Chapter 4

ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter discusses the findings of the study with regards to the

general objective which is to determine the common English grammatical errors

of the respondents, as well as the specific research questions.

1. The Common Grammatical Errors Found in Students’ written

compositions

After two grammarians had performed the error analysis on a total of 75

written compositions made by the respondents, the researchers were able to

classify the respondents’ errors into sixteen, namely punctuation, indention,

capitalization, conjunction, verb agreement, prepositions, fragments, articles,

word order, spacing, pronouns, run-ons, verb tense, singular-plural form, and

demonstratives (Table 1). These identified errors are similar to the ones found by

the autors of the related studies presented in the second chapter (Hamzah, 2012;

Alinsunod, 2014; Iamsiu, 2014; Presada and Badela, 2014; Phuket, 2015; Jamil,

2016; and Pardede, 2019).

Table 1. Grammar errors identified upon error analysis.

Ranking Grammar Error Frequency Percentage
1 Punctuation 58 77.3%
2 Indention 55 73.3%
3 Capitalization 52 69.3%
4 Conjunction 49 65.3%
5 Verb agreement 48 64%
6 Prepositions 45 60%
7 Fragment 45 60%
8 Articles 45 60%
9 Word Order 42 56%
10 Spacing 38 50.6%
11 Pronouns 36 48%
12 Run-on 34 45.3%

23
 13 Verb Tense 33 44%
14 Singular-Plural-Form 28 37.3%
15 Demonstrative 22 29.3%
16 Spelling 16 21.3%

Following are some examples and explanations for five of the identified

errors. These five represent the top two (punctuation and indention), the middle

(articles), and the bottom two (demonstratives and spellings).

A. Punctuation

As seen in the previous table, 58 respondents committed some errors on

punctuation, making such an error as the top among the 16 identified errors. This

equates to 77% of the 75 respondents. Respondents who committed this error

were not able to point the appropriate punctuation marks such as periods and

commas, among others. Two other studies that were able to identify punctuation

errors were that of Alinsunod (2014) among MET students at the Technological

University of the Philippines, and that of Presada and Badela (2014) among

students in Romania. Although in their respective studies, punctuation did not top

the identified errors, their results still prove that many ESL learners find it difficult

to master the rules on punctuation.

B. Indention

Indention ranked second among the identified errors, with a total of 55

respondents committing such an error (73.3%). This is something that

distinguishes the current study from the other mentioned ones since, indention

has not been identified as a common grammatical error in all of them. A possible

explanation for this is that indention might have been considered by the previous

24
researchers as a technical element of writing, and not as a standard rule of the

English grammar.

C. Articles

Ranked in the middle of all the identified errors in this study is that on

articles, having a total commitment of 45 (60%) among all the respondents.

Hamzah (2012). Alinsunod, (2014), Presada and Badela (2014), Phuket (2015)

and Pardede (2019) had also been able to find some grammatical errors

concerning articles in their respective studies across different countries. Some of

these researchers attributed this error to the interlingual interference in their

respective respondents’ mother tongue and the English language, both citing that

the lack of articles in the respondents’ mother tongue possible resulted to the

misuse and even omission of the articles in the written compositions of their

respondents (Presada and Badela, 2014; Phuket, 2015). The researchers

believe that such is also the possible explanation on the identified grammatical

error on articles among this study’s respondents. That is, no corresponding

articles exist in the Filipino language, thereby causing a negative transfer

between the respondents’ mother tongue and the target language.

D. Demonstrative

Demonstratives ranked as the second lowest among the 16 identified

errors, with a total of 22 commitments (29.3%) among all the 75 respondents.

These demonstratives are considered as either pronouns or adjectives

depending on their usage and function on sentences. Among the mentioned

related studies, that of Hamzah (2012), Iamsiu (2014), Phuket (2015) and

25
Pardede (2019) had also been able to detect grammatical errors on the usage of

either pronouns or adjectives. Both such errors involving demonstrative pronouns

and adjectives can be explained by the incongruence between the grammatical

rules of the respondents’ mother tongue and the English language.

E. Spelling

Spelling ranked last among the identified grammatical errors, with a total

of 16 commitments out of 75 respondents (21.3%). Four among the mentioned

related studies (Hamzah, 2012; Alinsunod, 2014; Phuket, 2015; Jamil, 2016; and

Pardede, 2019) had also found this grammatical error. Hamzah (2012) had

explained that some reasons for such a grammatical error might be the

irregularity in selling of words in the English language, and the basis of such

misspellings to the pronunciation of the English words. This may also be a

possible explanation for this study’s results since in the Filipino language, no

such irregularities in the spelling of words exist. That is, a Filipino word is always

written as it is pronounced.

2. Contributory Factors to the Students’ English Writtten Composition

Grammatical Errors

The group of students were also asked to rate the contributing factors

found in Table 2. After an analysis to compute for their weighted means, it was

found that all of such factors, were averagely rated as only sometimes observed

with measures ranging from 2.64 to 3.19. Following the table are explanations for

two of these factors.

