropriate qualities of
their ideas.
 Mind mapping: Students arrange their ideas into a mind map, which reveals
the hierarchical relationship of ideas and helps students to shape the text
structure.

5


 Writing the first draft: Students produce the first draft based on the ideas they
filter and organize. Writing the first draft in the class can be done in pairs or
groups.
 Peer feedback: Students exchange their drafts with each other, and to some
extent they can improve their own writing pieces.
 Editing: Students will improve their own drafts based on peer feedback.
 Final draft: Students produce the final draft after editing.
 Evaluation and teacher feedback: Teachers will assess and provide feedback
on students‟ writing papers.
As the process approach pays attention to linguistic knowledge and skills, it
“promote the development of language use” (Hasan, 2010). In addition, the
approach offers students chances to release their potential to deal with rhetorical

concerns of writing (Bazerman, 1980). However, there remain drawbacks with the
process approach. As the approach regards writing process the same irrespective of
“what is being said and who is writing…and may ignore the context in which
writing happens” (Badger and White, 2000). Another disadvantage is that the
process approach does not provide enough amount of input of academic discourse
that can satisfy students‟ academic writing needs (Bizzell, 1982).
I.1.2. Product approach
Gabrielatos (2002) defines product approach as “a traditional approach in
which students are encouraged to mimic a model text, usually presented and
analyzed at an early stage.” Pincas (1982) has a more specific view when they
consider writing in the product approach mainly concerning linguistic knowledge of
vocabulary, grammar, syntax and cohesive devices. In addition, Pincas suggests that
in the product approach students have to experience four stages in learning writing:
familiarization (some features of a text become known to students), controlled
writing, guided writing (students practice writing with more freedom) and free
writing (they can write about authentic tasks) . Steele (2004) also shares the view
when affirming that the product approach is made up of four stages:
6


 Stage 1: students may be provided with a model text so that they can
familiarize themselves with certain characteristics of that text.
 Stage 2: students base on highlighted features to create familiar sentence
patterns through controlled practice.
 Stage 3: students organize their ideas and are ready for free writing.
 Stage 4: students use their own knowledge of vocabulary, structures, and
syntax to produce their own pieces of writing.
Summarizing, in the product approach, students are provided with model
texts so that they can imitate and then produce their own writing pieces.
I.1.3. Genre approach

There are various definitions of genre instruction, for example, Swales
(1990) sees it “as a class of communicative events, the members of which share
some set of communicative purposes.” Hyland (2003) defines genre approach as
“abstract, socially recognized ways of using language.”
According to Badger and White (2000), although genre approach sees
writing mainly related to linguistic aspects, the genre instruction also takes into
account the social context in which writing happens. In their view, the central focus
of genre approach is purpose, which means each type of writing is produced for
different types of purposes. This type of approach is impacted by some factors such
as the relationships between the writer and the readership, the organization pattern,
and even the subject matter. This is similar to the view that genre instruction lays
more emphasis on the reader and the writing conventions acceptable to the audience
(Munice, 2002).
There are three stages learners go through in the genre approaches:
 Stage 1: Learners are provided with a genre model for analysis.
 Stage 2: They do the tasks with related language forms.
 Stage 3: They create a short text.
The genre approach remains some disadvantages, the first of which is that it
overemphasizes on the reader while nearly neglecting learner expression (Swales,
7


2000). Another drawback is that the genre approach in the combination of both
knowledge of text and knowledge of culture, which is difficult for learners to
comprehend (Paltridge, 2001). In short, genre-oriented approaches are not only
concerned with language use but also the social context in which writing occurs.
I.2. Major elements of writing
I.2.1. Cohesion
The purpose of a writer when writing a text is to make readers not only
understand what the text is about but also make them realize how well the text is

organized and how logical

smaller units in the text are linked. Cohesion is

linguistically explicit and signals underlying semantic relationships between text
elements. Cohesion is represented by grammatical, logical and lexical bonds
between elements of a text or discourse which give the readers the perception of
clear compression of the given text or discourse.
According to Halliday and Hasan (1976), cohesion is regarded as one of the
most influential techniques in text analysis in terms of its current appeal in applied
linguistics. De Beaugrande and Dressler (1981) state that the presupposition of
coherence is the basis of cohesion. In order to make a text understandable and
logically perceived there must be cohesive devices such as conjunctions, ellipsis,
substitution, reference and lexical cohesion. We can see that the explicit cohesive
devices in texts can not only help a writer to express ideas clearly, but also to help a
reader understand a text more easily. If we strike out these cohesive ties in any text,
the meaning of the text will not be changed, but the organization of the text will be
less efficient, leading, in turn, to difficulties for the reader to achieve understanding.
Halliday and Hasan (1976) classify cohesion in terms of reference,
substitution, ellipsis, conjunction and lexicon. Nguyen Hoa (2000) has a different
approach to cohesion when he categorizes it into grammatical, logical and lexical
cohesion. Though the way of categorization is diverse, the elements of cohesion are
fully mentioned in their works.
Cohesion contributes to the comprehension of discourse but it is inadequate.
8


Receivers may draw on their background knowledge to extract inferences to
comprehend a discourse. The main source of the background knowledge is taken
from real experience, so it involves common procedures and activities social

interactions, and spatial settings.

