<span class="text_page_counter">Trang 1</span><div class="page_container" data-page="1">

<b>LAC HONG UNIVERSITY </b>

<b>PHẠM NGUYỄN HẢI YẾN </b>

<b>GRAMMATICAL ERRORS MADE BY THE FOURTH GRADERS AT A PRIMARY SCHOOL IN BIEN HOA CITY </b>

<b>MASTER GRADUATION PROJECT IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE </b>

<b>DONG NAI, 2024 </b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 2</span><div class="page_container" data-page="2">

<b>MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING LAC HONG UNIVERSITY </b>

<b>PHẠM NGUYỄN HẢI YẾN </b>

<b>GRAMMATICAL ERRORS MADE BY THE FOURTH GRADERS AT A PRIMARY SCHOOL IN BIEN HOA CITY </b>

<b>MASTER GRADUATION PROJECT IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE </b>

<b>MAJOR: ENGLISH LANGUAGE MAJOR CODE: 8220201 </b>

<b>INSTRUCTORS </b>

<b>1. Assoc. Prof. Dr. PHAM HUU 2. Dr. NGUYEN THI CHAU ANH </b>

<b>DONG NAI, 2024 </b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 3</span><div class="page_container" data-page="3">

<b>LIST OF FIGURES ... vii </b>

<b>LIST OF TABLES ... viii </b>

1.3. Grammatical error analysis ... 13

1.4. Steps in conducting a grammatical error analysis ... 16

1. 5. Characteristics of young learners ... 18

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 4</span><div class="page_container" data-page="4">

2. 4. Samples and sampling procedures ... 27

2. 5. Materials and research instruments ... 28

2. 6. Data collection procedures ... 28

2. 6. Data analysis procedures ... 29

3.1.1.4. Errors in word order ... 43

3.1.1.5. Errors in possessive pronouns ... 45

3.1.2. Students’ improvement of the grammatical errors... 46

3.2. Discussion ... 46

3.2.1 Types of grammatical errors do students in grade 4 at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary school often make in writing ... 46

3.2.2. Errors in verb tenses ... 49

3.2.3. Students’ improvement of the most common grammatical errors ... 51

3.3. Chapter summary ... 52

<b>CONCLUSION ... 53 REFERENCES </b>

<b>APPENDICES </b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 5</span><div class="page_container" data-page="5">

<b>ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS </b>

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the following people for their assistance during the two-year time for the MA course.

Firstly, I would like to express my profound and sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Phạm Hữu Đức for the entire patience, encouragement, and immense knowledge throughout the process of accomplishing my study. My deep thanks go to Dr. Nguyễn Thị Châu Anh and all the lecturers at Lac Hong University for the precious lessons and assistance during my study.

Additionally, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the teachers and students at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary School for their support and cooperation which helped me with the source of data to do this thesis.

Finally, my sincere thanks are to my family and friends who have shared and encouraged me during the process of finishing my MA research project.

Dong Nai, January, 2024 Author

Phạm Nguyễn Hải Yến

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 6</span><div class="page_container" data-page="6">

<b>ABSTRACT </b>

The importance of proficient and effective writing skills in learning a second language or a foreign language, especially English, is unquestionable. These skills are essential for educational, business, and personal success. However, writing is a complex task that requires significant cognitive and linguistic effort. In this context, it is understandable that learners of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) must put in considerable effort to develop their proficient writing skills, particularly in grammar. Despite early exposure to the English language, many Vietnamese primary students, including those at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary School, struggle with English grammar and syntax. Common grammatical errors in their writing, whether done at home or school, are often attributed to a lack of understanding of grammatical rules and concepts.

Therefore, this research project aims to examine the grammatical errors in the writings of students at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary School. It focuses primarily on the main grammatical errors made by fourth graders, using data from their English class writings. The project involves 60 primary students with average to low levels of grammar proficiency from two classes.

The methodology of the study combines both quantitative and qualitative approaches. The quantitative approach is based on statistical data, which is organized in a table showing the specific types of grammatical errors these students make. The qualitative aspect includes an analysis and interpretation of these errors. Future studies could expand the scope beyond Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary School to include a broader range of educational institutions across different regions. This would allow for a more comprehensive understanding of the challenges faced by EFL learners in various socio-cultural contexts. Future studies could expand the scope beyond Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary School to include a broader range of educational institutions across different regions. This would allow for a more comprehensive understanding of the challenges faced by EFL learners in various socio-cultural contexts.

<i><b>Key words: Cognitive and linguistic effort, English as a foreign language (EFL), </b></i>

<i>grammatical errors analysis, grammar proficiency, primary school, quantitative and </i>

<i><b>qualitative methodology, writing skill </b></i>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 7</span><div class="page_container" data-page="7">

<b>DECLARATION BY AUTHOR </b>

I certify that this thesis “GRAMMATICAL ERRORS MADE BY THE FOURTH GRADERS AT A PRIMARY SCHOOL IN BIEN HOA CITY” is the result of my own research and I am the sole author of this project. To my best knowledge and belief, it is carried out without using materials previously published or written by other people. It is accepted for the requirements of the M.A degree after a carefully

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 8</span><div class="page_container" data-page="8">

<b> LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS </b>

LUU Lac Hong University

EFL English as a Foreign Language ESL English as a second Language

SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 9</span><div class="page_container" data-page="9">

<b>LIST OF FIGURES </b>

Figure 1.1: The conceptual framework of the study by the researcher ... 22

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 10</span><div class="page_container" data-page="10">

<b>LIST OF TABLES </b>

Table 1.1. Types of errors classified by Lee (2009) ... 10

Table 1.2. Types of grammatical errors categorized by Dulay (1982) ... 14

Table 1.3. Chaney’s analysis of leaners’ errors (1999) ... 15

Table 1.4: Characteristics of young and adult language learners ... 19

Table 2.1. Steps of conducting grammatical error analysis by Corder (1973) ... 30

Table 3.1: Typical errors related to the past simple tense in affirmative form ... 34

Table 3.2: Typical grammatical errors related to the past simple tense in negative form ... 36

Table 3.3. Typical errors related to the present simple tense ... 37

Table 3.4. Typical errors related to the present continuous tense ... 37

Table 3.5. Typical errors related to the present simple and present continuous tense ... 38

Table 3.6. Typical errors related to future expression with “Be going to” ... 39

Table 3.7. Errors related to plurality and indefinite article ... 40

Table 3.8. Typical errors related to prepositions ... 43

Table 3.9. Typical grammatical errors related to word order. ... 44

Table 3.10. Typical grammatical errors related to pronouns. ... 45

Table 3.11. Paired sample t-test to measure the improvement of the grammatical errors. ... 46

Table 3.12. Frequency of typical grammatical errors made by the participants at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary School ... 47

Table 3.13. Typical grammatical errors related to verb tenses ... 50

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 11</span><div class="page_container" data-page="11">

<b>INTRODUCTION </b>

<b>Background of the study </b>

The English language significantly influences numerous facets of human existence around the globe. Recognized as a global language, it holds a pivotal position in various societal domains such as education, economics, science, and politics, among others. Consequently, English features prominently in the curricula of schools and other educational institutions.

