TEACHERS’ PER
CEPTION ON ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION IN
TWO ENGLISH LANGUAGE COURSES IN SALATIGA
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
Alberto Eka Saputra
112012081
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS
UNIVERSITAS KRISTEN SATYA WACANA
SALATIGA
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This thesis contains no such material as has been submitted for examination in any course or accepted for the fulfillment of any degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my knowledge and my belief, this contains no material previously published or written by any other person except where due reference is made in the text.
Copyright@ 2016. Alberto Eka Saputra and Anne Indrayanti Timotius, S.Pd., M.Ed.
All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced by any means without the permission of at least one of the copyright owners or the English Language Education Program, Faculty of Language and Arts, Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana, Salatiga.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER PAGE i
APPROVAL SHEET iv
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT v
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT DECLARATION vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS vii
ABSTRACT 1
INTRODUCTION 1
LITERATURE REVIEW 3
Roles of Grammar in Oral Grammar Correction 3
Kinds of Oral Grammar Correction 4
Teachers‟ and Students‟ Perceptions on Oral Grammar Correction 6
The Advantages and Disadvantages of Oral Grammar Correction 7
Previous Studies 8
THE STUDY 8
Context of the Study 9
Participants 9
Instrument of Data Collection 10
Data Analysis Procedures 11
FINDING AND DISCUSSION 12
A. Perception 12
1. Advantages of using Oral Grammar Correction 12
1.1 Improving Students‟ Speaking Accuracy 12
1.2Preventing Fossilization 13
2. Efficiency in technical problems 14
3. Effectiveness toward students‟ learning process 16
B. Students‟ reactionsbased on teachers‟ observation 17
1. Positive reaction 17
2. Negative reaction 18
C. Methods in Giving Oral Grammar Correction 19
1. Repetition 19
2. Metalinguistic 20
3. Overt Correction 21
CONCLUSION 22
REFERENCES 25
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 27
Appendix 1.Interview questions 28
Appendix 2. Result of Interview 30
TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION IN TWO Grammar itself becomes important since grammar is the foundation of a language. This study
was aimed at finding out teachers‟ perceptions on oral grammar corrections, students‟
reactions toward oral grammar corrections, and methods of oral grammar corrections used by the teachers in speaking activities in English courses. This study was conducted in two English courses in Salatiga. It used qualitative analysis method and the subjects of this study
were 4 teachers of the two English courses and 8 student teachers of English Language
Education Program under Faculty of Language and Arts (FLA) who had already passed Teaching Practicum and had teaching experiences in one of the English courses in Salatiga (Semester I/2015-2016). The data were collected by having interviews with those twelve participants. The analysis of the data is based on three initial themes, namely : advantages
such as: improving students‟ speaking accuracy, preventing fossilization, improving
efficiency in the technical problem, improving effectiveness toward students‟ learning
process; positive and negative responses through Oral Grammar Correction (OGC).; the
method that the teachers used to correct students‟ grammatical mistakes.
Keywords: Oral Grammar Correction (OGC), grammatical mistakes.
INTRODUCTION
communication without speaking, while speaking itself is a process of interaction among people to construct meaning and involving the process of giving and receiving information (Florez, 1999).
Now, since Indonesia has become the member of AEC, many people in Indonesia tend to learn English more in order to be able to compete other AEC members or workers. However, based on my teaching experiences, English grammar normally becomes one of the obstacles for EFL students to learn the language. This situation could be the main reason why grammar needs to be applied in communicative activities and more communicatively. So, if we are able to use the correct patterns of grammar, then communication can be done efficiently and effectively. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2015), grammar is the set of rules of a particular language that explain how words are used. Grammar rules actually are helpful for the language users to communicate easily, clearly, and effectively. Grammar is a set of basic rules consisting of words and phrases that are arranged in sentences (Richard, 1992; as cited in Aliakbari & Toni, 2009).
However, is oral grammar correction effective in correcting students‟ grammatical
mistakes in speaking classes? Can it improve their grammatical competence and also their self-awareness in spoken language? Truscott (1999) said that oral grammar correction in speaking
class does not improve students‟ abilities to speak grammatically.
Based on some questions which appeared above, one of the aims of this study is to investigate teachers‟ perceptions on oral grammar correction to correct students‟ grammatical mistakes. I also chose oral grammar correction in English language courses in order to help teachers of the English courses in suggesting broader view to later be able to choose suitable feedback or correction methods to help their students improve their speaking accuracy more effectively. Therefore, this study tried to answer some questions as follows: What are teachers‟ perceptions on oral grammar correction, what methods are used by the teachers when correcting
their students‟ spoken grammatical mistakes and how are the students‟ reactions based on
teachers‟ observations toward oral grammar correction in their speaking activities?
Hopefully, the results of this study can help English language teachers in the future, especially in English language courses, to be effective English teachers in giving correction, and achieving the aims of the teaching and learning process more effectively. Normally, students learn and acquire English language well because those corrections are not only feedback but also inputs from the teachers to the students to make the students have good self-confidence and good communicative skills as they have mastered the language correctly.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Roles of Grammar in Oral Grammar Correction
arrangement of the items and the structure of the item (Cambridge Dictionary, 2006). Based on the explanation above, grammar seems to be the most important thing from all aspects in learning English as a second or foreign language. Truscott (1999) believes that grammar always plays an important role in the development of student‟s ability to both speak and write. Many L2 learners often make mistakes in using or understanding grammar either oral form or written form. From the students‟ grammatical mistakes, it is not rare that teacher helps the students by giving corrective feedback orally. Therefore, my opinion and summary about the definition of oral grammar correction is an oral feedback or input given by English language teachers to correct students‟ spoken grammatical mistakes in speaking activities.
