Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Chris Esson
Julian Edge suggests we revise our ideas about mistakes, and call them instead learning
steps (1989:14). This revision is dependent first on our relation to students' production of
language. If in CLT teachers are not considered gate-keepers of language, but are there
instead to encourage students in their development, then our response to student errors
can only be as learning steps - opportunities for students' learning. The revision of
mistakes for learning steps also then depends on the teachers response to them. While a
language students' learning does not depend exclusively on their teacher, good teaching
will maximise opportunities for mistakes to become genuine learning experiences.
Julian Edge categorises student errors as: slips, which a student could self-correct; errors,
which the class may know the correct form of even if an individual cannot self-correct; and
attempts, which a student makes without having the necessary form for expression
2 of 4
Chris Esson
(1989:9-11). I have made this and a more specific description of the context of students'
mistakes the basis for my observation instrument as I wish to draw connections between
student errors and the correction techniques used by teachers. I have also included fields
for the method and medium of corrections.
3 of 4
Chris Esson
Bibliography
Bowen, Tim & Marks,
Inside
Teaching.
Jonathan (1994)
Oxford.
Heinemann
Englsh
Language
Teaching,
Edinburgh.
Harmer, Jeremy (2001)
Rogers, Theodore S.
(2001)
4 of 4