Vietnam, along with other Asian nations, commenced the integration of English instruction into its primary education system in the early 1990s. Given the paramount importance of English grammar in both teaching and learning, researching the impact of Vietnamese interference on the English writing skills of Vietnamese students is deemed valuable. Nonetheless, it's impractical to address every potential writing error related to these two languages within a constrained timeframe. Therefore, this thesis narrows its focus to primarily examine the most prevalent grammatical mistakes encountered in the English and Vietnamese written works of Vietnamese learners.

<b>Statement of the problem </b>

In teaching and learning English, acquiring and imparting writing skills in English is often the most challenging aspect, persisting across various educational stages. It necessitates a robust understanding, enabling learners to simultaneously construct words, sentences, and paragraphs with proper grammatical structure. Attaining proficiency in a foreign language like English involves comprehending and applying its grammatical rules diligently. Errors are a natural and expected part of the language learning process, particularly in English. Consequently, English educators should dedicate time and effort to identifying and understanding the common grammatical mistakes students frequently encounter in their writing. This proactive approach aids in enhancing their grammatical proficiency.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 12</span><div class="page_container" data-page="12">

In light of these considerations, the researcher has chosen to undertake a study titled “Grammatical errors made by the fourth graders at a primary school in Bien Hoa City.” The research aims to meticulously examine, categorize, and quantify the types and occurrence of grammatical inaccuracies that students typically exhibit at both the sentence and paragraph levels in their written work.

<b>Research aims and objectives </b>

The aim of the study is to analyze the types of grammatical errors that were made by the fourth graders at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary school in their writing and simultaneously, to find out the frequency and percentage of common grammatical writing errors. Consequently, pedagogical implications to minimize or eliminate grammatical writing errors will be provided.

To achieve the aims, the study is expected to reach the following objectives: - Analyzing the types of grammatical errors committed by the participants in their writing;

- Investigating the frequency and percentage of grammatical writing errors that are most made by the fourth graders at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary school.

<b>Research questions </b>

The objectives of the study can be elaborated into the research questions as follows: 1. What types of grammatical errors do students in grade 4 at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary school often make in writing?

2. To what extent do students improve their grammatical errors?

<b>Scope of the study </b>

This project delves into the grammatical inaccuracies present in the writings of students at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary School, with a specific focus on 60 fourth-grade students. The investigation takes place during the initial term of the 2023-2024 academic year and involves a thorough examination of the frequent grammatical mistakes these students make in their written assignments.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 13</span><div class="page_container" data-page="13">

Given the time constraints and the finite scope inherent to a project, the research is confined to scrutinizing the grammatical errors in the writings of primary school students. Data collection is achieved from 60 fourth graders in classes 4/1 and 4/4, through the pre-test and the post-test, which include grammatical exercises and a writing task. In this task, students are prompted to compose a brief paragraph, spanning from 5 to 8 sentences, on a designated topic. All the participants were the same level.

The scope of this project is limited to identifying and analyzing the grammatical errors made by the fourth graders at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary School in their writing. It particularly focuses on quantifying the regularity of these errors. The study pays special attention to specific types of mistakes, including those related to verb tenses, plurality, articles, prepositions, word order, and possessive pronouns. The subsequent step involves a detailed analysis of the frequency and percentage of these error categories, derived from the data gathered during the research. This

<b>Significance of the study </b>

This study was conducted at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary School, offers significant theoretical and practical implications. Theoretically, the research serves as tangible support for the notion that analyzing errors is instrumental in enhancing English writing proficiency. This is achieved through the identification, classification, and detailed examination of the most frequent errors committed by English learners in their written work. As a result, this thesis may act as a valuable resource for other educators or researchers with a keen interest in the analysis of grammatical errors in writing.

From a practical standpoint, the researcher envisions this study as a foundational tool for advancing the teaching skills of educators, particularly in the domain of grammar instruction. It aims to stimulate students’ interest in learning English, transforming it from a mundane subject into an engaging and interactive experience. Furthermore, the study offers insights that could guide the selection of

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 14</span><div class="page_container" data-page="14">

effective teaching strategies or techniques at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary School. By incorporating the findings into their teaching practices, teachers can foster a more dynamic and effective learning environment, encouraging students to master English grammar with enthusiasm and commitment.

<b>Definitions of key terms </b>

<b>1. Cognitive and Linguistic Effort: This phrase describes the mental energy and </b>

focus required for language-related tasks. Cognitive effort pertains to the mental processes involved in learning, understanding, and using language, while linguistic effort relates specifically to the work involved in acquiring and using language skills, such as vocabulary, grammar, and syntax.

<b>2. English as a Foreign Language (EFL): This term refers to the study or learning </b>

of English by speakers with different native languages. EFL is used in environments where English is not the primary language, and the focus is often on learning English for use in international communication or for educational purposes.

<b>3. Grammatical Errors Analysis: This is the process of identifying, examining, and </b>

understanding mistakes made in the use of grammar. In language learning, such analysis is crucial for educators and learners to understand common problems and challenges in using grammar correctly.

<b>4. Grammar Proficiency: This term refers to the degree of skill or expertise someone </b>

has in using the rules and structures of a language. In the context of language learning, it particularly relates to the ability to use grammar correctly and effectively in both spoken and written forms.

<b>5. Primary School: This is an educational institution where children receive the first </b>

stage of compulsory education known as elementary or primary education. In most countries, primary school is for children aged around 5 to 11 years and precedes secondary school.