Kinds of Oral Grammar Correction
In correcting grammar, teachers should know how and when to correct students‟ grammatical mistakes as every teacher has different method to correct students‟ grammatical mistakes. Some students may accept oral grammar correction well. While others, sometimes the teachers need to repeat the incorrect parts and mention the corrections so the students can really understand the grammatical mistakes which have been made previously. Sometimes when the teachers corrected students‟ grammatical mistakes, some students might feel embarrassed, but the other students could use the correction as motivation to be able to have better accuracy. So, to prevent the negative reaction from the students, the teacher should know and use appropriate method to different students.
Lyster and Ratna (1997) discuss six methods which can be used by teachers to revise
students‟ grammatical mistakes, namely: Explicit correction that refers to giving explicit
clues of the correct forms then the student directly understand that what the student had said was incorrect. For example: the student said “I want to identification about the disease”. Then
The second method is Recast which is the opposite form of explicit correction occurs when the teacher gives implicit words such as “You should say” rather than “You mean”.
For example: student said “I want to identification about the disease”. Then the teacher
revised using the sentence “Oh, you mean: identify?”
The next one is Clarification request which is used when misunderstanding happens in a conversation. The teacher only focuses on the problem. The teacher usually uses the word
“Pardon” then asks the word that the teacher does not understand. For example: the student
said “I must to go to Surabaya”. Then the teacher asked for clarification “Pardon, what you
mean “must to go?”
Unlike the previous methods, Metalingustic feedback is feedback which contains information, comments, and questions related to the mistakes that the student made. In metalingustic feedback, the teacher asks the student to find the mistakes by giving clues or asking the error then asks the student for guessing and being aware of the mistakes. For
example: students said “I saw elephant big”. Then the teacher said “Can you find the error?
Which one is correct: big elephant or elephant big?”
Another method is Elicitation which happens when the teacher elicits the incorrect forms from the students‟ answers then gives the fill in the blank part to the students so they need to guess the correct forms. Then the teacher also combines the metalingustic comment
to make sure that the student will not make the same mistakes. For example: students said “I
saw elephant big”. Then the teacher said “ I saw . . .”
The last is Repetition which happens when the teacher repeats and isolates the
student‟s mistakes. Usually the teacher uses intonation to highlight the mistakes. For
example: the student said “I want to drink many water”. Then the teacher repeated the wrong
In addition to that, Lyster and Ratna (1997) describe another method to deliver oral grammar correction which is by using multiple feedbacks. It is known as multiple feedbacks because teachers can combine some feedbacks altogether at the same time; normally the teachers use more than one method to correct the grammatical mistakes. For example, from the data that Lyster and Ratna (1997) got, some teachers used the combination of repetition and metalingustic feedback. It means that the teacher combined the method by using intonation then the teachers also needed to give some comments and questions to make sure that the students understood and were aware of their mistakes. Moghaddam and Behjat (2014) also give another option to correct the grammatical error by using overt correction. Overt correction is done by combining request, repetition, metalingustic clues, and elicitation (Moghaddam& Behjat, 2014).
Teachers’ and Students’ Perceptions on Oral Grammar Correction
Every teacher may have different perception when correcting students‟ grammatical mistakes. The purpose of giving correction is to make sure that the students understand the correct patterns when they speak. Tomczyk (2013) also believes that teachers mostly have the perceptions that correcting students‟ oral grammar mistakes is beneficial. The teacher needs to give the correct forms of grammar to the students so that the students will not make the same mistakes in the future (Tomczyk, 2013). It is because to show the students‟ grammatical mistakes could mean that students understand their mistakes, they are hoped to notice the grammatical mistakes, and remember both the grammatical mistakes and the correction as a positive learning process.
questions. Understanding the situation, teachers must understand that students vary in characteristics. So, teachers cannot give the same treatments to all students. The correction can be done in the small group or during one on one interaction ( Lyster, Lightbown& Spada, 1999). It also depends on students‟ attitudes, motivations, and anxiety in learning English (Dekeyser, 1993). Understanding the different attitude and motivation of the students; the oral grammar correction is also able to make students feel frustrated, especially within group of people in the class discussion, the teacher‟s job is to know the students‟ personalities (Lyster, Lightbown & Spada, 1999). Furthermore, Chen, Thompson, Kromrey, and Chang (2011) believe that gender also contributes in how students receive the feedback, boys are more attentive with the correction rather than girls, and girls are more sensitive when receiving the feedback.
The Advantages and Disadvantages of Oral Grammar Correction
Some advantages of oral grammar correction are that the student can get some new information from the teacher instead of only correcting their mistakes (Lyster, Lightbown & Spada, 1999). The information from the teacher helps the students notice the mistake and will not do the same mistakes in the future. Oral grammar correction also does not take much time because the teacher directly corrects their mistakes instead of writing it, which sometimes the student will not pay attention to.
