Search

Error analysis is a technique that identifies and classifies the inappropriate forms that foreign language learners produce (Crystal, 1987), and it is considered a useful tool for helping them improve their writing skills. The study investigated the secondary students' common errors in writing English paragraphs. During the first term of the school year 2023-2024, 43 grade 7 students from a secondary school in Hanoi participated in a descriptive quantitative research project. The participants were asked to complete three writing tests at three different times to generate their written errors based on Ferris' (2014) model of error analysis. The findings indicate that the types of errors that grade 7 students made are lexical errors, syntactic errors, morphological errors, orthographical errors, and paragraph errors. Lexical, syntactic, and orthographical errors are greatly committed by the students. Accordingly, it comes to the conclusion that secondary students in general and 7th graders in particular struggle with writing English paragraphs. The results of the research would also give the secondary teachers of English some implications, such as focusing on grammatical patterns, emphasizing irregular instances, offering adequate practice opportunities, implementing explicit instructions, and engaging students in interactive exercises, visual aids, collaborative activities, authentic materials, etc. to mitigate the students' written errors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite numerous tutorials and standards written to the technical community on X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), difficulties with data acquisition, analysis, and reporting persist. This work focuses on common errors in XPS that are frequently observed in the scientific literature and their sources. Indeed, this work covers: (i) XPS data collection, initial data analysis, and data presentation, (ii) Handling XPS backgrounds, (iii) Common errors in XPS peak fitting, and (iv) XPS data presentation and reporting. Graphical examples of errors and appropriate ways of handling data and correcting errors are provided. Additional readings are listed for greater in-depth exploration of the subjects discussed.