<b>6. Quantitative and Qualitative Methodology: These terms refer to two broad </b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 15</span><div class="page_container" data-page="15">

categories of research methods. Quantitative methodology involves the collection and analysis of numerical data to uncover patterns, averages, predictions, and other quantifiable aspects. Qualitative methodology, on the other hand, focuses on descriptive data, often collected through interviews, observations, and analysis of texts, to gain insights into people's experiences, attitudes, behaviors, and interactions.

<b>7. Writing Skills: These are the abilities associated with expressing ideas and </b>

information effectively through written text. Writing skills encompass various components, including grammar, vocabulary, spelling, punctuation, clarity, coherence, and the ability to structure and organize content in a logical manner.

<b>Organization of the project </b>

The project is divided into five parts as follows:

- Introduction presents rationale, research aim and objectives, research questions, scope of the research, and significance of the research.

- Chapter I: Literature review presents the theories about grammar errors, and previous studies.

- Chapter II: Research methodology presents research methods, the context, sample, instruments, data collection procedures, and data analysis procedures. - Chapter III: Results and discussion clarify the research objectives relying on the

generation of data.

- Conclusion summarizes main ideas of the research, implications, limitations, and some recommendations for further studies.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 16</span><div class="page_container" data-page="16">

<b>CHAPTER I </b>

<b> LITERATURE REVIEW </b>

<b>1.1. Overview of errors </b>

<i><b>1.1.1. Definition of errors </b></i>

Encountering errors is a common and seemingly inescapable part of learning a foreign language, particularly English. To gain a deeper understanding of these errors, it's beneficial to explore the various definitions provided by distinguished linguists.

Jeremy Harmer (2001) described errors as components of a learner's 'interlanguage,' which is essentially the learner's current version of the language at any given stage of their learning journey. This interlanguage is continuously evolving as the learner progresses towards achieving complete fluency in the language.

Dulay, Burt, and Krashen (1982: 139) defined an error as a systematic fault that consistently occurs when a learner produces language based on their understanding of what they believe to be correct. They conceptualized the learner's performance in the target language as an 'interlanguage', possessing its unique set of grammatical rules and communicative strategies.

On the other hand, Brown (2007: 215) offered a slightly different perspective. He characterized an error as a distinct deviation from the standard grammar used by native speakers. This deviation, according to Brown, is indicative of the learner's 'interlanguage competence', highlighting the learner's current stage in mastering the language. Each of these perspectives sheds light on the intricate nature of language learning and the role of errors in the process.

<i><b>1.1.2. Errors versus mistakes </b></i>

Making the difference between grammatical errors and mistakes is crucial in language education. It assists teachers in meeting the educational needs of students and enables students to correct their own language. Errors in grammar are consistent issues arising from a learner's inadequate grasp of the target language’s grammar

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 17</span><div class="page_container" data-page="17">

rules. These errors, usually stemming from either a lack of knowledge or misinterpretation, are generally not rectifiable by the learner themselves. For example, repeated incorrect use of verb tenses or problems with subject-verb agreement showcases a deficit in grammatical skills. As Richards (2015) points out, these errors are a part of the learner’s evolving comprehension of the language and are inherent to the learning process. Error analysis is useful here, as it aids in pinpointing, detailing, and elucidating these errors, thus allowing teachers to modify their teaching methods accordingly. James (2013) also notes that such errors are systematic and can be classified to pinpoint specific linguistic challenges faced by learners, facilitating targeted teaching approaches.

In contrast, grammatical mistakes are lapses that happen even though the learner knows the correct rule. Often caused by external factors like fatigue, stress, or inattention, these are not indicative of a lack of linguistic skill. Such mistakes are generally identifiable and correctable by the learner once highlighted. Harmer (2015) suggests that mistakes are less grave than errors as they stem from temporary lapses in applying known language rules. Hence, mistakes do not suggest a lack of rule understanding in applying them in certain situations.

Distinguishing between errors and mistakes is vital in educational contexts. Systematic instruction is needed to correct errors, whereas mistakes typically improve with practice and more exposure to the language. This distinction greatly influences teaching tactics. For errors, teachers may need to go over and strengthen certain grammar rules or concepts. Conversely, for mistakes, offering more practice opportunities, like speaking or writing exercises, is more effective. Recognizing the nature of a learner's grammatical shortcomings, whether errors or mistakes, is key to efficient language teaching.

Grammatical errors and mistakes, though both common in language learning, stem from different sources and necessitate distinct educational strategies. Errors suggest a fundamental misunderstanding of grammar rules requiring direct instruction, whereas mistakes, tied to performance, can often be self-corrected by the

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 18</span><div class="page_container" data-page="18">

learner. This knowledge is crucial for educators to effectively aid language learners in their path to fluency.

<i><b>1.1.3. Nature of errors </b></i>

Language learning encompasses the development of both oral and written skills. It's common for learners to encounter mistakes and errors as they strive to refine each of these skills. Errors typically arise from a lack of understanding of grammar rules, the appropriate usage of words, or sentence construction. The occurrence of errors is not merely a setback but a crucial element that provides insights into the learning process, whether the errors stem from grammatical mistakes or slips of the tongue in either spoken or written language.

Davis and Pearse (2002: 103) posited that "errors are an integral part of language learning and not evidence of failure to learn." This perspective underscores the importance of analyzing errors, as they contribute significantly to our comprehension of how language is acquired. Errors offer learners valuable feedback, serving as a guide for identifying new strategies to accomplish their learning objectives. Furthermore, the nature and patterns of these errors can reveal the strategies learners employ in their language acquisition process, rendering errors a vital component in the study of foreign language learning. This constructive view emphasizes that errors should not be seen merely as missteps, but rather as informative milestones in the ongoing journey of language mastery.

<i><b>1.1.4. Classification of errors </b></i>

Corder (1973) proposed a nuanced classification of errors by comparing a learner's utterance with a reconstructed (correct) version, categorizing errors into four distinct types:

<b>1. Omission: This occurs when a learner omits a necessary element in their </b>

utterance.

<b>2. Addition: This involves the inclusion of an unnecessary or incorrect element. 3. Selection: This type of error is characterized by the selection of an incorrect </b>

element.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 19</span><div class="page_container" data-page="19">

<b>4. Disordering: This occurs when the elements in the utterance are in the wrong </b>

sequence.