26
Table 2. The Contributing Factors

Contributing Factors W.M. Interpretation

1. The teaching methods in writing 3.19 Sometimes observed
2. The Textbook 2.84 Sometimes observed
3. Lack of Writing Activities and 2.79 Sometimes observed
Homeworks
4. The Incomprehensibility in 2.95 Sometimes observed
Grammar Rules
5. The Incomprehensibility in 2.88 Sometimes observed
Mechanics in Writing
6. Mother-Tongue Interference 2.64 Sometimes observed
7. Lack of Motivation 2.69 Sometimes observed
8. Lack of Vocabulary 2.91 Sometimes observed
Grand Mean: 2.86

A. The Teaching Methods in Writing

Although of the contributing factors were generally rated as only

sometimes observable, the one that was rated as highest by the respondents

was the teaching methods used in writing, with an average weighted mean of

3.19. This espouses the need to use teaching strategies that could better help

the students to master the needed skills so that they may be enabled to compose

more effective written outputs. Error analysis is an effective teaching strategy that

can be used to detect the grammar skills with which students are lacking.

Appropriate instructional strategies can consequently be decided to hone such

skills.

B. Lack of Vocabulary

Lack of vocabulary is another of the factors that had been rated by the

students and it had an average rating of 2.9, which entails it to be sometimes

observable. This may be interpreted as a dire need that hinders the masterful

English writing skills of students. A way for teachers to help students overcome

27
this challenge is to include unfamiliar words in their lessons and use them in

context so that students may be able to understand their meanings. They may

also instruct students to construct their own sentences using such unfamiliar

words. As for the students, no strategy is more effective than independent

reading if they want to improve their vocabularies.

3. Correlation of Grammatical Errors and their Contributory Factors

It was hypothesized that the grammatical errors and the factors

contributing to their grammatical errors of the respondents would correlate

significantly. Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient r was calculated to

determine the relationship between the respondent’s grammatical errors (mean

value= 40.38, SD=11.72) and factors contributing to grammatical errors (mean

value= 2.88), SD=0.22). The correlation was significantly found at 0.0505 p=

0.046, and shows a moderate relationship between two (2) variables (Table 3).

Table 3. The Correlation of Grammatical Errors and Contributing Factors

Variable Grammar Errors in writing compositions

Factors contributing to their 0.0505
Grammatical error
N 75
Note: N=sample size, *p<.05, **p<.01

It implies that when the larger the contributing factors are found, the more

the grammatical errors will be associated with. That is why the correlation

between the grammatical errors and its contributing factors falls at 0.505 p=0.046

which is according to the degree of correlation, if the value lies at 0.50, it will be

considered in the direction and strength of correlation as moderately observed.

28
 The table demonstrate that there is a significant relationship between

grammatical errors and their contributing factors. The higher the result of often

and always observed of the contributing factors, the more a student cannot

produce a good result of writing compositions. The result was that most students

had a high percentage of errors committed, and some contributing factors have

always had an impact on them.

4. Webinar on Dealing with the Common Grammar Errors and The Steps of

Learning to English Fluency

Upon the researchers’ reflection of the error analysis and survey results,

they decided to conduct a webinar and the topics were decided based on the

said results. During the subject implementation of the Community Extension

Services (CES), the researchers conducted a Webinar giving emphasis to the

common grammatical errors and how to effectively write sentences and

paragraphs. Videos were presented to the participants, who were composed of

10 students who had committed the highest number of errors in their written

compositions. Such videos were those created by the following creators on

YouTube: Lisa Mojsin, Papa teach me, learn English with Adam, and Mr. P. Ten.

The webinar was conducted last October 28-30, 2020, regularly lasting

from at 1:00 to 4:00 in the afternoon. Its main objectives were as follows: a)

engage in worthwhile work to support other students; b) help them improve

communication skills; c) reinforce and further develop learned skills and

knowledge. Further, following are the topics that were presented to the

participants: a) 7 Most Common Grammar Mistakes Plus a Test; b) Naming of 10

29
Most Common Grammar Mistakes English Learners Make; c) Writing Skills: The

Paragraph; and d) Paragraph Writing: the Burger Method.

After every presentation, the participants were asked to share their

reflections and ideas. They were also administered with quizzes and activities.

The researchers believe that the participants were able to learn from the said

presentations and discussions. Following are some more videos that were used

to assess the learnings of the participants: a) Can You Get a Perfect Score on

Grammar Quiz?; b) Can You Pass This Grammar Test Quiz?; c) English Test 10

Questions- IN, ON, AN; d) English Spelling Test; and e) SVA Quiz.

Leaflets containing the alternatives to solve common grammar errors were

also handed out to the participants. These contained some techniques on

remembering the rules in grammar, entitled “Remember Basic Grammar Rules:

10 Easy Ways”. It emphasizes the idea of the grammatical rules that should be

followed by all English language learners. An example of the included topic are

the different parts of speech.

30
 NOTES

Dagneaux, E., Denness, S., Granger, S., & Meunier, F. (1996). Error
Tagging Manual Version 1.1. Louvain-la-Neuve: Centre for English
Corpus Linguistics : Université Catholique de Louvain.

University of Winnipeg. (n.d.). Countries in which English Language is a

Mandatory or an Optional Subject (interactive) | Global English Education
Policy | The University of Winnipeg. UWinnipeg. Retrieved July 23, 2021,
from https://www.uwinnipeg.ca/global-english-education/countries-in-
which-english-is-mandatory-or-optional-subject.html

Why has English become a universal language? (2021, June 18). The Language
Gallery. https://www.thelanguagegallery.com/blog/why-has-english-
become-a-universal-language

31