It is admitted that cohesion facilitates the

interpretation of discourse; its combination with coherence is the necessary and
sufficient condition for the total comprehension of discourse.
I.2.2. Coherence
According to Halliday and Hasan (1976), coherence is an underlying
organizer that makes the words and sentences into a unified discourse that conforms
to a consistent world picture. A coherent text is meaningful, unified, and gives the
impression of "hanging together". Cutting (2002) suggests that coherence refers to
the rhetorical devices, to ways of writing and speaking that bring about order and
unity and emphasis. The term coherence also reveals the relationship of the ideas in
a text or a discourse that link together to create a meaningful discourse. This will
help the reader to move easily from one sentence to another without feeling that
there are gaps in the thought. Therefore, the interconnection of ideas in the text,
rather than the individual sentences, is crucial in the production of a coherent text.
Let us consider the following example:
John killed two children. He was sentenced to death.
In this example, there is no cohesive device but we can still understand due
to its coherence. The second sentence is the consequence of the first one: because
John killed people, he received the capital punishment.
There have been various interpretations of coherence. Some researchers
apply the term coherence to the concepts and relations underlying meaning of a text
or discourse.

Therefore, coherence represents both the interrelation between

elements of the discourse and the unity and continuity of meaning and context.
Linguistic messages are the necessary condition for our understanding of a

discourse, but it will be a misconception to interpret discourse with total
dependence on literal input (Brown and Yule, 1983).
9


I.3. Errors in writing
I.3.1. Previous studies on error analysis
There were a good number of papers related to error analysis were published
during 1970s and 1980s. Error analysis is the identification, description and
explanation of errors either in its spoken or written form. The structuralist linguists
view language as a set of mechanistic habits, and suppose that errors can be avoided
at the beginning of learning stage. With the emergence of the generativetransformational theory, researchers, scholars and educators were more open to
error committing, supposing that errors are natural part of learning process. This
positive attitude towards errors is especially important in the wake of the
Communicative Language Learning and Teaching. There had been many studies in
language teaching and learning done by scholars like Corder (1967), Richard (1971)
and Selinker (1992). By classifying errors that learners made, researchers could
learn a great deal about the second language acquisition process by inferring the
strategies that the learners were adopting. For learners themselves, errors are
„indispensable‟ since the making of errors can be regarded as a device the learner
uses in order to learn (Selinker, 1992).
In Vietnam, there has been an attempt made by researchers to contribute to
the treasure of error analysis. Binh (2002) conducted a study on the error analysis
on the use of cohesive devices in writing by the first-year English major students at
Thang Long University. She presented a large number of errors regarding the use of
cohesive devices; in her view, the most significant outcome of the study is that she
was aware of students‟ difficulties in using cohesive devices to create their own
writing contexts. Ninh (2008) investigated into errors regarding multi-verbs in
English commonly made by students at Nguyen Hue gifted High school. She
pointed out a great number of errors related to verb phrases and phrasal verbs

committed by her students; and she also suggested error corrections as one of the
effective way to deal with the problem. Contributing to the picture of error analysis
is the study conducted by Anh (2009) on common errors in the use of English
10


articles made by first year students at Hung Yen Industrial College. In her study,
she claimed that lack of preposition is one of the most common errors; other than
that, her students often used articles wrongly. In general, many of the studies
conducted by Vietnamese researchers focus on a grammatical aspect such as
cohesive devices, articles, or verb use.
I.3.2. Errors vs mistakes
The distinction between “errors” and “mistakes” has been given by many
linguists though it is impossible to indicate any sharp differentiation. According to
Klassen (1991), the term “error” is used to refer to a form of structure that a native
speaker deems unacceptable because of the lack of language competence. Chomsky
(1965) initiated the distinction when he suggested that there were two types of
errors: one resulting from verbal performance factors, the other from inadequate
language competence. Later, Corder (1967) named the former mistakes and the later
error. Mistakes are said to be unsystematic in nature and correctable when attention
is drawn to its producers. Errors, on the other hand, refer to any systematic
deviations from the rules of the target language system. In short, errors are caused
by lack of knowledge about the target language or by incorrect hypothesis about it;
mistakes are caused by temporary lapses of memory, confusion, and carelessness
and so on. If we are uncertain whether one of the learners has made an error or a
mistake, the crucial test must be: can he correct himself when challenged? if he can,
probably it is a mistake; if not, it is an error.
I.3.3. Types of errors
The achievement of language learning and teaching may not be flawless as
thought. The imperfection derives from the difference between the expected output