Furthermore, Corder expanded the classification by including the linguistic levels at which these errors can occur, specifically focusing on morphology, syntax, and lexicon.

Keshavarz (2012), on the other hand, approached error classification from a communicative perspective, distinguishing between:

<b>1. Local Errors: These are errors that significantly hinder communication and </b>

affect the overall organization of the sentence. Examples include incorrect word order, omitted words, and erroneous or misplaced sentence connectors.

<b>2. Global Errors: These are errors that affect individual elements within a </b>

sentence but do not generally hinder communication. However, they can still interfere with the clarity of communication and disrupt the intended meaning of utterances. Examples of global errors include mistakes in noun and verb inflections, articles, and auxiliary verbs.

Lee (2009, p.50) took a linguistic viewpoint in categorizing errors into four

<b>3. Phonologically Induced Errors: Mistakes arising from incorrect </b>

pronunciation or stress patterns.

<b>4. Lexical Errors: Errors involving the incorrect use of vocabulary. </b>

Each of these scholars provides a unique framework for understanding and categorizing errors in language learning, offering valuable perspectives for educators and linguists in diagnosing and addressing the challenges faced by language learners.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 20</span><div class="page_container" data-page="20">

<b>Table 1.1. Types of errors classified by Lee (2009) </b>

<b>Grammatical errors </b> Stress the need for grammatical accuracy in both speech and writing, may hinder communication but errors at the sentence level “often reflect performance mistakes” for which immediate teacher correction is not necessarily appropriate.

<b>Discourse errors </b> Depend on the observance of the rules of speaking and writing; reflect learners’ cultural and pragmatic knowledge of language use.

<b>Phonologically induced errors </b> Be manifested in wrong pronunciation and/or intonation; in the case of English studies as a foreign language, such errors necessitate timely correction on the part of the teacher because vowel length, voiced and voiceless last consonants, word stress, etc. May have meaning - differentiating function.

<b>Lexical errors </b> Belong to the other linguistic levels; may also hamper communication and intelligibility.

Sharing the same opinion, James (2013) emphasized that in the process of learning a foreign language, errors occurred unavoidably at different levels, such as: substantial, text, lexical, discourse and grammatical errors.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 21</span><div class="page_container" data-page="21">

<b>1. 2. Error analysis </b>

The field of error analysis was established in the 1970s by Corder and colleagues. Although there are many different definitions of error analysis depending on the researchers’ study aims, it can’t be denied that error analysis is one of the most influential theories of second language acquisition.

According to Corder (1967), learners’ errors are important in and of themselves because errors are indispensable for learners themselves, so the process of making errors can be regarded as a device the learners use to learn. James (2013) emphasized, “error analysis is concerned with the analysis of the errors committed by L2 learners by comparing the learners’ acquired norms with the target language norms and explaining the identified errors”. Similarly, Crystal (1999, p.108) stated, “error analysis in language teaching and learning is the study of the unacceptable forms produced by someone learning a language, especially a foreign language” (As cited inAl-Khasawneh, 2014).

According to James (2013, p.62), “error analysis refers to the study of linguistic ignorance, the investigation of what people do not know and how they attempt to cope with their ignorance”. Brown (2007) gave a definition: “Error analysis is the process to observe, analyze, and classify the deviations of the rules of the second languages and then to reveal the systems operated by learner".

<i><b>1.2.1. Making errors in writing </b></i>

Before students can produce a good piece of writing, they often make errors in grammar (Harmer, 2007; Sermsook, Liamnimit, & Pochakorn, 2017; Fitrawati, & Safitri, 2021, Siregar, Batubara, & Manisha, 2023), mechanics (Krashen, 1981), word choice and content. According to Corder (1967), learners’ errors are important in and of themselves because errors are indispensable for learners themselves, so the process of making errors can be regarded as a device the learners use to learn.

Selinker (1972) put a heavy emphasis on the role of error analysis by when regarding errors as “red flags” providing evidence of the learner’s knowledge of the

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 22</span><div class="page_container" data-page="22">

second language”. Safitri (2019) stated that error analysis can thus provide a strong support to remedial teaching. He also affirmed that it could reveal both success and failure of the teaching program. Thus, it can be seen that error analysis provides insights into the nature of language and to the process of language teaching and learning. The results of error analysis may draw conclusions about how a second or foreign language can be more effectively taught and learnt or how current teaching methods can be improved (Akhter, 2011).

Kushniruk (2021) stated that the study of errors in order to identify strategies which learners use in target language, identify the causes of learners’ errors, and obtain information on common difficulties in language teaching. According to Corder (1974), error analysis serves three main following purposes: (1) to find out the level of language proficiency the learners have reached; (2) to obtain information about common difficulties in language learning, and (3) to find out how people learn language.

Corder (1967) also confirmed, “The investigation of errors can be diagnostic and prognostic. It is diagnostic because it can tell us the learner’s state of the language at a given point during the learning process. It is prognostic because it can tell course organizers to reorient language learning materials on the basis of the learners’ current problems”.

<i><b>1.2.2. Causes of errors </b></i>

Causes of errors can be classified into three types, that is, carelessness, first language interference, and translation (Pinter, 2006; Attia, 2023, Nazir Syamaun & Erdiana, 2018). Those causes are discussed briefly as follows.

<i>- Carelessness: It is often closely related to lack of motivation. Many language </i>

teachers admit that it is not always the student’s fault if he loses interest, perhaps the materials and/or style of presentation do not suit him/her.

<i><b>- First language: According to Norris (1987, p.21-26), learning a language (a </b></i>

mother tongue or a foreign language) is a matter of habit formation. When someone

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 23</span><div class="page_container" data-page="23">

tries to learn new habits, the old ones will interfere with the new ones. This cause of error is called first language interference.

<i>- Translation: This happens when a student tries to translate his/her first </i>

language sentence or idiomatic expression into the target language and vice versa. This is probably the most common cause of error.

Another expert who discusses the causes of error is Richards (1974). He classifies causes of errors into the following points:

<i><b> - Interference: An error resulting from the transfer of grammatical and/or </b></i>

stylistic elements from the source language to the target language.

<i><b>- Overgeneralization: An error caused by extension of target language rules to </b></i>

areas where they do not apply.