The disadvantages are supported by Truscott (1999) who said “Sometimes the non-NEST teachers are not expert in grammar and it can make the student feel confused to
understand the grammar”. The teacher should know the part when the students can or cannot
they only focus on correcting the grammatical mistakes that the students have made previously. Giving correction could disturb the classroom activities and ongoing communication process. It tends to have possibility to discourage the students to freely express themselves in using any variety of the grammar.
Previous Studies
Truscott (1999) conducted a research to explore that oral grammar correction becomes harmful for the students, even though it aims to help students in improving their language learning. Truscott (1999) gives suggestion. If the teachers want to correct students‟ grammatical mistakes in grammar the teachers can use appropriate ways in appropriate time, because if they do not, the correction becomes harmful for students‟ learning process. Teachers‟ oral grammar correction might also become embarrassment, anger, inhibition, feeling inferiority, and a general negative attitude toward the class (Truscott, 1999, p. 441).
Another study from Lyster and Ratna (2011) is about the method that they used to correct students mistakes. The results of the research show that they found 6 methods to correct students‟ grammatical mistakes. These 6 different methods appeared because they believed that teachers had to use different methods when correcting students‟ grammatical mistakes since every student might have different characteristics when being corrected or receiving the corrections.
THE STUDY
Context of the Study
This research was conducted in two English courses in Salatiga. The reason why I chose two English courses is because based on my observation toward some English courses in Salatiga, speaking activities have more portions in the learning process, for example there are some programs offered for students such as Conversation Class or English Conversation Program which normally focus on how to provide more time for the students to use the language for communication. An English course is also a place for students to learn English deeper in terms of the knowledge, more exclusive in terms of the number of students in a classroom, and relatively shorter in terms of the duration of each program.
Grammatical mistakes can occur in any speaking activities. Therefore, teachers‟ oral grammar correction also commonly follows the mistakes. Grammatical mistakes tend to be different from one student to other students; normally it is based on the level of the programs taken and also background knowledge of English as their foreign language. One more aspect that becomes my consideration is that students learning English in the courses seemed to be highly motivated learners, and they seemed to be willing to have their grammatical mistakes corrected. At the same time since the program for speaking classes or speaking activities normally only consists of a few students or in other word is a small group. This condition could be beneficial since the students could be observed more obviously and easily.
Participants
English courses in Salatiga (Semester I / 2015-2016). They consisted of one male student teacher and 7 female student teachers. Their ages were around 20-25 with English as their foreign language. The participants were chosen based on criterion based selection. Roulston (2010) describes that researchers must specify the characteristics of the participants. From
Roulston‟s statement, then I looked for participants based on the characteristics that I have
already explained previously; having passed Teaching Practicum and had teaching experiences in one of the English courses in Salatiga.
Instrument of Data Collection
using a smart-phone in a room (indoor) to reduce noise or distracting sounds from the surroundings.
Data Collection Procedures
I interviewed 8 students of English Language Education Program who had already finished their Teaching Practicum in one of the English courses in Salatiga and also 4 teachers of the two English courses. Before I conducted the interview, I did the piloting for the interview questions to two of the student teachers who had already taken Teaching Practicum in one of the English courses in Salatiga. The purpose of piloting was to know if the questions were suitable to dig up information about teachers‟ perceptions toward oral grammar correction in the two English courses in Salatiga. The following step was I did the piloting to 2 of the student teachers. Then from their responses and their answers I was able to know whether or not some of my questions were suitable to answer all information I required. When further information needed, I changed and added more questions, and then I conducted the interview with the other student teachers. After the interview questions were done, I contacted them personally since I had already had their personal links and access to meet them. The following step was interviewing those participants personally in a place where they were comfortable to talk openly and freely. After having finished with the interview I made the transcripts of the recordings. Then I categorized the answers based on categories to answers my research questions.
Data Analysis Procedures
utterances, for example: “umm” and “err” (Elliott, 2005). From the transcriptions, I could
find out the answers of my research question whether oral grammar correction contributed advantages to teachers and the students also reacted positively or negatively, it depended on their attitudes and motivations.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
In this part, I will categorize the results of the data analysis which I got from several interview sections. There are four subthemes in Teachers‟ Perceptions on Oral Grammar Correction in two English language courses in Salatiga, then I will discuss them one by one from the first to the last topic told by the participants I had interviewed with.
A. Perception
1. Advantages of using Oral Grammar Correction
First of all I will discuss about teachers‟ perceptions on oral grammar correction.
From the total number of participants, 11 out of 12 said that oral grammar correction was important and beneficial to their teaching and learning process, especially in improving
students‟ speaking accuracy and preventing fossilization.
1.1 Improving Students’ Speaking Accuracy
Some statements below are responses from some participants to show the advantage of using oral grammar correction during teaching and learning process in order to improve
students‟ speaking accuracy. Based on the interview results, 11 out of 12 participants agreed
that oral grammar correction was important in improving students‟ speaking accuracy, such as what Ms. S believed:
remembered all the grammar parts, but they can improve even though little in every meeting. (Ms. S, My Translation).
Another statement comes from Mr. Ed that supported Ms. S‟s opinion saying that “Oral
grammar correction is normally done directly in front of the students, because of this so psychologically the students will know and later in the future they will not use the incorrect
ones when talking” (Mr. Ed, My Translation)
From Ms. S‟s and Mr. Ed‟s opinions, it can be concluded that when the students were
corrected by their teacher using oral grammar correction, the students would learn how to produce correct utterances according to English grammar. Then, based on the teachers‟ observation, after the students were able to produce correct utterances, they would not get embarrassed when talking to their partners since they were able to avoid grammatical mistakes that they probably made in the previous meetings. This finding is similar to
Truscott‟s study. Truscott (1999) in his research found that students might still make
grammatical mistakes during learning process, but after oral grammar correction was given to them, the students could perform better and it could be seen on the speaking test results especially on grammar parts.
