Peer correction among grade 11 students at a high school in thanh hoa province

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES


NGỌ THỊ LOAN

PEER CORRECTION AMONG GRADE 11 STUDENTS
AT A HIGH SCHOOL IN THANH HOA PROVINCE

(Nghiên cứu việc học sinh lớp 11 sửa lỗi cho nhau tại một trường trung học
phổ thơng ở tỉnh Thanh Hóa)

M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS
Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 8140231.01

Hanoi – 2021


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES


NGỌ THỊ LOAN

PEER CORRECTION AMONG GRADE 11 STUDENTS
AT A HIGH SCHOOL IN THANH HOA PROVINCE

(Nghiên cứu việc học sinh lớp 11 sửa lỗi cho nhau tại một trường trung học

phổ thơng ở tỉnh Thanh Hóa)

M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS
Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 8140231.01
Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyễn Văn Độ

Hanoi - 2021


DECLARATION
I certify that the minor thesis entitled ‘Peer correction among grade 11
students at a high school in Thanh Hoa province’ is the result of my own work
and has not been submitted in any form for another degree or diploma at any
universities or other institutions. Documented references have been fully
provided.
Hanoi, 2021
Ngo Thi Loan

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First, I would like to express my special and sincere thanks to my
supervisor, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyễn Văn Độ, who gave me enthusiastic
instructions, precious support and critical feedback on the construction of the
study.
Second, I also express my profound gratitude to all doctors, lecturers
and staff members of the Faculty of Postgraduate Studies, University of
Foreign Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University,

Hanoi for their valuable lectures and useful advice that is of a great help for
me to fulfil the thesis.
Next, I would like to send my deep sense of thanks to the English
teachers and 30 high school students in Thanh Hoa for their cooperation and
the valuable information they provided in my research field.
Finally, I am also thankful to many writers whose ideas are useful hints
for the development of this thesis.

ii


ABSTRACT
This research investigates the peer correction technique among grade
11 students at a high school in Thanh Hoa province. The purposes of the
research are to examine the students’ attitudes towards peer correction and its
effectiveness in helping students to enhance their writing skill. In spite of the
fact that peer correction is an educational technique being used more and more
widely in the world, there have not been much research conducted in
Vietnamese context. The data was collected through three instruments: pre-test
and post-test, portfolio and questionnaire. The pre-test and post-test were taken
from the question bank of the school. They were paragraphs consisting of 25
mistakes. However, the level of recognizing the mistakes of the post-test was
more difficult than that of the pre-test. They were designed to measure students’
ability to identify mistakes in the written paragraph and were run before and
after the treatment. The portfolio was administered to see if peer correction
enabled students to reduce mistakes when they produced paragraphs from the
first one to the last one. The questionnaire was designed for thirty students and
contained 7 questions. The findings showed that students had positive attitudes
towards peer correction technique. It is effective in helping students to improve
their writing skill as well as motivate them to write more. Finally, this research

is hoped to contribute a small part in enabling teachers and students to facilitate
the process of teaching and learning writing.

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION .............................................................................................. i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................ ii
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................... iii
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................... vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................... viii
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION .................................................................. 1
1. Rationale of the study.................................................................................... 1
2. Aim and objectives of the study .................................................................... 3
3. Research questions ........................................................................................ 3
4. Scope of the study ......................................................................................... 3
5. Method of the study ...................................................................................... 3
6. Significance of the study ............................................................................... 4
7. Structural organization .................................................................................. 4
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................... 6
2.1. Teaching writing ........................................................................................ 6
2.2. The process of writing ................................................................................ 7
2.3. Error correction .......................................................................................... 8
2.4. Types of error correction.......................................................................... 10
2.4.1. Teacher correction ................................................................................ 10
2.4.2. Self-correction....................................................................................... 12
2.5. Correction in writing as a process ............................................................ 14
2.6. Error code and error logs.......................................................................... 15
2.7. Previous studies ........................................................................................ 16