<i><b>- Performance error: Unsystematic error that occurs as the result of such thing </b></i>

as memory lapses, fatigue, confusion, or strong emotion.

<i><b>- Markers of transitional competence: An error that results from a natural and </b></i>

perhaps inevitable development sequence in the second language learning process (by analogy with first language acquisition).

<i><b>- Strategy of communication and assimilation: An error resulting from the </b></i>

attempt to communicate in the target language without having completely acquired grammatical forms necessary to do so.

<i><b>- Teacher-induced error: An error resulting from pedagogical procedures </b></i>

contained in the text or employed by the teacher.

<b>1.3. Grammatical error analysis </b>

<i><b>Definition of grammatical error analysis </b></i>

Grammar can be defined as a set of shared assumptions about how language works (Ari Nugrahaeni, 2012). Knowing about how grammar works means understanding more about how grammar is used and misused (Yulianti (2007, As cited in Rachmawati, 2019). Therefore, it is common for language learners to make grammar

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 24</span><div class="page_container" data-page="24">

errors (Wornyo, 2016; Sari, Putrawan, & Deviyanti, 2021). Dulay (1982) categorized grammatical errors into six (6) groups as follows:

<b>Table 1.2. Types of grammatical errors categorized by Dulay (1982) Types of grammatical errors Description and examples Omitting grammatical morphemes </b> - Items that do not contribute much to

the meaning of the sentences. For

<i>example: She bought car. </i>

<b>Double marking </b> - A semantic feature (e.g. past tense) that only one marker is required. For

<i>example: He didn’t came back. </i>

<b>Regularizing rules </b> - For example: “womans” for “women”

<b>Using arch forms </b> - One form in place of several - such as the use of “her” for both “she” and

<i>“her”. For example: I saw her </i>

<i>yesterday. Her talked to my brother. </i>

<b>Using two or more forms in random </b> - Alternation even though the language requires the use of each only under certain conditions, as in the random use of “he” and “she” regardless of the gender, person, or interest.

<b>Misordering items in constructions </b> - It requires a reversal of word-order rules that previously required, as in:

<i>what you are doing?, or misplacing </i>

items that may be correctly placed in more than one place in the sentence,

<i>such as: They are all the time late. </i>

Other ways of classifying grammatical were mentioned in Chaney’s analysis of leaner errors (1999) as below:

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 25</span><div class="page_container" data-page="25">

<b>Table 1.3. Chaney’s analysis of leaners’ errors (1999) </b>

<b>Verb errors </b> All errors in verb tense or form including relevant subject-verb agreement errors.

<b>Noun ending errors </b> Plural or possessive ending incorrect, omitted, or unnecessary including relevant subject-verb agreement errors.

<b>Article errors </b> Article or another determiner incorrect, omitted, or unnecessary.

<b>Wrong word </b> All specific lexical errors in word choice or word form including preposition and pronoun errors. Spelling errors are only included if the (apparent) misspelling is resulted in an actual English word.

<b>Sentence structure </b> Errors in sentence/clause boundaries (run-on, fragments, comma splices), word order, omitted words, or phrases, other unidiomatic sentence construction.

Sharing the same opinion, James (2013) emphasized that in the process of learning a foreign language, errors occurred unavoidably at different levels, such as: substantial,

<i>text, lexical, discourse and grammatical errors: </i>

<i>- Substance errors: “substance errors are those errors that occur at the level of </i>

spelling such as those of punctuation and mis- selection of letters and at the level of

<i>pronunciation”. </i>

<i><b>- Text errors: arise from ignorance and misapplication of the lexico- </b></i>

grammatical rules of the language including how these rules are exploited to achieve texture. This means that text errors are shown in the relations that occur between the

<i>structures of a language. </i>

<i><b>- Lexical errors: are those errors which operate at the level of words. Seven </b></i>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 26</span><div class="page_container" data-page="26">

things to know about a word are: (1) Its morpho-phonology; that is, its spelling and pronunciation; (2) Its syntactic behavior; (3) Its functional and situational restrictions which means that the use of words depends upon the situation and the function needed to be achieved; (4) Its semantic value. For example, we do not say “he broke my foot”, instead, we say “he broke my leg”; (5) Its secondary meaning; that is to say, every word can have more than one meaning; (6) Word association, that is, how words are associated or connected sensibly to make meaningful sentences and (7) The last thing to know about a word is how likely it is to be used. In other words, learners

<i>need to master the use of different words in language. </i>

<i><b>- Discourse errors: discourse errors are those errors concerning the coherence </b></i>

of the text and they are differentiated from text errors in that this latter is concerned with the meaning of text, however the former is concerned with the interpretation of

<i>the text”. </i>

<i><b>- Grammatical errors: they are those which occur at the level of grammar. </b></i>

Hence, the current research is limited and concerned only with grammatical errors which are divided into two categories: morphological and syntactic.

<b>1.4. Steps in conducting a grammatical error analysis </b>

It is crucial to point out that the process of grammatical analysis is not only about identifying and detecting errors but actually trying to explain why they are made

<i>(Perveen & Akram, 2014). When conducting a grammatical error analysis, there are </i>

some steps to follow based on the theory of Ellis & Barkhuizen (2005, p.57) (As cited in Ari Nugrahaeni, 2012) such as: identification of errors, description, and

<b>explanation of errors. </b>

<b>* Identification of errors: In this step, the researcher identified the existing </b>

errors by making a comparison between the correct forms of sentences with the sentences produced by the learners. In this sense, this step involves a contrastive analysis procedure as it deals with comparing between utterances to indicate the similarities and differences between them. In this regard, Corder (1971, p.166) distinguishes between overt and covert errors. Overt errors are those errors which are

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 27</span><div class="page_container" data-page="27">

grammatically incorrect, however, they can be interpreted easily by the learners. While covert errors are those errors that are well-formed at the sentence level but can

<b>not be interpreted by the learners. </b>

<b>* Description of errors: According to James (2013, p. 104-106), there are two </b>

main taxonomies or what he refers to system of categories: a linguistic taxonomy and surface structure taxonomy.

In terms of linguistic taxonomy, the learner needs to indicate at which level the error occurred. That is, at the level of grammar, lexis, discourse, or other levels. And then, if the error, for instance, occurs at the level of grammar, the grammatical structures need to be categorized into categories such as verb phrases, adjectives, and many others. These categories can be further sub- categorized into other categories including verb tense, the use of modals and other aspects (James 2013, p.105).