of the language learning and the real result of such process. The teacher often
requires and expects learners to make as few errors as possible, or even no errors. In
fact, learners commit errors of different extent and levels. Due to the variety of
errors, it is need to classify errors in specific groups.

11


The categorization of errors is based on various criteria and aspects. If the
learner commits errors due to the first language interference, interlingual errors will
occur. In the mean time, intralingual errors are made irrespective of first language
interference. Corder (1973) has a different way to classify errors. In his view, it is
the expressive and receptive behavior in language learning that cause expressive
and receptive errors. He also asserts that teachers often hold the belief that learners
tend to make more productive errors than receptive errors.
On the basis of linguistic levels, errors can be categorized into grammatical,
discourse, phonological and lexical errors. Grammatical errors lay emphasis on
grammatical accuracy rather than fluency, which may be obstacles for
communication proficiency. The immediate teacher correction is not necessary if
the purpose of the language course is to provide communicative proficiency.
Discourse errors are those related to the non-observance of the target language
conventions and they are the manifestations of the leaner cultural and pragmatic
knowledge of language use. Phonological errors are related to incorrect
pronunciation, word stress, and intonation. Lexical errors occur when learners use
wrong word class or inappropriate words.
According to Touchie (1986), there are two types of errors: performance
errors and competence errors. Learners commit performance errors when they are
hasty or careless. Errors of this type are usually not so serious and learners can
correct themselves with some attempt. On the contrary, competence errors are
committed due to inadequate learning. These errors are more serious because

learners will take time to accumulate and improve their language knowledge.
Burt and Kiparsky (1974, cited in Touchie, 1986) differentiates between
local errors and global errors. Local errors include noun and verb inflections, the
use of grammatical items. Local errors do not have negative impacts on the
communication process as well as the comprehension of the meaning of utterances
or statements. Therefore, local errors are not very serious. Global errors involve the

12


use wrong word order and meaning; therefore, they may cause obscurity and
unintelligibility, which may disrupt and hinder communication.
I.3.4. Sources of writing errors
I.3.3.1 Intralingual and developmental factors
It is natural that language learners make errors during their learning process.
Errors may derive from various sources. There have been many explanations for
errors committed by errors. Richards (1974) proposes five causes of errors: 1)
overgeneralization, 2) incomplete application of rules, 3) false concepts
hypothesized, and 4) ignorance of rule restriction. To make it clear, the four
classifications above are explained briefly below.
Overgeneralization
In case of overgeneralization, learners apply strategies they have learned to
new learning situations. More specifically, they base on their past learning
experience to produce deviant structures in the target language. There are two main
reasons for overgeneralization; the first one is that learners want to diminish
linguistic complexities, and the other one is the superficial similarities of structures
in the target language.
Overgeneralization is also linked with redundancy reduction. This happens
when learners find that some grammatical aspects are unimportant in conveying
meaning. This occurrence is popular in descriptive writing which learners often use

simple present tense instead of past tense though the actions happen in the past.
Incomplete application of rules
The ability to produce acceptable utterances and statements represents the
extent to which learners apply rules to doing so. One of the common difficulty
facing learners is the use of question forms; a statement is sometimes a question.
Responses to questions require grammatical rules. Foreign and second language
learners may pay attention to communicative aspects of language, so they often
ignore grammatical forms. In other words, the leaner needs to communicate in other
languages may exceed the needs to produce grammatically correct sentences.
13