2.7.1. Overseas studies .................................................................................... 16
2.7.2. Studies in Vietnam ................................................................................. 22

iv


CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ............................................................ 23
3.1. Restatement of research questions ........................................................... 24
3.2. Context of the study ................................................................................. 24
3.2.1. The setting of the study .......................................................................... 24
3.2.2. Participants ........................................................................................... 25
3.3. Research approach ................................................................................... 25
3.4. Data collection instruments ...................................................................... 27
3.4.1. Pre-test and Post-test ............................................................................ 27
3.4.2. Portfolio ................................................................................................ 28
3.4.3. Questionnaire ........................................................................................ 28
3.5. Data collection procedure ........................................................................ 29
3.6. Analysis of data ........................................................................................ 30
3.7. Summary .................................................................................................. 30
CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION....................................... 31
4.1. Data analysis ............................................................................................ 32
4.1.1. The results of pre-test and post-test ...................................................... 32
4.1.2. The results of portfolio .......................................................................... 33
4.1.3. The results of questionnaire for students .............................................. 38
4.2. Findings and discussion ........................................................................... 41
4.2.1. To what extent does peer correction enable students to enhance their
writing skill? .................................................................................................... 41
4.2.2. What are the grade 11 students’ attitudes towards peer correction in
writing lessons? ............................................................................................... 42
4.3. Summary .................................................................................................. 44

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION .................................................................... 45
1. Recapitulation.............................................................................................. 45
2. Concluding remarks .................................................................................... 46
v


3. Limitations of the current research ............................................................. 47
4. Implications of the findings ........................................................................ 47
5. Recommendations and suggestions for future research .............................. 48
REFERENCES .............................................................................................. 49
APPENDIX 1 .................................................................................................... I
APPENDIX 2 ...................................................................................................II
APPENDIX 3 ................................................................................................. III
APPENDIX 4 ................................................................................................. IV
APPENDIX 5 .................................................................................................. V
APPENDIX 6 ................................................................................................ VII
APPENDIX 7 .............................................................................................. VIII
APPENDIX 8 ................................................................................................. IX
APPENDIX 9 .................................................................................................. X

vi


LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Results of the pre-test and post-test ................................................. 32
Figure 2: The number of word order mistakes committed ............................. 34
Figure 3: The number of concord mistakes committed .................................. 34
Figure 4: The number of wrong word mistakes committed ............................ 35
Figure 5: The number of article mistakes committed ..................................... 35
Figure 6: The number of tense mistakes committed ....................................... 36

Figure 7: Students’ attitudes towards peer correction..................................... 38

vii


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
L1:

First Language

L2:

Second Language

EFL: English as a Foreign Language
ESL: English as a Second Language
MA: Masters of Art

viii


CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale of the study
In the current society, it is becoming more and more imperative and
essential to learn a foreign language, especially English. English plays an
integral part in our daily lives. It is not only used in academic environment but
also in other leisure activities such as surfing the net or travelling. Recognizing
the importance of this language, many learners are attempting to explore
effective ways of learning English. There have been many learning strategies
analysed in order to find out effective tools of teaching to implement in schools.

The purpose of them is to enhance the process of learning English. One of the
tools that is employed in English class is peer correction. It seems that learners
of English language feel unpleasant when they produce paragraphs or essays in
English. The researcher assumes that the feeling of uncomfortableness can be
due to various elements. One of the factors may be the insistence of teachers
on correcting all students’ errors. The change to peer correction was the issue
concerning many linguists in the last decades. Hence, the concentration was
shifted from teacher-centered approaches to student-centered approaches. It
cannot be denied that giving feedback to students’ writing is significant in the
process of learning a second language. There are different ways to give
feedback in language teaching and learning: teacher-student conference, peer
correction, self-correction and teacher correction. Witbeck (1976) came to a
conclusion that peer correction enables students to find out most of the
mistakes, which can result in better writing.
Mistakes are regarded as a natural phenomenon of communication.
Besides, teachers’ role is considerably altered as they play a role as a facilitator,
monitor and advisor. Teachers are also more tolerant to students’ errors. The
1


shift in the role of teacher means that students will have to rely on themselves
more than on teachers. Students need to participate more actively in the learning
process and take responsibilities to complete the work on time. Teachers should
create activities and then ask students to work in pairs and groups to discuss
and expand those activities. Involving students in the activities they love can
help to generate a high level of motivation from students. Therefore, the
researcher assumes that having students be responsible for their own work
increases the motivation of students. This makes the researcher to explore how
peer correction has effects on students’ writing skill and their attitudes towards
this correction technique. Peer correction is conducted in classroom to boost

the autonomy, cooperation, involvement and interaction among students.
Furthermore, peer correction may improve students’ writing skill considerably.
To the researcher’s experience and observation, students at a high school
in Thanh Hoa province, especially the grade 11 students, are very shy and
nervous when they ask the teacher to correct their writing. It seems that they
feel more comfortable and pleasant when they ask their classmates about
something they do not know. Therefore, the researcher assumes that peer
correction is the best correction technique for them. Besides, as can be seen that
until now, there have been many researchers investigating the issue of peer
correction. However, peer correction among high school students has not been
still studied deeply and thoroughly. Hence, the researcher decided to do a thesis
about ‘peer correction among grade 11 students at a high school in Thanh Hoa
province’.