In terms of surface structure taxonomy, the ways surface structures are constructed based on the theory of Dulay et al. (1982) suggesting four principal ways

<i>in which learners modify the target forms: omission errors - errors caused by the absence of an item that must appear in a well-formed utterance; addition errors - the occurrence of unnecessary elements in the learners’ utterances; misformation errors - the use of the wrong form of a structure or morpheme; misordering errors - the use </i>

of wrong order of words in sentences.

In this study, the researcher specified the differences between the forms produced by the learner and the correct forms, that means linguistic taxonomy was best used. Because the errors analyzed here occurred at the level of grammar, therefore, the researcher made an attempt to categorize them into verbs, articles,

<b>prepositions, pronouns, plurality, word order, and subject-verb agreement. </b>

<b>* Explanation of errors: Explanation of errors means determining the sources </b>

behind the occurrence of the errors. That is to say, after identifying and describing the errors, the researcher tried to classify them into each type of intralingual source.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 28</span><div class="page_container" data-page="28">

<b>1. 5. Characteristics of young learners </b>

Harmer (2001, 2007) pointed out some following noteworthy characteristics of young language learners such as the need for being exposed, curiosity, finding abstract concepts such as grammatical rules hard to understand. According to Pinter (2006, p.2), the ways young learners learn a language is much different from adult ones.

1. Children need a lot of good exposure if they are to acquire a language. Although learning for one or two hours a week is not sufficient for their successful language acquisition, it may give them a taste of the new language and make them feel positive about the language other than their own.

2. Children take in information from everything around them, not just what is being taught. They learn from things they see, hear, touch, and interact with. This is just as important as formal explanations.

3. Children are usually curious about things around them and like learning.

4. Children often find abstract concepts such as grammatical rules hard to understand.

5. Many children are happy to talk about themselves, and like learning experiences which involve and relate to their own lives.

6. Children are pleased to have the teacher’s approval.

7. Children often find it difficult to concentrate on the same thing for a long time. According to Pinter (2006, p.2), the ways young learners learn a language is much different from adult ones. This distinct difference can be seen in Table 1.4 below.

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 29</span><div class="page_container" data-page="29">

<b>Table 1.4: Characteristics of young and adult language learners </b>

They have a holistic approach to language. They understand meaningful messages but cannot analyze the language yet.

- They are well-established at school and comfortable with school routines.

- They begin to take an interest in language as an abstract system. They have lower levels of awareness

about themselves and about the process of learning.

They have a growing level of awareness as children and as learners.

They have limited reading and writing skills in their first language.

They are developing readers and writers.

They have a limited knowledge about the world.

They have a growing awareness of the world around them. They also have a growing awareness of others and their

Many researchers in the world such as Huang (2001) investigating the nature and distribution of different kinds of grammatical errors made by 46 English majors of a Taiwanese university. A total of 1700 errors were found and categorized into 13 error types. The top six common errors were: (1) verb; (2) noun; (3) spelling; (4) article; (5) preposition, and (6) word choice.

Song, Dajin. & Kim, Tae-Eun (2016) analyzed grammatical errors in English writing of elementary students and to compare the aspects of grammatical errors of students amongst three different groups to explore effective ways of teaching grammar and writing. The grammatical errors were classified into four categories of

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 30</span><div class="page_container" data-page="30">

addition, omission, substitution, and word order. Within each category, the errors were again classified into ten sub-items which include verbs, articles, nouns, pronouns, adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, punctuation, and capital/small letters. The number of errors and its proportion from certain sub-items were calculated to identify the frequent grammatical errors. The results of the study suggested that the most frequent grammatical errors were verb errors, which were mainly the third person singular verb errors, errors of tense, overgenerated be-verb errors. The next frequent type of error was the omission of articles. Errors of punctuation and classification of capital and small letters also appeared frequently.

Alka, Dzulfikri, & Khusna (2023) identified different types of grammatical errors made by primary school students since some previous studies only conducted the same research with high school students as the participants. This study used a descriptive qualitative research design. The participants were 40 fourth-grade students from SD Muslim Cendekia Batu. Students' writing products were used as the instrument. The data were analyzed, identified, and classified based on Dulay’s (1982) surface strategy taxonomy. The data shows that the students made 79

<i>grammatical errors, with errors of omission accounting for 25 items (31.6%), 21 (26.5%) errors in addition, 26 errors (32.7%) in misformation, and 7 (9.2%) errors in misordering. The findings reveal that students lack grammar mastery; therefore, </i>

they frequently create their own rules in writing a text.

In Vietnam, study on grammatical errors in writing was carried out by a variety of researchers. Nguyen (2011) conducted a research study on analyzing errors made by students at Phu Cat 3 High School in Binh Dinh province in English written paragraphs. By taking 240 tenth graders’ writing into consideration, the author concluded that many errors in the students’ writing were due to morphological errors and syntactic errors. Tran (2015) carried out a study on common grammatical errors in paragraph writing committed by first year English major students at School of Foreign Languages - Thai Nguyen University (SFL-TNU) and the causes of these errors. After collecting 50 paragraphs and analyzing the result of students’ free

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 31</span><div class="page_container" data-page="31">

writing by means of both qualitative and quantitative methods, she realized that the participants made a total of 296 common errors which were classified into 7 groups including 17 types of errors. The research results showed that first year English major students at SFL- TNU often made errors in sentence structure, verb usage, preposition usage and singular/plural nouns. Thai, Vuong, and Phu (2017) conducted research on common mistakes in paragraph writing of the first-year English-majored students at Can Tho university in the academic year 2013-2014. The data for the study was collected from 60 written products on the topic “Your new life in Can Tho University” with the word length of 120 words and the in-depth interviews with three teachers of English. The research findings indicated that the number of word formation and word choice mistakes were the most frequent while the least common ones were subject-verb agreement and word order.

<b>1.7. Research gap </b>

From previous studies, most research focused on analyzing errors made by adult or teenager participants at high schools or universities. There has been little research on grammatical errors made by primary students. Therefore, research on grammatical errors that primary students often make in their writing is a study gap which needs further investigating. Thus, the researcher decides to conduct the thesis with the title: “Grammatical errors in writing made by the fourth graders at a primary school in Bien Hoa city”.

