![](bg6.png)
better over time. Through the feedback they receive
will provide great opportunities to find their
potentials to improve their subject matter competence
and the potential to further develop themselves
through the feedforward process (Xue-mei, 2007;
Maolida, 2013).
This study clearly shows that prospective
teachers who are the subject of this study show their
deficiencies in four categories. Through the error
analysis of the four categories described above,
prospective teachers will be able to identify their
faults independently (Xie and Jiang, 2007) and be
able to improve on their own competence (Kayum,
2015) as well as a solution to the problems they face
in the future day.
4 CONCLUSION
Based on the findings and discussion of this study, the
following conclusions can be drawn. Firstly, not all
mistakes made by the prospective teacher is a
permanent mistake. Most of these are temporary
errors. They realize that they know they are wrong.
Giving prospective teachers a chance to identify all
errors including their strengths becomes crucial in
identifying and making use of the mistakes made in
order to become a lesson for not making similar
mistakes. Secondly, mistakes made by prospective
teachers must be acknowledged to always exist and is
a potential that can be used as input for mentors as
well as learning materials that can be utilized by
prospective teachers to improve the quality of
mastery of their field of study. Thirdly, systematic
efforts through feedback both from mentors and
colleagues enable prospective teachers to identify
existing weaknesses and then design programs to
address them through the utilization of their
respective potential.
Related to the findings and discussion, the
following suggestions are in need to be done. Firstly
to prospective teachers, it is necessary to improve the
practice of using English as the language of
instruction in the classroom. Secondly to mentors,
cooperating teachers, university teachers, or similar
related professions can take error analysis as a study
to enrich their learning and teaching process. Thirdly
to the school or related institution managing the
education, it may lead teachers, lecturers, instructors,
or related professions to improve their competence,
especially in the field of study. They are expected to
have the ability to detect errors, find causes of errors
made, and design follow-ups or feedforward in the
form of programs that can help prospective teachers
to find solutions to overcome the problems
experienced.
REFERENCES
Abushihab, I., 2014. An Analysis of Grammatical Errors in
Writing Made by Turkish Learners of English as a
Foreign Language. Int. J. Linguist. 6, 213–223.
https://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v6i4.6190
Alahmadi, N.S., 2014. Errors Analysis: A Case Study of
Saudi Learner’s English Grammatical Speaking Errors.
Arab World Engl. J. 15.
Darling-Hammond, L., Baratz-Snowden, J., Education,
N.A. of E.C. on T., 2005. A Good Teacher in Every
Classroom: Preparing the Highly Qualified Teachers
Our Children Deserve, A Good Teacher in Every
Classroom: Preparing the Highly Qualified Teachers
Our Children Deserve. Wiley.
Ellis, R., 1997. SLA Research and Language Teaching.
Habibullah, M.M.K., 2010. An Error Analysis on
Grammatical Structures of The Students’ Theses.
Harmer, J., 2007. How to Teach English (Second Edition).
ELT J. 62, 313–316. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn029
Hendriks, M.A., Luyten, H., Scheerens, J., Sleegers, P.,
Steen, R., 2010. Teachers’ professional development:
Europe in international comparison. Office for Official
Publications of the European Union.
https://doi.org/10.2766/63494
Kayum, M.A., 2015. Error analysis and correction in oral
communication in the efl context of Bangladesh. Int. J.
Multidiscip. Res. Dev. 5.
Khansir, A.A., 2013. Applied Linguistics and English
Language Teaching 7.
Lewis, M., 2002. Giving feedback in language classes.
SEAMEO Regional Language Centre, Singapore.
London, M., Sessa, V., 2006. Group Feedback for
Continuous Learning. Hum. Resour. Dev. Rev. 5, 303–
329. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484306290226
Maolida, E. H., 2013. Oral Corrective Feedback and
Learner Uptake in a Young Learner EFL Classroom: A
Case Study in an English Course in Bandung. A Thesis,
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.
Mustafa, F., Kirana, M., Bahri Ys, S., 2017. Errors in EFL
writing by junior high students in Indonesia. Int. J. Res.
Stud. Lang. Learn. 6, 38–52.
https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2016.1366
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., Perry, R. P., 2002. Positive
Emotions in Education. Retrieved from
https://kops.uni-
konstanz.de/bitstream/handle/123456789/13908/Pekru
n_positive_emotions.pdf?sequence=2.
Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J., 2011. Feedback: focusing
attention on engagement. Stud. High. Educ. 36, 879–
896. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.483513
Rini, S., 2014. The Error Analysis on the Students of
English Department Speaking Scripts. Regist. J. Lang.
Teach. IAIN Salatiga 7.
Sadler, D.R., 2010. Beyond feedback: developing student
capability in complex appraisal. Assess. Eval. High.
BELTIC 2018 - 1st Bandung English Language Teaching International Conference
248