2


2. Aim and objectives of the study
The study aimed at improving the grade 11 students’ writing skill at a
high school in Thanh Hoa province through the use of peer correction in class.
This overall aim was specified into the following objectives:
1. To find out effectiveness of peer correction in helping students
improve their writing skill.
2. To examine the attitudes of the grade 11 students at a high school in
Thanh Hoa province towards peer correction.
3. Research questions
In an attempt to achieve the aims and objectives stated above, the
following research questions were addressed:
1. To what extent does peer correction enable students to enhance their
writing skill?

2. What are the grade 11 students’ attitudes towards peer correction in
writing lessons?
4. Scope of the study
The study limits itself to 30 grade 11 students at a high school in Thanh
Hoa province, not all students of that school. Besides, it only focuses on peer
correction and students’ attitudes towards this type of error correction, not other
types of correction techniques such as teacher correction or self-correction.
Although peer correction can be applied in teaching and learning several
English skills, the researcher only concentrates on writing skill.
5. Method of the study
The study was conducted in the following steps:
Firstly, Pre-test was administered to test students’ ability to recognizing
mistakes in a paragraph given by the teacher.

3


Secondly, Portfolio was employed to recognize students’ progress in
writing performance from the first paragraph till the last paragraph (the fifth
one).
Next, Post-test was used to see whether there was a positive change in
students’ ability to identify mistakes when reading a paragraph given by the
teacher or not
Lastly, the survey questionnaire for students was employed at the end of
the study to investigate the students’ attitudes towards peer correction.
6. Significance of the study
This study has a considerable importance in English teaching and
learning activity at high schools. In terms of theory, the study is expected to
make a contribution to the process of teaching writing as well as adjusting from
teacher-centered approach to student-centered one in teaching and learning.

In terms of practice, firstly, English teachers can have a better look on
students’ attitudes towards peer correction in writing lessons. Furthermore, it
is expected to enable English teachers to make a decision about whether to
apply peer correction into teaching writing or not. Besides, the study can be
used as a reference for other researchers to discover more about students’
attitudes towards peer correction.
7. Structural organization
The study consists of five chapters:
Chapter I, Introduction, presents the rationale, aim and objectives,
research questions, scope, significance and design of the study.
Chapter II, Literature Review, reviews theoretical issues related to error
correction, types of error correction including teacher correction, selfcorrection and peer correction.

4


Chapter III presents the methodology of the study, including the
background information of the context where the study is conducted, the
subject, the instruments used to collect data, and the procedures of data
collection.
Chapter IV, Findings and discussion, aims at describing the analysis of
data in detail and giving the summary of the findings as well as a thorough
discussion of the findings of the study. Some explanations and interpretations
of the findings are also presented in this chapter.
Chapter V, Conclusion, provides the summary of the main issues and
concluding marks of the study. The limitations as well as some suggestions for
further research are also discussed in this part.

5

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Teaching writing
Along with other English skills, teaching writing is crucial. It is an activity
to instruct students how to convey and express their ideas in the form of written
text. In teaching writing, teachers are supposed to give students directions about
the structure of the text rather than the content of the text. According to
Depdiknas (2006), in Indonesian, the target of teaching writing is to help
students to understand deeply functional and monologue texts in different kinds
of form such as descriptive, narrative, procedure and report. Widiati (2003)
assumed that teaching writing in Indonesian context has not been suitable with
various levels of literacy of students. Lots of students feel it tough to brainstorm
the ideas and join the ideas into paragraphs. Alwasilah (2004) stated that
writing is considered to be the most difficult language skill to master by
students and to teach by teachers in comparison with three other English skills.
Hence, Harmer (2004:4) suggested some steps of writing for teachers to
concentrate on as follows. The first step is to make a plan prior to beginning to
write. The writers should brainstorm the ideas to enable them to make a
decision about what they are going to write. The second step is drafting so that
it is amended later. The next step is editing. When writers have finished the
draft, they will reread their writing to see if there are any mistakes in their
paragraphs or to see whether the ideas in paragraphs are logical or not. They
can move or add new paragraphs. In this step, other readers such as teachers,
editors or their peers are often those who give comments, feedback and
suggestions to their paragraphs. The last step is to produce the final version.
When writers finished editing and making necessary changes to their draft, they
will produce the final version.
6