<b>1.8. Conceptual framework </b>

The main objective of this research is to find out grammatical errors made by the fourth graders at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary school and investigate common grammatical errors committed by them. Based on the research results, pedagogical implications are given for teachers of English to help learners avoid making the same grammatical errors in their writing.

To achieve these desired aims, the researcher relies on theoretical framework

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 32</span><div class="page_container" data-page="32">

of previous studies and literature review referring to errors, error analysis, grammatical error analysis, writing skills, grammar, etc. The research is conducted on the basis of Chaney’s theory (1999) of which grammatical errors are classified in terms of elements of grammar. The conceptual framework of the study is clearly illustrated in the following figure.

<b>Figure 1.1: The conceptual framework of the study by the researcher </b>

This conceptual framework is built on various fundamental elements, each playing a significant role in creating an all-encompassing understanding of the topic. It recognizes the pivotal stage of language acquisition in primary school education, particularly focusing on fourth graders. During this phase, children are in the process of not only expanding their lexicon but also dealing with the intricacies of grammatical structures, a point highlighted by Richards (2015). The research suggests that examining grammatical errors at this critical stage could shed light on the natural progression of language learning in young students.

<small>Types of Grammatical </small>

<small>Errors Verb tenses (past & present simple, pre. </small>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 33</span><div class="page_container" data-page="33">

At the core of the thesis is the differentiation between grammatical errors and mistakes. James (2013) outlines grammatical errors as systematic discrepancies stemming from a lack of knowledge about the language's grammatical rules. These errors are typically regular and signal the need for more directed educational support. Conversely, grammatical mistakes, as Harmer (2015) explains, are execution errors that happen even though the learner understands the correct grammatical rule. These types of mistakes are usually correctable by the learners themselves and do not necessarily indicate a profound misunderstanding of the language. The study investigated the form and the meaning of the errors.

The methodology for identifying and classifying grammatical errors forms a crucial part of the framework. This process involves the analysis of both written and oral language samples from fourth-grade students to detect error patterns and frequencies. This study used the mixed method to find out the grammatical errors made by the fourth graders in two classes (4/1 and 4/4) in their English learning. The qualitative approach analyzed the errors, the qualitative approach indicated the primary students, improvements. Grounded in language acquisition and error analysis theories, this analysis considers several factors, including the influence of the first language, the educational environment's role, and the cognitive development of children at this age, as discussed by Dulay et al. (1982).

Moreover, the thesis delves into the pedagogical implications of these findings. It aims to discern how the results can guide more effective teaching strategies to address the common grammatical challenges encountered by fourth graders. This involves scrutinizing the utility of corrective feedback, the efficacy of diverse teaching methods, and the influence of external factors such as motivation and exposure to the target language.

<b>1.9. Chapter summary </b>

This chapter has discussed the related literature including the concepts of and previous studies, which shed light on the content of the next chapters. The chapter mentions related theoretical review such as, overview of errors and error analysis;

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 34</span><div class="page_container" data-page="34">

issues concerning grammar including its definition, types of grammar, grammatical competence and its role in writing; writing skills and characteristics of young learners, etc. Following that, a summary of previous studies regarding error analysis in the context of oversea countries as well as in the context of Vietnam was presented as well. The research methodology will be mentioned in the next chapter.

<b> </b>

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 35</span><div class="page_container" data-page="35">

<b> CHAPTER 2 </b>

<b>METHODOLOGY </b>

<b>2. 1. Research design </b>

The study is carried out in the theory of Chaney (1999) because according to his classification, grammatical errors were classified in terms of elements of grammar, which proved to be easier and feasible to apply in collecting and analyzing grammatical errors of primary students. Besides, due to the main aims and objectives of the study, description, statistics, analysis are also regarded as supporting methods. Classifying the errors by conceptual categories to find out which types of grammatical errors in writing are made by the participants of the study. Then, the statistical and descriptive methods are used to investigate the most common grammatical writing errors, thereby the research can propose some corresponding pedagogical recommendations for both learners and teachers.

According to Kothari (2004), “there are two basic approaches in research which are quantitative and qualitative approach. Quantitative approach was used for the phenomena which could be delivered and explained in quantity”.

Seliger, Shohamy and Shohamy (1989) said that it involved a collection of techniques which were used to specify or describe naturally occurring phenomena without experimental manipulation. Qualitative study contains an intensive and comprehensive description and analysis of an entity, phenomenon, or a social unit”.

For this study, the researcher used the mixed method which includes both qualitative and quantitative to analyze the students’ common grammatical errors in writing to find out the causes of errors and to measure their improvement of errors. The mixed method by the writings of 60 fourth graders from 2 classes were chosen accidentally to be investigated and analyzed by descriptive and referential statistic analysis method. The common grammatical errors are the outcomes obtained from the students’ writings. The number of errors committed is taken into careful

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 36</span><div class="page_container" data-page="36">

consideration.

In analyzing the data, the researcher undertakes some steps as suggested by Corder (1973: 43). As mentioned before, the data is taken from students’ writing. Thus, the first step done in this research is collecting the students’ writing. After that, the errors are identified, counted, and categorized by the researcher. For the next step, the data is reconstructed, and the feedback is given to the students to raise their awareness of grammar in their writing.

In other words, the research method of analysis applied in the study consists of five main steps, namely collecting the errors, identifying errors, classifying errors, explaining errors, and evaluating their frequency. The flexibility of a qualitative study is important because the aim of this qualitative research was to sample individuals with rich and varied insights into teaching foreign language grammar to students at primary schools.

This study investigates the case study in Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary School, using the mixed method quantitative approach (both quantitative and qualitative). Case study is employed as a research methodology because it is suitable to investigate a particular phenomenon in a real-world setting (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2018). It is a case study with an embeded single-case design, including teachers and students as the two units of analysis. The study focuses on errors made by students of grade 4 in the progressive tests in terms of nouns, verb tenses and wrong words, and their improvement of errors through the error analysis for research question 1 and through the t-test to anwer research question 2.

