a) The factors that help a teacher to decide whether or not to
correct an error:
1. The teacher can ignore correcting the students’ errors when
they are irrelevant to the lesson focus or when it is not the
main aim of the lesson. Ex. Correcting grammar in a reading
lesson.
✅ Krashen’s Monitor Hypothesis (1982)
The Monitor Hypothesis suggests that language learners have two systems:
Acquired system – subconscious, intuitive language use (like native-like fluency)
Learned system – conscious knowledge of rules (e.g., grammar explanations)
The Monitor can only be used if:
1
The learner knows the rule
Page
The learner is focused on form
The learner has enough time
· Fluency comes mainly from the acquired system, not constant monitoring.
· Overusing the monitor may lead to hesitation and slower speech.
· Teachers should focus more on providing comprehensible input than overloading learners
with grammar rules.
2. When the situation has an emotional aspect so as not to
embarrass the students and harm their feelings.
Ex. T: We have a new student today. Vera, can you introduce
yourself?
S: I am coming from Moscow. I am absolutely happy to join
this class.
3. Sometimes, with high level students, the teacher needs to
encourage the students to be autonomous, to work independently,
and to encourage the self-monitoring strategies by leaving a space
for self-correction. Therefore, the teacher will leave the errors
underlined for the students to correct.
4. With low level students, when the errors are common. The teacher
should select only the mistakes that should be corrected not to over
correct the students’ mistakes that may demotivate them and affect
their confidence negatively.
1. . Nature of the error (slip vs. systematic)
Slips (momentary mistakes) may not require correction unless they interfere with communication.
Systematic errors (from incorrect understanding) often need addressing.
4. Affect and learner confidence
2
Page
If a learner is shy or easily discouraged, frequent correction may raise anxiety. The teacher may delay
correction to support a low-stress environment.
5. Focus of the lesson (form vs. meaning)
If the lesson focuses on grammar or pronunciation, correction is more justified. If the focus is on
communication or fluency, too much correction can be counterproductive.
b) Advantages of immediate Error Correction:
1. When the aim of the activity is focusing on accuracy not fluency.
2. When the Students are given controlled practice on the form of
the target language.
2. Prevents fossilisation
Correcting errors as they occur reduces the risk of errors becoming permanent. This aligns with
Selinker’s Interlanguage Theory, where uncorrected errors may fossilise.
4. Develops metalinguistic awareness
Immediate correction often uses metalanguage (e.g., 'third person -s'), helping learners understand
language systems.
5. Strengthen teacher’s role in the learning process.
Advantages of delayed Error Correction:
1. When students are trying to use the language more freely and
fluently for communication because this will allow learners to
experience uninterrupted, meaningful communication.
2. If students say something meaningful, they need to feel that what
they are saying is more important than how to say it.
3
3. When students are involved in fluency practice unless the
Page
mistakes affect their communication.
4. When the teacher should not intervene and spoil the atmosphere
of pair-work or freer conversation.
5. The correction should be delayed when the students are given a
writing activity.
6. According to the students’ learning style, as some students are
resistant and feel bad when their mistakes are corrected explicitly
on the spot.
2. Maintains fluency and communicative flow
Learners are not interrupted mid-task, which allows them to express themselves more naturally. This
supports Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), where fluency is prioritized.
3. Reduces learner anxiety (lowers affective filter)
Correction after speaking reduces the pressure to be perfect during communication, making learners
more willing to take risks. Krashen’s Affective Filter Hypothesis supports this idea.
4. Encourages meaningful communication
When learners are not focused on accuracy in real-time, they pay more attention to meaning, promoting
authentic use of language.
5. Allows for more reflective uptake
Delayed correction creates a space for learners to reflect on and consciously process feedback. This
supports Schmidt’s Noticing Hypothesis by creating clearer noticing moments post-task.
6. Enables focus on patterns of errors
The teacher can identify recurring errors and address them collectively, often using board feedback or
reformulation. This approach is common in TBL (Task-Based Learning)
7.
Great effort, mashallah.
4
Page
1. Disrupts fluency
Interrupting learners as they speak can break the flow of communication and reduce fluency. This goes
against Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), which prioritizes meaning over form. Krashen also
argues that such interruption interferes with natural language acquisition.
2. Raises anxiety
Constant correction can increase learners’ affective filters, especially for shy or introverted students.
According to Krashen’s Affective Filter Hypothesis, anxiety hinders input processing and acquisition.
3. Interferes with interlanguage development
Immediate correction may disrupt the natural development of interlanguage. Learners need space to
test hypotheses and develop internal grammar systems. This view aligns with Selinker’s Interlanguage
Theory and the principles of the Natural Approach.
4. Prioritizes accuracy over fluency
Learners may become hesitant to speak, fearing mistakes, which can hinder fluency development. This
contradicts the goals of fluency-focused approaches like CLT and Task-Based Learning (TBL).
5. Low uptake or retention
Learners might not notice or internalize corrections made mid-communication. According to Schmidt’s
Noticing Hypothesis, for learning to occur, learners must consciously notice the gap between their
output and the correct form.
5
Page