1.2 Preventing Fossilization
Based on my interview with the participants, the second advantage of using oral grammar correction was to prevent fossilization that normally happened in speaking activities. 1 out of 12 participants mentioned and discussed about fossilization. Understanding the importance of producing correct grammar in their utterances when
learning language, oral grammar correction could be used to shape students‟ understandings
mistakes would not fossilize in their minds. An argument from Ms. T showed the similar idea which said “Yes, grammar is important in English language teaching because grammar is like the foundation in everything, like in speaking and writing. If we have good grammar we can
speak fluently or use the language appropriately”. (Ms. T, My Translation). Furthermore, Mr.
Ed also supported Ms. T‟s statements which said “If we correct students‟ grammatical mistakes, it can help the students to have a good foundation so that fossilization toward incorrect grammar will not happen”. (Mr. Ed, My Translation).
These two arguments are similar to Han and Odlin‟s study. Han and Odlin (2006) described that fossilization means the failure in L2 learning process; this is also permanent state of not attaining desire of some L2 competence in learning process. Understanding the effect of fossilization toward second language or foreign language to students, Ms. S argued that “Oral grammar correction also helps the teachers to show the mistakes that the students made at a particular time and the teachers can make sure that the students really know the mistakes that they made”. (Ms. S, My Translation).
It means that based on the participant‟s teaching experience in using oral grammar
correction as shown in the interview results, the students could remember better about the corrections or evaluations from the teachers because the teachers directly notice, show, and
correct students‟ grammatical mistakes.
2. Efficiency in technical problems
give the correction. All of my participants agreed that using oral grammar correction in speaking activities really helped the teachers to spend less time in showing grammatical mistakes that the students had made, gave the correct grammatical patterns to revise the mistakes, and also made sure that the students understood the grammatical mistakes and not to do the same grammatical mistakes again in the following teaching and learning process. In response to the time efficiency in using oral grammar correction, one of my participants gave her argument which said “It is helpful, because it does not take time and is very efficient because the teacher can directly correct students‟ mistakes and makes sure that the students
understand and also not to do the same mistakes again”. (Ms. Y, My Translation).
According to the participant, oral grammar correction did not take much time because the teacher could directly correct students‟ mistakes and could make sure that the students really understood the mistakes they had made. Then the students could remember the correct patterns because the teacher directly noticed and corrected the grammatical mistakes that the students had made. An idea that comes from another participant in order to give additional information about it, saying “The students will be more aware if we correct grammatical mistakes orally rather than in written because the students will pay more attention and aware
of their mistakes”. (Ms. S, My Translation). Furthermore, another opinion which comes from
Ms. Pt mentioned that “Oral grammar correction gives students opportunities not only notice
their mistakes but also directly use the correct one”. (Ms. Pt).
classes, usually when the teachers gave the correction in written forms, the students would not pay attention more about their grammatical mistakes compare to when the correction was done orally because the students received no direct corrections when talking, and the chance of forgetting the correct patterns was higher in the following meetings when corrected using written forms. An argument from Ms. St strengthens this statement, she said:
It is because the students respond much faster on oral grammar correction than written correction as what I have said previously. So when they make grammatical mistakes, they will be corrected directly about which the correct forms are. By doing this, they will memorize (the correct ones) instantly in the following meetings that when they almost make the same mistakes again, they will know from the experience they had in the previous meetings and they will not do the same grammatical mistakes again in the future (Ms. St, My Translation)
From those results, conclusion that could be clearly seen was that oral grammar correction seems to be beneficial in terms of time efficiency. Time efficiency was important to help the students instantly notice their own grammatical mistakes, remembered the correct patterns immediately, and prevented them from making the same grammatical mistakes in the following meetings, as Tomczyk (2013) mentioned in his study saying that the teacher needs to give the correct forms of grammar to the students so that the students will not do the same mistakes in the following meetings or future learning. (Tomczyk, 2013).
3. Effectiveness toward students’ learning process
Based on the interview results, oral grammar correction also gave another advantage such as improvement in motivation and sense of curiosity for students. 1 out of 12 participants stated his experience in teaching speaking classes using oral grammar correction. He found that using oral grammar correction in his classes gave him an advantage which is
building students‟ sense of curiosity, he said:
From the statement which Mr. Sg has mentioned, I also believe that if the students have the sense of curiosity to know the correct patterns of English grammar, then the students seem to be more aware if they make grammatical mistakes in the following meetings. This idea is supported by Dekeyser (1993) who also believes that if the teacher can built the motivation of English (in this case was the motivation to have sense curiosity) the student will do better with the correction it means that the student will obtain the grammar knowledge, speaking fluency, and accuracy. The students were likely to understand why they are corrected since they have already had the understandings of the correct grammatical patterns. By having sense of curiosity to know and to learn the correct patterns of English grammar, the students would understand the use of the correct ones. After the students understood the correct grammatical patterns and used the correct grammatical patterns in the classroom activities, they tended not to make the same mistakes, and from this situation they seemed to be more motivated in learning the language.