<b>2. 2. Research site </b>

Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary school was founded more than 60 years ago. It is located at number 66, Nguyen Van Tri Street, Hoa Binh Ward, Bien Hoa City, Dong Nai. Currently, there are about 120 students of grade 4 (N=120) and 3 teachers of English teaching. All the English teachers here are experienced, and hold required certificates from the Ministry of Education. The students in grade 4 are distributed equally in class 4/1 (31 students), 4/2 (30 students), 4/3 (30 students), 4/4 (29 students). Learners

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 37</span><div class="page_container" data-page="37">

<i>in these classes learn the coursebook “Global Success” in the educational program </i>

2018 designed by the Ministry. Every week, these students learn 4 English periods with Vietnamese teachers. They often have English lessons with Vietnamese teachers to improve reading, writing and grammar proficiency and with English teachers to practice listening and speaking.

The themes and situations throughout the books are popular to children nationwide. Students are regularly presented with new vocabulary and structures so that they have adequate and necessary language to communicate. Major grammatical points and writing topics are taught in these six units include the following issues.

<b>2.3. Participants </b>

The participants of this study were 60 fourth-grade students in Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary School. The students were not randomly assigned; instead, the classes are pre-determined due to the practical constraints in the academic setting. The participants were from two classes: 4/1 and 4/4. A sample of 60 students for the control group (29 males and 31 females) were selected purposively to achieve the aim of the study. The students were taught English grammar in their regular English classes.

<b>2. 4. Samples and sampling procedures </b>

The study was carried out during the first term of the academic year 2023-2024 at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary school by analyzing common writing grammatical errors made by students in grade 4. There are 120 primary fourth -grade students. The participants of this study consisted of 60 students with good, fair, and low grammar proficiency who are chosen conveniently from 2 classes 4/1 and 4/4. The main reason for choosing the fourth graders is that at the age of 9 after the time of exposure to English learning compared to other graders, these students have sufficient vocabulary and grammar knowledge to expand the writing topic in short paragraph. In addition, the researcher decided to choose class 4/1 and 4/4 because the number of the students in these two classes are almost identical (There are 31 students in class 4/1 whereas class 4/3 has 29 students). All the students learnt English for one year when they were

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 38</span><div class="page_container" data-page="38">

at grade 3. Besides, both follow the same intensive program using the same coursebook and duration of learning time. Finally, these two classes were taught by the researcher, which data collection was feasible and advantageous.

<b>2. 5. Materials and research instruments </b>

Instruments played an important role in research because they could have a strong impact on the data collected. To obtain adequate data for the study, the researcher would like to collect a variety of data collection through the results of pre- test and post-test. The pretest and posttest were used since both tests measure students’ English grammar before and after the intervention. They consisted of writing tasks to assess students’ proficiency in using grammar in various contexts.

As stipulated by the Ministry of Education for the teaching of English to the

<i>primary students, the coursebook “Global Success” was used. Based on the </i>

curriculum of this coursebook for the first semester in the school year 2023-2024 which comprises 6 units, the data were collected from the tests which consist of different tasks including grammatical exercises and writing topics such as below.

<i>- Topic 1: Write about your plans for the weekend/Write about your plans for next summer vacation </i>

<i>- Topic 2: Write about your favorite food/Write about your eating habits - Topic 3: Write about your last trip/Write about your last summer vacation </i>

Both the pretest and posttest are recognition tasks in which the students chose the right words or phrases, and reproduction tasks in which the s students were asked to write a short paragraph.

<b>2. 6. Data collection procedures </b>

The method that was used to collect the data in this study is document analysis. It was used to answer research questions. Document analysis is a systematic procedure for reviewing or evaluating documents. A document is something that we can read, and which is related to some aspects of the social world. A document analysis requires the data to be examined and interpreted to obtain meaning, gain understanding, and

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 39</span><div class="page_container" data-page="39">

develop empirical knowledge.

The data collection was conducted for 12 weeks from November 2023 to January 2004 in the academic school year 2023-2024. Before the intervention, the students took the pretest in writing to establish their baseline English grammatical competence. The pretest helped the students identify the grammatical errors. Then, the students received explicit grammar instruction for a specified period, After the intervention, the posttest is administered to the students. The posttest asked the students to recognize the errors in the parts of choosing the right words, and then the students were asked to write a short paragraph of their own to see whether they made any improvement. After that, the researcher used and analyzed written instruments which were the writing of students selected by the teachers. By analyzing the students’ writing, the researcher took notice of grammatical errors made by them. After analyzing the tests, the researcher drew some conclusions regarding the problem.

<b>2. 6. Data analysis procedures </b>

The data from the pre-test and post-test were analyzed using statistical methods to determine whether there were significant differences in the English grammar for the students. By following this methodology, the study aimed to provide a rigorous examination of the impacts of teaching grammar on fourth graders’ general English grammar. To show clearly how the project was implemented, which consisted of two methods of research: the qualitative approach (content analysis of grammar errors) and quantitative approach (pre-tests and post-test).

The available data in this research were illustrated in numbers which were found from counted errors in the students’ writing. They were analyzed by using statistical and descriptive analysis methods. It means that the researcher gave a deep explanation of what types of grammatical error that students made when they delivered the writing. In analyzing the data, an error analysis method was employed. The researcher tried to use the theory of Corder (1973) which suggested the following steps to conduct error analysis research as below:

</div><span class="text_page_counter">Trang 40</span><div class="page_container" data-page="40">

<b>Table 2.1. Steps of conducting grammatical error analysis by Corder (1973) </b>

1. Collection of samples of learner language

Deciding what samples of learner language to use for the analysis and how to collect these samples.

2. Identification of errors Identifying the errors by underlying the errors the learner made.

3. Classification of errors Grouping the errors that have been found and stating the classes of the errors.

4. Explanation of errors Explaining the errors by establishing the source of the errors and calculating how often the errors appear.

5. Evaluation of errors Evaluating the errors step involves making tables of the errors and drawing conclusion.

The Paired Samples t-test was used to find out how much fourth-grade students could improve their grammar.

<i><b>2.6.1. Errors analysis </b></i>

The researcher adapted Chaney’s classification of grammatical errors, thus in this step, students’ writings were marked and given feedback by the teachers at Nguyen Khac Hieu Primary School shown based on the grammatical points such as verb tenses, verb forms, word order, subject-verb agreement, article, plural & singular nouns, and pronouns. After having identified the errors, the researcher classified them into the following main categories, such as: errors related to verb tense, plurality, article, prepositions, and possessive pronouns.

Once the errors were calculated and arranged, the results of the analysis were presented in the form of a table with an aim to reveal the identification of the

</div>