An example of incomplete application of rules can be seen in the question
forms. Teachers‟ use of questions in classroom is not to find out something but to
elicit sentences. The use of question may also be unrelated to the skills it is meant to
establish.
False concepts hypothesized
There are errors arising from faulty comprehension of distinctions in the
target language. In other words, learners cannot distinguish different grammatical
forms. There are two main explanations for errors of this type. The first one is the
leaner‟s‟ poor gradation of teaching items. The other is connected with a contrastive
approach to language teaching. Instead of introducing language structure as a whole
for learners to follow, the contrastive approach lays excessive emphasis on points of
difference, which may confuse learners. Effective ways to minimize learners‟
confusion are choosing non-synonymous contexts for related words and phrases and
not using excises based on contrast and transformation.
Ignorance of rule restriction
Another cause of error is the non-observance of restrictions of existing
structures. In this case, learners produce deviant structures with inappropriate
application of rules. The omission of rules is a type of generalization because

leaners apply their previously acquired rules to new situation. There are two main
reasons for rule restrictions errors. The first one is analogy (the creation of deviant
structures from previous experience of English), and the other one is the rote
learning of rules.
Teaching materials and methods
Errors made by learners can sometimes be caused by teachers themselves.
Errors appear during the teaching process is the representation of ineffective
teaching methods. In particular, teachers‟ hypercorrection and presentation order
during their teaching prompts learners to make errors. It is interesting that some
teachers are influenced by learners‟ errors during long teaching process (Touchie,
1986). In the case that teachers select inappropriate teaching materials with little
14


care, learners will be exposed to materials containing incorrect knowledge.
I.3.3.2. Interlingual transfer
Language transfer, also called linguistic interference, is the influence of the
learner‟s first language in the second language. There are two types of transfer; if
the result of transfer is correct expressions in the target language, it is positive
transfer. On the other hand, if the linguistic transfer leads to incorrect production in
the target language, it is negative transfer.
Language learners can make errors due to interlingual transfer. Interlingual
errors, also called transfer or interference errors, are caused by learners‟ first
language. Error analysis does not consider interlingual errors as “the persistence of
old habits, but...as signs that the learner is internalizing and investigating the system
of the new language” (Erdogan, 2005). In his view, interlingual errors may appear
at phonological, morphological, grammatical, and lexical levels.
At any levels, Touchie (1986) supposes that hypercorrection is a cause of
learners‟ errors. In his view, the teacher‟s considerable efforts to help learners to
write and speak correctly happen to become learners‟ obsession. For example, the

teacher wants learners to pronounce the sound /p/ correctly; learners may make
errors with the sound /b/ in the long run due to lasting and regular practice of
pronouncing the sound /p/.
I.3.5. Importance of errors to teaching and learning writing
Corder (1973) affirms that there are two main schools of thought regarding
language errors in the area of teaching methodology. The first school is that the
teaching method is the decisive factor that governs learners‟ possibility of making
errors. If our goal is to achieve a perfect teaching method, then there will be no
chances of learners‟ committing errors; it is the ineffectiveness of teaching methods
that result in the occurrence of errors. The other view is that making errors is a
natural thing and is unavoidable in language learning. In practice, the second
thought seems popular or even ubiquitous in language learning setting. Thus, if

15


making errors is natural, the question of seriousness of the action is not as important
as the significance that such errors bring about.
Contributions of error analysis to pedagogy
According to Richards (1974), researchers conduct studies related to errors to
find out strategies employed by learners in language teaching, to identify the causes
of errors, and to explore learners‟ common difficulties to facilitate language
learning and teaching process. In fact the third aim is the consequence of the first
two aims. Learners‟ errors provide the evidence of the language they are using at
some particular point in the course (Corder, 1973). Therefore, learners‟ errors have
been in the interests of teachers, syllabus designers, and test developers. As a result,
the contribution of error analysis to language teaching and learning can be regarded
from the aspects of language teachers and syllabus designers (Erdogan, 2005).
Contribution of error analysis to foreign language teachers
The teacher is the one who is well aware of types, causes and frequency of

errors that their learners make. The analysis of such errors in a systematic way will
tell the teacher the learner‟s progress in the learning process and the remaining jobs
to be done (Corder, 1973). Based on what the learner has achieved, the teacher will
be able to explore the needs and weaknesses of learners whereby appropriate
teaching strategies are employed. Though errors are representation of learners‟
performance, the teacher should notice that errors are signs to measure the adequacy
of teaching methods. Consequently, the teacher needs to adapt the teaching styles in
accordance with learners‟ capacity to minimize the chances of making errors.
Contribution of error analysis syllabus designers
Syllabus design should not be done arbitrarily but based on studies related to
specific criteria and factors such as age group, needs, and learner goals. The
importance of syllabus design in language course cannot be denied. Errors are the
source of evidence for researchers to explore “how language is learned or acquired,
what strategies or procedures the learner is employing in his discovery of the
language” (Corder, 1973). The analysis of learner errors will help to indentify
16


learners‟ linguistic difficulties and their needs at some stage of language learning
process; therefore, it assists to construct materials suitable to learners.

17


CHAPTER TWO: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the participants, instruments of data collection,
procedure of data collection, and methods of data analysis of the study in detail.
II.1. Participants
The number of participants in the study is fifty; they were chosen randomly
from five classes; each class has ten students taking part in the study. Below is the

specific information of the participants.