2.2. The process of writing
The process of writing consists of several stages. According to Richard
and Renandya (2002: 303), the writing process includes 4 stages: planning,
drafting, revising and editing. In the first stage, students are encouraged to
write. In the second stage, students draft their writing. They just concentrate on
the writing fluency and ignore the accuracy of grammar or the cohesion and
coherence of the draft. The next step is revising. Students will rewrite their
writing based on the comments and feedback given by teachers or other
students. In the last stage, students are required to revise their writing when
they prepare the final draft to submit to the teachers.
Additionally, Hyland (2004: 10) stated that illustrator steps of writing to
help students to understand clearly that process of writing is crucial to make a
good writing. There are several steps in this process of writing. First of all,
teachers and students choose a topic. They can take part in picking the topics
in writing together. The second stage is pre-writing. In this step, students are
engaged in several activities such as brainstorming, collecting data, note taking
and outlining. The next step is drafting in which students write down their ideas.
The following step is responding to the revision, which is done by their teachers
or peers. After that, it is evaluation. Teachers will evaluate students’ writing
which is shown in front of the class after the evaluation. The last step is followup task, which is carried out to summarize the issues that students need to
improve in their writing.
It can be inferred that there are some processes of writing for teachers to
follow in teaching writing. Hence, teachers need to instruct students about the
processes so that they can produce essays whose contents are transparent to the
readers, which is expected to have positive impacts on the improvement of
students’ writing.
7


2.3. Error correction

Along with other English skills, writing is an integral part in learning
English. Students are required to produce a paragraph or an essay in the written
form. However, students often make mistakes while producing a writing.
Therefore, it is essential to know what kinds of mistakes are usually made by
students and the frequency they make those types of errors in order to provide
in time instruction for them.
There are many studies conducted on error correction. Darus and Ching
(2009) carried out a research using a case study. The purpose of the research
was to investigate the most common errors that were usually made by 70
Chinese students when they wrote essays. There were 70 essays collected and
18 types of errors needed analysing. The study found that students frequently
made mistakes with the four kinds of errors which are: mechanics, tenses,
subject-verb agreement and prepositions. The study also showed that L1 had a
considerable influence on students’ L2 writing. Another study carried out by
Watcharapunyawong and Usaha (2013) showed a similar result. They analysed
Thai students’ writing mistakes which were affected by Thai language. Forty
second year English majored students were required to produce 120 paragraphs
of 3 types of writing: descriptive writing, narrative writing, contrast and
comparison writing during their writing course. The result of the study revealed
that students frequently made errors with word choice, tenses, structure,
prepositions and articles.
It is often assumed by teachers that when students make errors, there is
no language learning happening. However, making errors is a normal
phenomenon, especially during the process of learning a second language.
Making mistakes means that language learning process is happening. Students
are learning through making errors. So as to reduce the errors, error correction
8


is needed to help students recognize the mistakes and avoid them. Traditionally,

teachers are considered to be the centre of knowledge. They are those who
transfer knowledge to students and correct students’ mistakes. Nevertheless,
they sometimes correct their students’ errors according to their feelings, which
can hurt students who are sensitive. Therefore, teachers should be careful about
this.
According to Semke (1984), effectiveness of error correction has been a
controversial issue among researchers because of the phenomena that the same
mistakes are still made by students even after they are corrected many times.
Ferris (1999) assumed that error correction influenced considerably on
students’ writing. Semke (1984) and Zamel (1985) analysed the previous
studies and came to a conclusion that there was no research evidence that
students’ writing was helped to improve by error correction. He pointed out
practical issues associated with the ability and willingness of teacher to give
error correction and of students to receive it. This has created a controversy at
international levels and in published articles. Krashen (1978) also asserted that
error correction had no impact on the improvement of students’ writing
performance.
Feedback means the response or comments that students receive from a
teacher or peer about any task that they have done. It is commonly employed
in education field, especially in writing and speaking. According to Lightbown
and Spada (1999), feedback helps students recognize the mistakes they make
about the target language.
The significance of feedback appeared with the advancement of studentcentered approaches to the instruction of writing in North American L1
composition classes during the 1970s. It mainly aimed to assist students

9


through a lot of drafts by giving feedback and suggesting revisions during the
writing process rather than at the end of the process.