B.Students’ reactionsbased on teachers’ observation
In correcting students‟ grammatical mistakes, there were two results which could be
found based on the interview results of the 12 participants. Those two results were positive and negative reactions of the students being corrected using oral grammar correction.
1. Positive reaction
people. If they are planning to study, then the self awareness will be high but I think gender does not distinguish the self awareness”. (Ms. Y, My Translation).
I strongly believed that gender seemed not to distinguish the self awareness that the students had, but again, it depended on the people themselves. “It depends on their attitudes, motivation, and anxiety in learning English” (Dekeyser, 1993). Another interview statement from Ms. Sd also showed that most of the students generally reacted positively when being corrected using oral grammar correction, she said:
Positive, mostly positive. Because they look like “oh I know how to speak this well”, they
know how the correct way to speak with the correct grammar so positive because they confirm, and sometime they take notes. (Ms. Sd)
From the teaching experience of the participants, it could be understood that students who were highly motivated and have positive attitudes in learning the language seemed to react positively because the students realized and understood that making mistakes was part of the learning process that the students had to overcome.
2. Negative reaction
However, only 1 out of 12 participants being interviewed mentioned that negative reaction was shown when teacher used oral grammar correction to her students during the learning process. The participant stated in the interview that oral grammar correction she used during teaching and learning process sometimes caused the students to feel uncomfortable and made the students feel being underestimated and embarrassed when being corrected in front of their friends, especially when they were talking. The participant said “Not all the students feel comfortable with oral grammar correction. Maybe we should combine with
other types of correction. Not just oral, we have to combine.” (Ms. T, My translation).
Based on the experience of one of my participants, some researchers also stated that
feeling inferiority, and a general negative attitude toward the class (Truscott, 1999, p. 441). Negative reaction from the students, based on my teaching experiences, could also be seen
when teachers‟ attention or focus was only to correct students‟ mistakes. The teachers would
only focus in the grammatical mistakes and did not focus on the contents that the students tried to deliver. Furthermore, sometimes oral grammar correction seemed to disturb the learning process because the teacher might cut the talks in the middle of conversation in the speaking activities. Truscott (1999) added some information that correcting the grammatical mistakes could waste time because the teacher became lack of focus and only focus on correcting the mistake that the students made. Therefore, indeed using oral grammar correction could be bothersome sometimes if the teacher only focused on correcting the
students‟ grammatical mistakes. Some people believed that gender could also play roles in
students‟ reactions toward oral grammar correction. The situation was similar to Chen,
Thompson, Kromrey, and Chang‟s study. Chen, Thompson, Kromrey, and Chang (2011) believed that gender also affects in receiving the feedback, boys were more attentive with the correction rather than girls, and girls were more sensitive when receiving the feedback.
C. Methods in Giving Oral Grammar Correction
In correcting students‟ mistakes usually some participants could use different method from other participants. It could be seen after I interviewed all of my participants. In this part I would categorize the methods into 3 parts based on the responses from my participants, they were: repetition, metalingustic, and overt correction.
1. Repetition
repeated the students‟ mistakes to show the mistakes, it would not take much time and the student would learn something from that.
I usually repeat what the students have said with the right grammar patterns because I think this is the best way to correct students‟ mistakes, for example when they said - I go to Semarang yesterday -, I will correct my students by repeating their mistakes into - I went to Semarang yesterday. (Ms. Y, My Translation)
Another example comes from Ms. Pt that also used repetition to correct students‟ mistake:
Normally, I tell the correct utterance right away. The students will automatically repeat my utterance. By this method, I think the students will be aware of their grammatical mistakes and directly know the correction. The example is when the students do not use past tense when they tell about past event: I go to school yesterday, and then I will directly confirm: You went to school yesterday. The student will reconstruct the sentence: Yes, I went to school yesterday. (Ms. Pt, My Translation)
This method was similar to what Lyster and Ratna (1997) had explained saying that repetition is when the teacher repeated and isolated the student‟s mistakes, usually the teacher uses intonation to highlight the mistakes. So, based on the participants‟ teaching experiences, 10 out of 12 of my participants normally used oral grammar correction in form of repetition
in correcting students‟ grammatical mistakes to show the parts that were incorrect made by
the students.
2. Metalinguistic
Only 1 of participants out of 12 used different method of oral grammar correction to
correct students‟ grammatical mistakes. My participant used metalinguistic correction to
gives explicit clues of the correct forms then the student directly understand that what the student had said was incorrect (Lyster&Ratna, 1997). One of my participants said:
For example in class discussion when the students speak and made mistake I will not directly correct their mistake, I will wait until the discussion end then I will correct their mistake but in the middle of the conversation the student already know that what they are said was wrong from the clue that I gave to them such as gestures or mimic. (Ms. St, My translation)
1 of my participants decided to use metalinguistic method in correcting students‟ grammatical mistakes was because sometimes the teacher also learned about how to give the
correction without interrupting students‟ talks. By giving metalinguistic correction, students
actually seemed to understand that they were making mistakes but the corrections from the teacher would be given later after the students had already finished with their talks.
