ERROR ANALYSIS IN ENGLISH SPEAKING SKILLS OF PRIMARY SCHOOL 4TH GRADE STUDENTS

Seyit YAYLA, Gonca SUBAŞI, Şerife Dilek BELET BOYACI
{"title":"ERROR ANALYSIS IN ENGLISH SPEAKING SKILLS OF PRIMARY SCHOOL 4TH GRADE STUDENTS","authors":"Seyit YAYLA, Gonca SUBAŞI, Şerife Dilek BELET BOYACI","doi":"10.31567/ssd.974","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An error analysis study was conducted in order to investigate the errors of fourth grade Turkish students with regard to English speaking skill. Demirel (2012) stated that among the skills in foreign language teaching, the speaking skill might be the most difficult skill to acquire. There are various reasons behind the scene such as learning difficulties in speaking a foreign language, the continuum of these learning problems in the following years, hesitation of students to speak English and attend English courses, exam-oriented learning and teaching environment, and not putting the information into the long-term memory. Considering these reasons, the present study showed an attempt to examine errors in the speaking skill of primary school students. Error analysis is employed to find the sources of errors by making an in-depth investigation (Corder, 1974). In the current study, via a quasi-experimental research design, a 9-week implimentation was carried out to improve the speaking skills of the participants. Descriptive analysis was used to analyze of the data. The results of speaking pre-tests and post-tests in the experimental (n=17) and control groups n=(15) were utilized. \"English Speaking Skills Rubric for Primary School Students\" was used as a measurement tool. The outcomes were analyzed by employing Man Whitney U test. In the error analysis focusing on the development of students' speaking skills based on the difference scores, the type of sub-dimension that the students were found to be more successful, respectively, as follows: Task achievement 10.7 difference points (out of 20 points) 53.5%, Comprehension and expression 4.7 difference points (out of 10 points) 47%, Fluency 7 differences points (out of 15 points) 46.2%, Vocabulary 8 differences points (out of 20 points) 40%, Grammar and structure 8 differences points (out of 20 points) ) 40%, Intelligibility 6 points (out of 15 points) 39.6%. In this situation, while the most errors were detected in the intelligibility sub-dimension, the least errors were observed in the task achievement.","PeriodicalId":353952,"journal":{"name":"SOCIAL SCIENCE DEVELOPMENT JOURNAL","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SOCIAL SCIENCE DEVELOPMENT JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31567/ssd.974","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

An error analysis study was conducted in order to investigate the errors of fourth grade Turkish students with regard to English speaking skill. Demirel (2012) stated that among the skills in foreign language teaching, the speaking skill might be the most difficult skill to acquire. There are various reasons behind the scene such as learning difficulties in speaking a foreign language, the continuum of these learning problems in the following years, hesitation of students to speak English and attend English courses, exam-oriented learning and teaching environment, and not putting the information into the long-term memory. Considering these reasons, the present study showed an attempt to examine errors in the speaking skill of primary school students. Error analysis is employed to find the sources of errors by making an in-depth investigation (Corder, 1974). In the current study, via a quasi-experimental research design, a 9-week implimentation was carried out to improve the speaking skills of the participants. Descriptive analysis was used to analyze of the data. The results of speaking pre-tests and post-tests in the experimental (n=17) and control groups n=(15) were utilized. "English Speaking Skills Rubric for Primary School Students" was used as a measurement tool. The outcomes were analyzed by employing Man Whitney U test. In the error analysis focusing on the development of students' speaking skills based on the difference scores, the type of sub-dimension that the students were found to be more successful, respectively, as follows: Task achievement 10.7 difference points (out of 20 points) 53.5%, Comprehension and expression 4.7 difference points (out of 10 points) 47%, Fluency 7 differences points (out of 15 points) 46.2%, Vocabulary 8 differences points (out of 20 points) 40%, Grammar and structure 8 differences points (out of 20 points) ) 40%, Intelligibility 6 points (out of 15 points) 39.6%. In this situation, while the most errors were detected in the intelligibility sub-dimension, the least errors were observed in the task achievement.
小学四年级学生英语口语技能的错误分析
为了调查土耳其四年级学生在英语口语技能方面的错误,进行了一项错误分析研究。Demirel(2012)指出,在外语教学的技能中,口语技能可能是最难获得的技能。这背后有各种各样的原因,比如说外语的学习困难,这些学习问题在接下来的几年里持续存在,学生说英语和参加英语课程的犹豫,应试学习和教学环境,以及没有将信息转化为长期记忆。考虑到这些原因,本研究试图检验小学生口语技能中的错误。误差分析是通过深入调查来找到误差的来源(Corder, 1974)。本研究采用准实验研究设计,通过为期9周的实施来提高被试的口语能力。采用描述性分析对数据进行分析。采用实验组(n=17)和对照组(n= 15)的言语前测和言语后测结果。使用《小学生英语口语能力量表》作为测量工具。采用Man Whitney U检验对结果进行分析。在基于差异分数的以学生口语技能发展为重点的错误分析中,学生被发现更成功的子维度类型分别为:任务成绩10.7分(满分20分)53.5%、理解和表达4.7分(满分10分)47%、流畅性7分(满分15分)46.2%、词汇8分(满分20分)40%、语法和结构8分(满分20分)40%、可理解性6分(满分15分)39.6%。在这种情况下,在可理解度子维度上检测到的错误最多,而在任务成就上检测到的错误最少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信