The Glossing Process as a Practical Approach to Grammar Instruction

When I was reading this article, the first thing that came to my mind was a correction process that we used to adopt some years ago in which we would indicate a student’s error by writing a code next to the error. These codes would indicate problems with spelling(sp), grammar(gr), verb tense(vt), vocabulary(vocab) and so on. Then the student was supposed to see and understand the codes and correct him or herself. He or she should have already been taught about the meaning of these codes. Teachers, however, used different codes, students got mixed up with them, sometimes they wouldn’t return their papers…- the result: I don’t see teachers using this nowadays.

The Glossing Process seems to be quite similar to this process as far as self correction is concerned. I agree that getting students to analyze their errors, think about them and actually re-write their sentences – and state the rules - might be useful for exercising the format of their writing, but the inevitable question comes up: what should be focused first – content or form? It has been discussed over the years the importance of focusing on content, meaning rather than on accuracy. Teachers have been taught about Process Writing – another form of correction which basically focus on meaning and the piece of writing goes back and forth (teacher-student-teacher-student…with all teachers hoping these papers don’t get lost or that students remember to hand them in again – and again) as many times as necessary so that the message is clearly – not necessarily accurately – written. As for the correction of form, it is the same process all again.

I personally have never been good at dealing with this come and go of students´ activities. I admit: I get lost. It is hard for me to control if Paulo is handing me a piece of writing after his third revision or if Manuela has already tried ten times – and is getting bored of that. This article leaves me basically with two questions: content or accuracy? And - whatever the first answer is - should I learn how to deal with this come and go – or is technology coming to make my way through this?

If you need some inspiration to prepare your Article Proposal, I recommend the following site:

http://www.scielo.br/

The site brings a large number of articles in various fields written by scholars, researchers and the like.

I hope you enjoy it!

Commenting on the text: “A touch of ...Class!”

Error Correction is indeed one of the great concerns of any L2 teacher. In fact, I think it is something we have to deal with in a daily basis and we need to find better ways to make it work, bringing better learning results for the students.

When the author questions whether “… our efforts in error correction actually translates into student leaning…” I find myself thinking about the students we teach at a certain level - for example, A3 - and who, repeatedly, come back to us in later stages (Int 2, Hint 1, etc) presenting the same type of problems they had when they first “belonged” to us! And this is so frustrating! It gives us the idea that neither we, nor any other teacher did the job well.

The author then presents some ideas on how to deal with the problem of error correction in a more strategic way. She argues that we should “… correct errors selectively rather than comprehensively …” when the students are at a beginning level of proficiency. On the other hand, she suggests a “reformulation” correction (meaning = “… having a native writer of the target language rewrite a learner´s composition …. So that it sounds more “native like”.) for students at a higher level of proficiency. This way, “…error correction strategies need to be tailored to the linguistic ability of the individual student.”

My observation is that, as teachers, we are so anxious for proficiency to be established that we do not wait for the learning process to occur, respecting the time each student needs. We correct and correct every little detail and think this correction will help the learning process to occur faster…! Maybe we need to think more, reflect more and become more patient… What do you think, teacher Catron?

Ana Maria
October, 2007

dilemma

When I read the article about students errors I wondered if, as a teacher, I do not see all of my students´ mistakes in writing as something negative.
On the contrary, I believe many of their mistakes are like a natural outcome of the development of communication skills. In fact, they demonstrate that my students are getting into the process of learning a foreign language.
Therefore, for me, the duty of knowing how to access that in an effective way becomes a challenge. What to do? Should I highlight their mistakes? Should I give them codes, so that they can discover by themselves what was wrong? Should I give them the right answers? Well, it depends on the students´profile and level and also on the teacher´s.
One consideration I know for sure: Identifying the students´ mistakes is as crucial as knowing how to access them.
Alecsandra

A touch of... class!