3. Overt Correction
1 of my participants also used different method of oral grammar correction to correct
the students‟ grammatical mistakes. The participant used multiple feedbacks (overt
correction) which were the combination of metalinguistic, elicitation, and repetition.
will automatically correct the mistakes. For example, last week I go, then I will repeat: Last week I went not go. So it depends on the students. (Ms. T, My Translation)
It seemed to be difficult for Ms. T not to use more than one method to correct
students‟ grammatical mistakes. This situation was similar to the method used by
Moghaddam and Behjat (2014) who gave correction by combining request, repetition, metalinguistic clues, and elicitation. From the interview result with the participant, I also believed that by using more than one method could also help the teachers to make variation in
correcting students‟ grammatical mistakes and also to make sure that the students would
know and understand the incorrect parts of the students‟ utterances by seeing their responses
and clarifications, and by using those indicators the teachers would know that the students would not do the same mistakes again in the future.
CONCLUSION
This research was aimed to look for teachers‟ perceptions on oral grammar correction,
students‟ reactions toward oral grammar correction in speaking activities based on teachers‟
observation, and also the methods used by the teachers in giving oral grammar correction.
The data collections were all collected from the interview which I conducted to 12
participants. First I started with semi-structured interview about participants‟ perceptions
toward oral grammar corrections. The participants shared their opinions and ideas on oral
grammar corrections. Second, after I got the answers from the interview, I categorized the
answers into three big themes, which are: teachers‟ perceptions on oral grammar correction,
students‟ reactions toward oral grammar correction, and methods which the participants used
to correct students‟ grammatical mistakes.
From all of the participants‟ responses about teachers‟ perceptions, I found three
gave contribution in improving students‟ speaking accuracy. Eleven out of 12 of my
participants believed that correcting students‟ grammatical mistakes could help students to
have good foundation of English grammar in speaking. Second is about time efficiency. Oral
grammar correction also helped teachers since oral grammar correction did not require much
time when done and the teachers could make sure that the students really understood the
mistakes, so the students would not do the same grammatical mistakes in the following
meetings. The third is about the effectiveness of using oral grammar correction that could
also help the students to build the sense of curiosity by motivating them to be more aware of
the grammatical mistakes the students made by themselves.
Then I also reported about the positive and negative reactions of the students when
being corrected using oral grammar correction in speaking activities based on teachers‟
observation. The first part is about the positive reaction of the students. Eleven out of 12 of
my participants agreed that most of the students being corrected using oral grammar
corrections showed positive attitudes that had impacts on their motivation in learning the
language. However, the negative response was shared by one of my participants who
believed that if we delivered the correction orally in front of the class it could make them feel
embarrassed with their friends especially in the middle of the class, and it seemed to disturb
the focus of the class activities because the teacher directly corrected the mistakes when they
were talking in the class.
At last, I confirmed the participants about the methods which they used in giving the
correction to the students. Ten out of 12 of my participants used repetition to correct the
students‟ grammatical mistakes because they believed that if the students were corrected
many times, they could remember their grammatical mistakes and would not do the same
mistakes in the following meetings. Then, there was one of my participants used
given by the teachers, the students could directly know and understand the mistakes they had
made. The last method which was used by another participant was overt correction. Overt
correction means that the teacher uses a combination of more than one method to correct
students‟ grammatical mistakes, and it was the combination of metalinguistic, elicitation, and
repetition. Overall, the aim is the same which is the teachers wanted to make the student
really understand the grammatical mistakes they had made and would not do the same
grammatical mistakes in the following meetings.
Finally, I do hope that the findings of this study could give benefits for English
teachers teaching English as second language or foreign language, especially in language
courses, to be helpful and effective teachers in giving corrections, use students‟ grammatical
mistakes to be parts of learning process, and making the students not only to have good self
confidence, but also good speaking accuracy in mastering English language.
Hopefully, the findings of this study could give inputs for English teachers in giving
oral grammar correction to the students; the method that was used in this research could help
the teachers to choose the right approaches or techniques to correct students‟ grammatical
mistakes in speaking activities. Furthermore, I do hope that similar studies in the future can
be conducted by having different participants, in different places, and different methods of
collecting data so that the following research study would give deeper contributions for
REFERENCES
Aliakbari, M., & Toni, A. (2009). On the Effects of Error Correction Strategies on the Grammatical Accuracy of the Iranian English Learners. Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics , 13 (1), 99-112.
Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (2006). Cambridge Grammar of English. New Delhi: Cambridge University Press.
Chen, Y. H., Thompson, M. S., Kromrey, J. D., & Chang, G. H. (2011). Relations of Student Perceptions of Teacher Oral Feedback With Teacher Expectancies and Student Self Concept. The Journal of Experimental Education , 79, 452–477.
Dekeyser, R. M. (1993). The Effect of Error Correction on L2 Grammar Knowledge and Oral Proviency. The Modern Language Journal , 77 (4), 501-514.
Elliott, J. (2005). Using Narrative in Social Research: Qualitative and Quantitative. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Florez, M. C. (1999, June). CAELA. Retrieved September 2015, from ESL resources:Improving Adult English Language Learners' Speaking Skills: www.cal.org/caela/esl_resources/digest/Speak.html
Han, Z., & Odlin, T. (2006). Studies of Fossilization in Second Language Acquisition. Canada: MPG Books Ltd.
Hattie, J., & Timperly, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research , 77 (1), 81-112.
Hesse-Biber, S. N., & Leavy, P. (2011). The Practice of Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. (2014). Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches. London:
SAGE Publications Ltd.
Liau, M. C., & Wang, H. C. (2009). Perception Differences of EFL Teachers and Students in Grammar Instruction and Error Correction. English Teaching and Learning , 33 (1), 101-146.
