Error Analysis on Classroom Language Made by Pre-service Teachers of English Education Program UNP

Introduction

Language proficiency in English teachers plays a crucial role in effective second language instruction. Teacher talk constitutes a major source of linguistic input for students, making the accuracy and appropriateness of teachers' language particularly significant. Error analysis provides valuable insights into the interlanguage development and pedagogical needs of pre-service teachers, helping identify areas requiring improvement in teacher education programs.

The English Education Program at Universitas Negeri Padang (UNP) prepares future English teachers through theoretical and practical components of teacher education. While pedagogical skills typically receive intensive attention, the linguistic competencies of pre-service teachers deserve equal consideration, as their classroom language directly impacts their students' language acquisition and model of appropriate English usage.

This study focuses on analyzing errors in classroom discourse produced by pre-service teachers during their teaching practicum. By systematically examining these linguistic deviations, the research aims to provide empirical evidence for curriculum development and targeted language improvement initiatives within teacher education programs at UNP.

Literature Review

Error analysis, introduced by Corder (1967), distinguishes between errors (systematic deviations from target norms) and mistakes (asemporary performance lapses). This distinction remains relevant when evaluating teacher talk, helping differentiate underlying competence issues from isolated performance inconsistencies.

Studies on classroom discourse have demonstrated the dual function of teacher talk as both instructional tool and language model. Walsh (2011) emphasizes that teachers' language should simultaneously communicate content, manage classroom interaction, and provide examples of appropriate language use. This multidimensional role places significant linguistic demands on English teachers, particularly those working in EFL contexts.

Research on pre-service teachers' linguistic performance has identified persistent challenges across various domains. Grammatical errors in tense usage, preposition selection, and article placement frequently appear in classroom discourse, often stemming from first language interference, incomplete acquisition of complex structures, or fossilized patterns from the teachers' own learning processes (Ellis, 2008).

Methodology

This study employed a qualitative research design with error analysis as the primary framework. Data were collected through classroom observations of 28 pre-service teachers from the English Education Program at UNP during their teaching practicum at various secondary schools in West Sumatra.

All classroom sessions were audio-recorded and subjected to transcription using the Jefferson system. Error identification followed Ellis's (2008) framework, categorizing deviations according to linguistic type and apparent cause. Each potential error was verified against authoritative references including the Cambridge Grammar of English and Merriam-Webster Dictionary to confirm its status as a deviation from standard English usage.

The analysis involved three steps: detection (identifying deviations from standard English), description (categorizing these deviations according to grammatical, lexical, phonological or pragmatic categories), and explanation (identifying potential underlying causes of each error type). To enhance reliability, 20% of the data was independently analyzed by a second researcher specializing in applied linguistics, with inter-rater agreement achieving 87%.

Findings

The analysis revealed significant variations in error frequency across linguistic categories. A total of 872 errors were identified during approximately 84 classroom hours of observation. The distribution of errors across categories is presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Distribution of Error Types

Grammatical Errors

Grammatical errors comprised nearly half of identified deviations. The most frequent categories included:

• Tense problems: particularly confusion between present perfect and past simple forms (e.g., "I have taught this lesson yesterday")
• Article errors: omission or incorrect selection of indefinite/definite articles (e.g., "Open book to page 15")
• Subject-verb agreement issues: especially with third-person singular subjects (e.g., "She work hard for this exam")
• Preposition misuse: particularly with temporal and spatial relationships (e.g., "in the weekend")

Lexical Errors

Lexical errors primarily involved:

• Word choice deviations: selecting semantically inappropriate vocabulary (e.g., "explain" used instead of "describe")
• Collocation problems: using words in untypical combinations (e.g., "make homework" rather than "do homework")
• Malapropisms: substituting similar-sounding words with different meanings (e.g., "affect" for "effect")

Pronunciation Errors

Pronunciation errors featured:

• Vowel sound confusion: especially between/i:/ and //, // and/e/
• Consonant cluster simplification: particularly in word-final positions
• Word stress errors: misplacement of primary stress in multisyllabic words
• Intonation issues: inappropriate use of falling/rising patterns in questions and instructions

Potential Causes of Errors

Errors were analyzed according to their apparent causes. Table 2 presents this distribution:

Table 2: Categorization of Errors by Apparent Cause

First language interference accounted for the largest category of errors, particularly in grammatical areas where Indonesian differs significantly from English, such as articles, tense systems, and pluralization. Intralingual overgeneralization was evident in errors where pre-service teachers applied English rules to contexts where they did not apply. Fossilized patterns from earlier learning stages persisted despite advanced instruction. Performance factors, including cognitive load and anxiety, contributed to errors under particularly demanding classroom conditions.

Discussion

The prevalence of grammatical errors aligns with findings from previous studies on Indonesian English teachers' language use. The frequent confusion between present perfect and past simple tenses likely reflects both L1 interference (Indonesian lacks aspect distinctions) and pedagogical factors where these forms are often taught in isolation without contextualization.

Article errors constitute a particularly challenging area, as Indonesian language lacks a definite/indefinite article system. This fundamental difference between the languages results in persistent difficulties for Indonesian English learners, including pre-service teachers, who frequently omit articles or make inappropriate selections despite high proficiency levels.

The significant number of pronunciation errors has implications for teacher effectiveness, as comprehensible pronunciation models are crucial for student learning. The observed vowel confusion patterns align with previously documented difficulties for Indonesian speakers of English and suggest the need for continued pronunciation development in teacher education programs.

Lexical errors in classroom instructions and explanations deserve special attention as they directly impact student comprehension. The collocation problems identified suggest that vocabulary development in teacher education should emphasize not only individual words but also their typical combinations and contexts of use.

Pedagogical Implications

These findings have several important implications for English teacher education at UNP:

• Enhanced language improvement components addressing persistent error patterns, particularly in grammatical areas affecting classroom discourse
• Integration of pronunciation development with practical classroom communication skills
• Explicit attention to functional classroom language in methodology courses, including standard phrases for instruction, questioning, and classroom management
• Implementation of peer observation and feedback systems focused specifically on linguistic accuracy in classroom discourse
• Development of self-monitoring strategies to help pre-service teachers identify and correct persistent errors
• Inclusion of error analysis techniques as part of teacher reflection and evaluation

Conclusion

This error analysis of classroom language produced by pre-service teachers in the English Education Program at UNP reveals significant linguistic challenges that require attention in teacher education programs. Grammatical errors, particularly in tense usage, articles, and subject-verb agreement, constituted nearly half of identified errors. Lexical imprecision, pronunciation difficulties, and discourse organization problems also affected the quality of teacher talk.

The errors identified appear to stem from multiple sources, including first language interference, overgeneralization of target language rules, fossilized patterns from earlier learning, and performance factors during classroom teaching. These findings underscore the need for continued emphasis on language improvement throughout teacher education programs, with specific attention to aspects of English that present particular challenges for Indonesian speakers in instructional contexts.

Incorporating explicit error analysis as part of teacher reflection and professional development can help pre-service teachers develop greater awareness of their linguistic strengths and weaknesses. This awareness, combined with targeted instruction, can enhance both the linguistic accuracy and pedagogical effectiveness of future English teachers, ultimately benefiting the learners they will serve.

Future research should explore the relationship between teacher linguistic accuracy and student learning outcomes, as well as the development of linguistic proficiency during the early years of teaching practice. Such studies would further inform the design of teacher education programs that adequately prepare future English teachers for both pedagogical and linguistic dimensions of their professional role.