Error correction

Maria Mantello

After reading Mantello’s article on error correction, I found myself making some considerations on how I deal with correcting my Ss’ errors in writing. Correcting students’ errors is not an easy task and I agree with her when she mentions how frustrating it is correcting errors and seeing them recur in students writing.

As a teacher, I use both selective and comprehensive error correction. I find the use of coded feedback very helpful with beginner or weaker Ss, mainly because it shows both the location and the nature of the error. As Mantello says “It seems that weaker students, in general, benefit from an error correction technique that makes corrections more explicit”.

With advanced or stronger Ss, I also use the coded feedback technique, and I provided them with models where the target structure can be seen in different context. By doing so, Ss have the opportunity to compare and analyze the language critically.

In conclusion, the way teachers approach error correction might differ, depending on a variety of reasons. It is important though, to reflect on why it is that we correct Ss’ error, and to bear in mind that the only objective in error correction is student learning.

Comment on Mantello's article: A Touch of Class (error correction)

I found Mantello's article interesting. It made me reflect on my way of correcting ss. I came to the conclusion that I do both: I correct errors selectively and/or comprehensively. It depends not only on the level I'm teaching but also on the s (whether he/she is weak or strong). I tend to use the coded feedback w/ weaker and more elementary ss because I feel it'll be easier and more motivating for them to focus on specific problems rather than try to grasp everything that comes with good writing (content, cohesion, coherence, linking words etc) at once. With stronger ss I tend to correct using the reformulation technique. I agree with Mantello when she says stronger ss seem to benefit more with this kind of correction as they are,in general, more attentive to the subtleties of writing in English.
Finally, I also share Mantello's view of engaging ss in the correction process. I often give individualized feedback and/or encourage them to think about the nature of their errors.

Error Correction in L2 - An Article by Maria Mantello

I chose to read this text because I've been especially interested in error correction lately, have been thinking about conducting a research with my Teen 4 groups on oral error correction and the effectiveness of doing the "immediate" or "on the spot" correction. Considering there are many articles on the groups related to error correction I have to be honest and admit that the choice of that specific article was random. But luckily (or not) it was a fortunate choice.

Maria Mantello makes reference to several researchers and publications on the topic, and explains the experiment she carried out on her French classes. I especially related to her writing because I too feel frustrated when correcting students writing, because it does seem that we keep correcting the same mistakes over and over, of the same students. Correcting takes such a long time and effort and attention from us, in the attempt of being thorough and fulfilling our role as a teacher and correcting all the students mistakes. And the impression I get is that we give them the corrected paper, they look at the grade and superficially (just a mere gaze) at the number of mistakes they've made, but they don't really read the corrections, they don't reflect upon them. So, many times I have caught myself wondering - what's the use?

Of course we can always find a student here or there that will look at the mistakes they've committed, try to be aware of them and avoid making the same mistakes again. but those are too few. So, what should we do?

I liked the idea of using two different techniques (in her case correction codes and reformulation), one for each group of the same level. This way she was able to better compare the progress and effectiveness of each technique during the experiment. However, I have to say that I found the idea of reformulation impractical for our reality at ABA, because it involves getting a native speaker to rewrite the student's piece, using a more authentic style and language structures. That is unrealistic, it could never be done in our current timeXcontentXamount of tasks to be done situation.

Nevertheless, her idea of focusing on correcting one specific structure being studied for some time was really interesting. It's not as tiring and apparently useless as correcting everything, and it doesn't give the feeling of "I'm not doing my job as a teacher" feeling that focusing on the content gives us. And according to her final results, it works. The students finally got the structure that was being corrected down.

Maybe the fact that students look at the corrections and don't see as many marks, or asking them to actually look at the paper, pointing out the fact you're focusing on the structure that's being studied motivates them. Focusing on one specific structure is certainly easier for the student.

I don't have the answers that I was possibly looking for - maybe a magic formula? But I have to say it gave me ideas and made me (once again) reflect on my practice, consider what I might be doing wrong. And I'm looking foward to experimenting that in class. Great reading!!!!