TRUSCOTT (1996): AGAINST GRAMMAR CORRECTION IN

WRITING • Grammar correction should be abandoned:

reasons:1.- it is ineffective2.- it has harmful effects3.- arguments for continuing it lack merit

EVIDENCE AGAINST GRAMMAR CORRECTION

• Semke’s (1984) study: 4 groups of students who received a different type of feedback:

- Group 1: comments on content, no concern for errors- Group 2: comments on errors- Group 3: comments on content + errors- Group 4: errors pointed out + correcting themselves Results: no significant differences among

groups in terms of accuracy

LEARNER VARIABLES• Despite previous arguments, there might be

learners who DO benefit from grammar correction

• The distinction between learners who benefit from those who do not may be due to gender, age, educational background, anxiety…

• Bad timing is another factor: teachers correct students on grammar points for which they are not yet ready

EVIDENCE FOR GRAMMAR CORRECTION

• Most studies have not provided evidence for the effectiveness of correction; they have assumed that it is effective

• Students who receive correction on grammar become better at grammar exercises, but this says nothing about its effect on students’ writing ability

WHY GRAMMAR CORRECTION CANNOT WORK

• Typical correction sequence: learners make an error -> they’re given the right form -> learners have the correct knowledge about that structure -> learners should be able to use it in the future

• This sequence is not correct: Long (1991) claimed that acquisition is a gradual process, not a sudden discovery

WHY GRAMMAR CORRECTION CANNOT WORK

• Syntactic, morphological and lexical knowledge are acquired in different ways, so no simple form of correction can be effective for all three

• Grammatical learning follows a natural order, so if learners are corrected on a point for which they are not yet ready, correction does not have much value. Consequence:

• Ignoring developmental sequences makes grammar correction ineffective

WHY GRAMMAR CORRECTION CANNOT WORK

• Some learners are unable or unwilling to adopt the corrections they receive, because they sound right to them

• Students favour their intuition over correction by teachers. This means that corrections cannot be expected to have much effect on students’ writing in the long term

CORRECTION IS INEFFECTIVE: Practical problems

• The teacher must realize a mistake has been made: some teachers who are not NSs of the target language may fail to notice some errors

• If teachers do recognize an error, the problem must be well explained: in large classes, busy teachers grading many written assignments have little time and patience; this may affect the quality of their comments

CORRECTION IS INEFFECTIVE: Practical problems

• Even if the error is correctly explained, the students may fail to understand the explanation

• If students understand the error, they may repeat it later in other contexts or forget it

• Students may see correction as a form of punishment

POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS• Teachers select a few important errors and

correct them over an extended period of time• Students would not feel so overburdened and

could pay more attention to corrections and even use them in the future

GRAMMAR CORRECTION: harmful and counterproductive

effects• Even students who think that correction is a

necessary part of learning, they don’t enjoy the sight of red ink over their writing. This fact may harm students’ motivation

• Students spend much time reading, thinking about and correcting their mistakes, time which could be better spent on other, more productive learning activities. This also applies to teacher’s time

SO, WHY DO TEACHERS STILL CORRECT???

• Teachers believe that grammar correction helps learners and they should keep on using it

• Learners cannot identify their own mistakes and need a more knowledgeable person to point them out

• Danger of fossilization: students who are not corrected may become stuck

• AND, BECAUSE STUDENTS WANT CORRECTION AS AN ESSENTIAL TEACHER’S ROLE!!!!!!!