Number of responses

Percentage

15

44

88%

16

6

12%

male

19

38%

female

31

62%

50

100%

Information of students
Age
Sex

Length of English learning

Nearly 5
years

Table 1: students’ general information in the survey
The number of students participating in the survey is fifty; the age of the
participants in the study are regarded as homogenous in with 44 students at the age
of 15 (88%), and the rest at the age of 16 . They all study in the same class in which
female students account for 62%, nearly double the number of male students. Until
the time of the survey, they all have been studying English for nearly five years.
Although those students have been studying English for nearly five years, their
English is at the pre-intermediate level.
II.2. Instrumentation
II.2.1. Survey questionnaire
The questionnaire is designed to explore students‟ attitudes towards learning
writing skill. The questionnaire is divided into three parts. The first part contains
questions to find out the students‟ general interests in learning writing. The second
18


part will focus on the consideration of students‟ perceptions of writing tasks in the

English textbook 10. The last part of the questionnaire is intended to find out
students‟ attitudes towards the writing teacher.
II.2.2. Writing tests
In the English text book for grader 10, there are sixteen units; each unit
contains a writing section. From unit 1 to unit 12, writing sections mainly focus on
grammatical exercises and sentence completion. The last four units require the
students to write a short paragraph based on the given instructions. Consequently,
writing paragraph is the last and highest requirement for the graders 10 to fulfill. I
have decided to ask my students to write about the following topics:
 Describe one of the most favorite films you have seen.
 Describe Hanoi capital city.
The students are given 45 minutes to write the two topics; the length of each
paragraph is about 100 words. The reasons I choose the two topics are that these are
topics in the textbook they find interesting and appropriate, and that they have more
chance to select the topic they prefer. The both topics contain hints and
organization. It means that the students only need to follow the organization given
in the textbook and produce their ideas. As a consequent, I will analyze the
students‟ writing papers focusing both on language errors and organization errors.
Language errors will be examined in terms of grammatical errors, lexical errors and
mechanical errors.
II.3. Data collection procedure
 Firstly, the questionnaire is piloted the first time to see if there is any
unexpected problem. It will be given to 20 students to fill in.
 The questionnaire is then adapted and officially given to the 50 tenth graders
to finish.
 A 45-minute writing test is designed for the students to complete.
 The survey questionnaire and the writing papers will be collected and
analyzed.
19

II.4. Methods of data analysis
This research was conducted as both a quantitative and qualitative study.
Regarding the exploration of students‟ attitudes towards learning writing in English,
I will deliver questionnaire to them to fill in. The answers given by the students will
be counted and subject to comparison so that real problems can be determined. As
for analysis of students‟ writing errors, the errors will measured in terms of the
frequency of occurrence in various categories and percentages of the different kinds
of errors in the total number of errors were established from this occurrence
frequency. The techniques employed in the analysis process are: identifying,
labeling, classifying, and transferring to indexes. The procedure was carried out
with four steps. First of all, all of the papers will be read carefully, errors in the
writing papers will be identified and marked. Then, an interpretation will be
retrieved to reconstruct what the subjects intended to express in their writing in
order to decide if the form or structure was really erroneous. Finally, occurrence
frequency counting is to be made for each type of errors. The outcomes will be
compared with each other.

20


CHAPTER THREE: DATA ANALYSIS
This chapter will present the results of the study and the analysis of the data
collected
III.1. Survey Questionnaire Analysis
In order to find out the learners‟ attitudes towards learning writing skill, a
survey questionnaire was designed concerning three aspects: learners‟ general
interests in writing skill, their feelings of tasks in the English textbook 10, and their
attitudes towards the writing teacher.
III.1. 1. The students‟ attitudes towards learning writing

It is necessary to find out how the students perceive learning writing as their
attitudes can affect their learning activities. Five questions were designed for that
purpose.
Question 1: Is writing skill important to you?

Item

Very important Important Not so important Unimportant

NoR

14

Percentage

27

7

2

28%

54%

14%

4%

Table 1: the students’ perceptions of the importance of writing skill

As can be seen from the table, more than half of the students considered
writing an important skill, with 54%. The percentage of those who suppose that
writing is of great importance to them accounts for 28%. This percentage is double
the percentage of the students who regard writing not so important. Only two
students saw writing unimportant. As such, more than two thirds number of students
realized the importance of writing to themselves. It can be inferred from the table
that only a few students ignore the importance of writing skill.
Question 2: How much time do you usually spend practicing writing at
home?

21