Lyster, R., & Ratna, L. (1997). Corrective Feedback and Learner Uptake. SSLA , 20, 37-66. Lyster, R., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1999). A Response to Truscott's "What's Wrong
with Oral Grammar Correction". The Canadian Modern Language Review , 55 (4), 457-466.
Moghaddam, S. R., & Behjat, F. (2014). Overt-correction vs. Recasts and Grammar
Research , 5 (4), 906-917.
Roulston, K. (2010). Reflective Interviewing: A Guide to Theory and Practice. London: SAGE Publication Ltd.
Tomczyk, E. (2013). Perception of Oral Error and Their Corrective Feedback: Teacher vs Students. Jurnal of Language Teaching and Research , 4 (5), 924-931.
Truscott, J. (1999). What's Wrong with Oral Grammar Correction. The Canadian Modern Language Review .
Truscott, J. (1999). What's Wrong with Oral Grammar Correction. The Canadian Modern Language Review , 55 (4), 437-456.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Appendix 1. Interview questions
Good morning afternoon, my name is Alberto Eka Saputra. I am a student in English Language Teaching Department and I want to interview you to fulfill my research about
„Teachers‟ Perceptions on Oral Grammar Correction in English Language Courses in
Salatiga‟. This interview will only take around 10 to 15 minutes with 12 questions. You are
about to answer the questions in English or Indonesian?
1. First of all, could you please tell me briefly about your personal information and education background?
2. How long have you been teaching English? 3. Do you teach speaking classes?
4. In your opinion, is grammar important in English language teaching? Why?
5. Do you sometimes correct students‟ grammatical mistakes in speaking classes? Why? 6. How do you normally correct students‟ grammatical mistakes? Why? Can you give
one or two exact examples?
7. In your opinion, is ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION important in English language teaching? Why?
8. Does ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION seem to be helpful for the improvement of
students‟ grammatical competence?
9. Do you see that this ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION you use seems to be helpful
to correct students‟ grammatical mistakes? (Using OGC techniques you have
mentioned previously)
10.What is normally the student‟s reaction or feelings when being corrected using ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION? In your opinion, why do they think or feel so?
Appendix 2. Result of Interview
Good morning afternoon, my name is Alberto Eka Saputra. I am a student in English Language Teaching Department and I want to interview you to fulfill my research about
„Teachers‟ Perceptions on Oral Grammar Correction in English Language Courses in
Salatiga‟. This interview will only take around 10 to 15 minutes with 12 questions. You are
about to answer the questions in English or Indonesian?
1. First of all, could you please tell me briefly about your personal information and education background?
My name is Puput Putri Asmani. I'm 23 years old. I graduated from English Department, Satya Wacana Christian University.
2. How long have you been teaching English?
During my college time, I took a compulsory course called teaching practicum and taught junior high school students grade 7 & 8 for about 2 months. Currently I am in a probation time as a teacher at Yeti English Course and have been teaching for around 3 months.
3. Do you teach speaking classes?
Yes, I teach speaking to students ranging from elementary school, junior high school, and college students.
4. In your opinion, is grammar important in English language teaching? Why?
5. Do you sometimes correct students‟ grammatical mistakes in speaking classes? Why? I often correct students' grammatical error in speaking class because I want the students to be aware of the error and switch to the correct one. In speaking class, we have limited opportunity to teach grammar fully because the focus is communication. However, students still need to know how to use the English properly. Thus, correcting error gives students chance to know which utterance is correct and which one is incorrect. They are expected to learn from the correction and do not repeat the same error.
6. How do you normally correct students‟ grammatical mistakes? Why? Can you give one or two exact examples?
Normally, I tell the correct utterance right away. The students will automatically repeat my utterance. By this method, I think the students will be aware of their grammatical error and directly know the correction. The example is when the students do not use past tense when they tell about past event, "I go to school yesterday", I will directly confirm "You went to school yesterday" The student will reconstruct the sentence "Yes, I went to school yesterday".
7. So if I want to clarify your statement, you use direct oral grammar correction in correcting students' mistakes in class?
Yes, kind of..
8. Do you think by using your approach, they know their mistakes by remembering the pattern? not the concept?
Yes, maybe they will notice the pattern only, so sometimes I also provide some kinds of clarification about the grammatical structure by the end of the meeting.
Yes, short explanation about it. Sometimes I write on the board and they will note down without being asked.
10.And then, about students' reactions when being corrected directly, how normally they react? Embarrassed, angry, or what?
They do not give negative reaction. They accept the correction and willingly repeat the utterance.
11.Do all of your students give positive reaction?
As far as I know yes, they've never been upset with correction.
12.What about the difference between boys and girls in reacting to the correction, do they both react the same?
It happens to all. I've never found any annoyed students regarding correction.
13.Okay, what about self awareness? which one has better self-awareness in grammar? Boys or girls?
I think it's the matter of ability..not gender.
14.So, if I may conclude your statement, their English competence determines their self-awareness in grammar? Right or wrong?
Yes, true..
15.In your opinion, is ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION important in English language teaching? Why?
16.So it happens only in classroom setting and not in real conversation, right? So you say it is useful...
Yes, it is useful and practical.
17.Based on your experience, does ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION seem to be
helpful for the improvement of students‟ grammatical competence?