Nakanishi (2007) did a research on the impacts of feedback on revision.
The effect of four various kinds of feedback on the essays of forty Japanese
intermediate EFL students was compared. There were 40 Japanese female
second year music majored students taking part in the study. Four groups were
established from 40 students: self-feedback, peer feedback, teacher feedback,
teacher and peer feedback. The result showed that group D revising after peer
and teacher feedback achieved the highest scores. On the contrary, Group A
revising after self-feedback achieved the lowest scores. There was ninety
percent of Group D students confirming the usefulness of peer and teacher
feedback while only a quarter of Group A students stated that self-feedback
was useful. Other kinds of feedback were studied by the second group. The
negotiations happening during ESL students’ peer reviews and how these
negotiations formed students’ revision activities were depicted by Mendonca
and Johnson (1994). The result showed that over fifty percent of students
included peer feedback in the final draft while 37% of students revised the text
in their own way. The percentage of students who did not revise the text was
10 percent. According to Hyland (2006), giving feedback to students is one of
the most fundamental tasks of teachers. Feedback can be provided in the form
of ‘written commentary, error correction, teacher-student conferencing or peer
discussion’.
2.4. Types of error correction
2.4.1. Teacher correction
According to Irons (2008), teacher correction can be any process, activity
or information that boosts the learning of students. This is based on feedback
and comments associated with activity or assessment. Teacher correction is
10


considered as a primary requirement to assess the improvement of students’
writing. Mottet (2008) defined that teacher feedback is feedback in the form of

information which is from a source to a recipient about the accuracy,
correctness or appropriateness of recipient’s last performance. Teacher
correction is information provided to students for revision. Most students
would like their teachers to correct their mistakes as teachers are regarded as
those who are knowledgeable and the centre of the class. Students are of the
opinion that teacher correction is precise, trustworthy and effective.
Nevertheless, when investigating the content and form of teacher correction,
studies show that most of the ESL writing teachers provide the same kinds of
feedback and focus more on language specific mistakes and problems. Silva &
Brice (2004) assumed that ‘depending on the types of the correction, teacher
correction has been found sometimes to help, to hinder, and occasionally to
have no effect on students’ learning and revising’. Teacher correction can also
cause confusion and arbitration for students (Sommers, 1982). Leki (1990)
stated that there was no evidence that well written comments could help
students to improve their subsequent writing.
Teacher correction is the traditional technique which is most widelyused to correct students’ writing. Hyland and Hyland (2002) suggested that
teacher feedback has an essential role to play in second language writing
classes. There are two types of teacher correction: direct and indirect. Direct
correction means teachers give thorough and specific feedback on students’
errors, whereas for indirect correction, teachers only indicate that students have
made errors. Ferris (2007) made a list of three ways that teacher can employ to
point out mistakes. They are coded (use abbreviation or symbols coding
system), uncoded (use underline or circle without telling the type of mistakes

11


made) and marginal error feedback (use margin to point out the quantity of
mistakes in each line).
According to Lee (2005), a number of teachers make a great effort to

mark mistakes carefully. Despite the fact that teachers spend a considerable
amount of time marking students’ writing, they do not believe that what they
do can be effective in helping students improve their writing. If teachers correct
too much, this can discourage students. Therefore, teacher correction should be
concentrated primarily on the lesson content. When students do not revise and
rewrite drafts, the issue can be due to the ineffectiveness of teachers for creating
responses to the writing of students. Specifically, teachers who think that
grammatical and lexical accuracy are more significant than other aspects of
writing can only focus on these features when correcting students’ mistakes.
As a consequence, their assessment and evaluation are not objective and can
generate unbalance. For instance, teachers who have a main orientation towards
grammar may give a low mark to a writing which consists of some grammatical
mistakes in the sentences. They may ignore the cohesion, coherence,
vocabulary or ideas of the writing. It seems that this evaluation is not fair to
students since they are learning how to write in the second language and the
mistakes should be considered to be an obvious phenomenon of the learning
process.
In other words, teacher correction is information in the form of symbols,
marks or comments having something to do with language specific mistakes
and problems provided by teachers for revision. In spite of the fact that students
prefer teachers to correct their mistakes, the contribution of this correction
technique to the improvement of students’ writing is still a controversial issue.

2.4.2. Self-correction
12


Conventionally, teachers are those who provide comments on mistakes
to students. However, current teaching approaches have incorporated various
ways of giving correction and feedback. Bitchener, Young & Cameron (2005)

suggested that self-correction is an implicit comment in which the teacher gives
students options that enable them to draw the correct form on their own. Selfcorrection helps students not only to pay their conscious attention to the
individual mistakes but to correct them, which can stimulate students to become
aware of the mistakes they often make and then identify the knowledge gap
they need to fulfil. Self-correction is highly appreciated in the process of
teaching. Buchanan (2004) acknowledged that it can be a correction technique
that encourages students to participate more actively in their own process of
learning. Shunk (2000) suggested that when students apply self-correction, they
can control their learning and concentrate more on the areas that interest them
and take more time to study. In current educational systems, the teaching and
learning process can become the most effective if students are actively engaged
in all activities and phases of educational process (Cobb, 1994).
Engaging students in the process of correcting mistakes by themselves
can provide students with an opportunity to be the evaluators of their own
performances, which can increase their confidence. Besides, self-correction can
have long-lasting impacts on the memory of students since they participate in
the process of learning actively and directly. Krashen and Pan (1975) stated
that students who are at an advanced level of language competency can correct
ninety five percent of their mistakes. Kavaliauskiene (2003) assumed that
students must be given the opportunity to correct their writing on their own.
Nevertheless, teachers should have a look at students’ writing in advance and
then indicate the mistakes. Wood (2004) found that students were fond of

13


revising their writing and then make a comparison between the first
composition with the second one.
Self-correction has a positive influence on students. They can remember
the mistakes longer and can avoid those kinds of errors next time. Selfcorrection enables students to be more confident and independent.

Furthermore, it is a source of information that helps teacher to evaluate
students’ own knowledge. However, self-correction still has several
drawbacks. For example, students sometimes cannot self-correct their
mistakes, which can make them feel demotivated and under pressure.
Therefore, another type of correction technique is proposed. This is peer
correction.
2.5. Correction in writing as a process
Zohrabi and Rezaie (2012) stated that in EFL context, the written text
evaluation was constrained to the correction of the linguistic errors made by
learners such as grammar and spelling. This approach led to the fact that pivotal
aspects related to the writing process were ignored. Cassany (2000) assumed
that aspects of writing not only included spelling, grammar and layout but it
also consists of aspects such as vocabulary, cohesion and structure.
Incorporating all these aspects in learners’ writing may help them to meet their
teachers’ expectations.
As for students, the conventional approach of teaching and learning
limits their participation in assessing their own writing, causing them not to be
aware of their weaknesses. Students are accustomed to submitting their writing
and achieving a score without getting informative feedback and comments
which offer suggestions for improvement. Therefore, students will not where
they made mistakes in the writing and why the mistakes are wrong. This can
discourage them and have negative effects on their motivation for writing. It
14


does not mean that teachers should eliminate completely conventional
correction from their teaching because learners’ demands, especially learners
in basic or elementary levels of the second language. They still want and expect
error correction that comprises the linguistics mistakes. Therefore, the kinds of
feedback should be balanced besides concentrating on various aspects of

writing in accordance with different steps of the process of writing.
Writing should be taught as a process because if it is not taught as a
process, learners only produce it to meet the teachers’ requirement. In this case,
it becomes a one-time writing production. They do not receive any feedback
for the improvement of their writing. Therefore, viewing writing as a process
will stimulate learners to see writing as an opportunity to convey their ideas
about a topic and as an experience of learning to enhance their writing through
drafting, correcting and editing process, which makes them feel satisfied,
motivated and proud.
2.6. Error code and error logs
Error codes and logs are used so as to enable students to conduct the
revision stage. Correction codes are instruments that give learners feedback on
their writing, which helps them to revise their understanding of linguistic items.
That is, learners identify mistakes related to lexical and grammatical elements
such as form and function. According to Byrne (1988), correction codes are
applied by ‘underlining the mistakes and using some kind of symbols to focus
the attention of the students on the kind of mistake they have made’. Therefore,
this technique involves employing various language aspects such as verb tense,
word order, spelling. Teachers and learners benefits a lot from using error codes
as they are practical and enable teachers and learners to revise the writing as a
problem-solving task. Error codes not only give students a fixed limit about
what to revise but also a set of symbols which help to standardize the writing
15