It is. Because by being corrected repeatedly, the students gradually understand the construction and accustomed to use the correct one.
18.Do you see that this ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION you use seems to be helpful
to correct students‟ grammatical mistakes? I mean the approach you use, direct oral
grammar correction you have explained previously...
It is useful since the students notice the mistake they made and switch to use the correct one.
19.As a teacher who has better grammar awareness, do you see that after giving ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION to your students, they can improve their grammatical awareness in the following meetings? Why do you think so?
They directly apply the correction. It means they are aware of making error and correcting it.
20.Do you have any indicators to strengthen your statement? Because, if you say that they directly apply the correction, it must happen for the following meetings and they can minimize their mistakes...
It needs time. The error decreases by time. Again, it depends on students' competence also. However, there's always progress on it.
It is useful in ELT since students get the opportunity to compare the error and the correct one and apply the correction right away. It helps the students to use language correctly.
Appendix.3 Result of the interview
Good morning afternoon, my name is Alberto Eka Saputra. I am a student in English Language Teaching Department and I want to interview you to fulfill my research about
„Teachers‟ Perceptions on Oral Grammar Correction in English Language Courses in
Salatiga‟. This interview will only take around 10 to 15 minutes with 12 questions. You are
about to answer the questions in English or Indonesian? Maybe both
1. First of all, could you please tell me briefly about your personal information and education background?
My name Tiur, I graduated from Satya Wacana, majoring English educational program.
2. How long have you been teaching English? I have been teaching English for two years. 3. Do you teach speaking classes?
yes
4. So all of that is Speaking or other classes? All up
5. In your opinion, is grammar important in English language teaching? Why?
Yes, grammar is importance in English language teaching because grammar is like the foundation in everything, in speaking, writing. If we have good grammar we can speak fluently or use the language appropriately.
7. How do you normally correct students‟ grammatical mistakes? Why? Can you give one or two exact examples?
I usually correct their mistake by doing like, I give facial expression. Misalnya like are you sure? I usually repeat the last sentence or the last phrase. For example: last
week I go to swim, then I will repeat the sentence: last week… then I keep silence
then the students will response my sentence, repetition something like that. Jadi last
week I.... if the students say “go” then I will repeat last week I. . . remembered you
have last week then you should use.. ya something like that I will repeat the last sentence from the students. It is just the example.
8. But why you use that kind of approach?
Because sometimes I cannot correct automatically because it will disturb the students so sometimes I give them time to think first so they will not depend to much to me, jadi tidak bergantung penuh dengan teacher, jadi kalau kita melakukan hal seperti itu students akan aware sendiri jadi kita tidak boleh bilang no you make mistake, last week ya I went tidak boleh I go seperti itu dan by doing this correction it make the students more aware their mistake they made.
9. So if I try clarifying, you correct students mistake while explain the grammar?
10.In your opinion, is ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION important in English language teaching? Why?
Maybe yes, maybe no because not all the students itu nyaman dengan oral grammar correction. Not all of the students feel comfortable with this kind of correction. Maybe we should combine with other kind of correction. Not just oral we have to combine it.
11.Does ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION seem to be helpful for the improvement of
students‟ grammatical competence?
Yah oral grammar correction helpful for the improvement of students‟ grammatical
competence because they will automatically aware so it help them be aware something like that.
12.Do you see that this ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION you use seems to be helpful
to correct students‟ grammatical mistakes? (Using OGC techniques you have
mentioned previously)
Yes,
13.What is normally the student‟s reaction or feelings when being corrected using ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION? In your opinion, why do they think or feel so?
They often say sorry to me, so just like this “oh sorry miss I forget about it something
like that, they already aware about that, so I think it helpful for them”
14.What do they think so or feel so?
I think they will happy jadi tidak merasa diremehkan oleh teacher.
15.Do you see any differences between male and female students in reacting to the ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION?
they say something, they always said to me, bener ga sih miss? Do I say in correct way? It difference with female students. If it is in speaking class, they always said that, mereka lebih heboh kalau yang perempuan ketika mereka membuat kesalahan
dan terbiasa dengan oral grammar correction mereka akan “wait wait miss, I make a
mistake sorry sorry”. Ini harusnya seperti ini somethings like that. It is difference
between male and female students.
16.Which one do you think has better self-awareness in grammatical mistakes after being corrected using ORAL GRAMMAR CORRECTION?
I think female students, female students has better self- awareness than male students, if it is in speaking class actually they are force to speak tetapi ada ketakutan dulu kalau male students. Female students have better self-awareness than male students. 17.Almost all the students do the same?
Yes, most of my students to the same.
18.Does students‟ educational background determine the self-awareness in their competence?
Yes, their educational background determines the self-awareness because when they come from school which has excellence education of English they will speak...Speak... and speak without feeling afraid something like that and they will be more aware than students who have its like poor level of education. They will feel afraid to speak and the self- awareness is not really good. They have it by some type of grammar correction and they will be aware.
Yes, because by doing oral grammatical correction, in the following meeting they will
be aware so “in the last meeting my teacher is already explain about this, so in the
following meeting the mistake is like decreasing something like that. 20.It because the oral grammar correction or other aspect?
I think it‟s because the oral grammar correction because the oral grammar correction
is take the role especially in speaking activities.
21.For your last statement, to clarify your statement, do you believe that oral grammar correction seems to be helpful for the improvement of the students‟ competence? Yes I believe it.