Students from different language backgrounds may face distinct difficulties when learning English, particularly in learning complex language structures such as questions. Therefore, identifying differences between learner groups can inform teaching practice. This paper presents the findings from a study on the production of English questions by 56 Year 4 national-type Chinese primary school students, categorised as Dominant Speakers of English (n=28) or Dominant Speakers of Mandarin (n=28). The objectives of the study were 1) to identify common errors in English questions produced by the students in a translation task and 2) to compare the errors made by Mandarin-dominant and English-dominant learners. The researchers obtained data via written language elicitation tasks, to examine the kinds of errors made by the learners. Data was analysed using an adapted version of Rowland's error analysis framework. Comparison of data from a 10-item translation task showed that Mandarin-dominant learners made more than twice the errors of English-dominant learners. Common errors across both groups were auxiliary tenses errors and omission errors in WH-questions and auxiliary errors in Yes/No questions. Furthermore, Mandarin-dominant learners made visibly more auxiliary, omission, andposition-of-question-word errors than English-dominant learners, while the latter had a higher proportion of double-marking errors. This study provides further evidence that learners from different backgrounds may face different challenges in acquiring features of English. Moreover, the findings could provide insights for English language teachers in Chinese-medium schools on how to better adapt the teaching of English questions to their students of different language backgrounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Existential sentences in Chinese indicate the existence, appearance, or disappearance of objects or people at a specific location. Numerous research papers have been published on Chinese existential sentences, and many native speakers of various languages have surveyed the errors made by Chinese learners in their respective countries. However, there is a lack of research on Iranian students in this area, highlighting the need for investigation. This article primarily focuses on analyzing the common mistakes made by Persian speakers when using Chinese existential sentences. Five main types of Chinese existential sentences are selected for analysis: sentences with "是" (shì), sentences with "有" (yǒu), sentences with "在" (zài), sentences with "V+着" (zhe), and sentences with "V+了" (le). The analysis in this article is based on questionnaire survey results obtained from Iranian students studying in China, as well as the characteristics of Persian language structure and grammar. Using the Contrastive Analysis theory and Error Analysis, the collected data has been analyzed. The resulting errors are categorized into four main types: omission, addition, substitution, and transformation. Studying these errors not only aids Iranian learners of Chinese in their language acquisition process but also provides valuable insights to educators in selecting appropriate teaching methods and improving the organization of classes and training courses in this field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined Chinese EFL researchers' English abstract writing in language education. Using open-ended questionnaires, it first investigated 24 Chinese EFL researchers' perceptions of their challenges in writing English abstracts. Using generalizability theory and follow-up interviews, it then invited 16 experienced English journal reviewers to assess 27 published English abstracts written by Chinese EFL researchers to identify common errors and suggest improvement tips. Finally, it examined eight selected Chinese EFL researchers' critical reflections on the English journal reviewers' assessment of the 27 English abstracts. The results indicated that Chinese EFL researchers experienced several challenges in writing English abstracts. Further, the English reviewers' assessment of the 27 abstracts was consistent and reliable. The common errors were associated with the accuracy, non-evaluative nature, coherence and readability, and conciseness of an English abstract. The English reviewers provided tips for improvement, and Chinese EFL researchers expressed their critical reflections on their assessment. Educational implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Congenital talipes equinovarus is one of the most prevalent birth defects, affecting approximately 0.6 to 1.5 children per 1000 live births. Currently, the Ponseti method is the gold-standard treatment for idiopathic clubfeet, with good results reported globally. This literature review focuses on common errors encountered during different stages of the management of idiopathic clubfeet, namely diagnosis, manipulation, serial casting, Achilles tenotomy, and bracing. The purpose is to update clinicians and provide broad guidelines that can be followed to avoid and manage these errors to optimize short- and long-term outcomes of treatment of idiopathic clubfeet using the Ponseti method. A literature search was performed using the following keywords: "Idiopathic Clubfoot" (All Fields) AND "Management" OR "Outcomes" (All Fields). Databases searched included PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and SCOPUS (age range: 0–12 months). A full-text review of these articles was then performed looking for "complications" or "errors" reported during the treatment process. A total of 61 articles were included in the final review: 28 from PubMed, 8 from EMBASE, 17 from Google Scholar, 2 from Cochrane Library, and 6 from SCOPUS. We then grouped the errors encountered during the treatment process under the different stages of the treatment protocol (diagnosis, manipulation and casting, tenotomy, and bracing) to facilitate discussion and highlight solutions. While the Ponseti method is currently the gold standard in clubfoot treatment, its precise and intensive nature can present clinicians, health care providers, and patients with potential problems if proper diligence and attention to detail is lacking. The purpose of this paper is to highlight common mistakes made throughout the Ponseti treatment protocol from diagnosis to bracing to optimize care for these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates the rate of unawareness of common errors in English and its impact on human vs. machine translation into Arabic. It analyzes the reaction of human and machine translators when encountering English sentences with common errors, and its impact on translation process. Translators are readers in the first place, they have to comprehend what they read in the SL in order to convey it in the TL. In order for the ST message to be correctly conveyed into the TL, detecting errors and correcting them before translating is a necessity. The study is conducted through presenting 40 SL texts and evaluating their 680 TL texts translated by 14 MA students of translation and 3 online machine translators. Results show that the rate of unawareness of common errors is 51% for human translators and 79% for machine translators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed at investigating common errors made and difficulties faced by postgraduate students in the departments of curricula and teaching methods, Faculties of Education in Yemeni universities when preparing their theses and dissertations. To achieve this, the study followed both qualitative and quantitative methods. A questionnaire was administrated to (36) faculty members and a semi-structured interview was administrated with (30) postgraduate students. The study findings showed that the degree of common errors in preparing theses and dissertations among postgraduate students was high. Moreover, the findings of the interview showed that the most important difficulties faced by students were: choosing the thesis title, limited skills of conducting research and Internet search, writing the introduction sequentially and clearly determining the study problem. Other problems included lack of modern sources and references, writing research questions or formulating research hypotheses, the confusion between the significance and research objectives, the difficulty of determining the appropriate sample method, building the research tools, analyzing data, as well as the difficulty of using English. Moreover, difficulties related to the supervisor included: the supervisor’s other commitments, which led to allocating insufficient time for the student, and providing late feedback or providing ambiguous comments to students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Statistics are a quintessential part of scientific manuscripts. Few journals are free of statistics-related errors. Errors can occur in data reporting and presentation, choosing the appropriate or the most powerful statistical test, misinterpretation or overinterpretations of statistics, and ignoring tests of normality. Statistical software used, one-tailed versus two-tailed tests, and exclusion or inclusion of outliers can all influence outcomes and should be explicitly mentioned. This review presents the corresponding nonparametric tests for common parametric tests, popular misinterpretations of the P value, and usual nuances in data reporting. The importance of distinguishing clinical significance from statistical significance using confidence intervals, number needed to treat, and minimal clinically important difference is highlighted. The problem of multiple comparisons may lead to false interpretations, especially in p-hacking when nonsignificant comparisons are concealed. The review also touches upon a few advanced topics such as heteroscedasticity and multicollinearity in multivariate analyses. Journals have various strategies to minimize inaccuracies, but it is invaluable for authors and reviewers to have good concepts of statistics. Furthermore, it is imperative for the reader to understand these concepts to properly interpret studies and judge the validity of the conclusions independently.

Congenital talipes equinovarus is one of the most prevalent birth defects, affecting approximately 0.6 to 1.5 children per 1000 live births. Currently, the Ponseti method is the gold-standard treatment for idiopathic clubfeet, with good results reported globally. This literature review focuses on common errors encountered during different stages of the management of idiopathic clubfeet, namely diagnosis, manipulation, serial casting, Achilles tenotomy, and bracing. The purpose is to update clinicians and provide broad guidelines that can be followed to avoid and manage these errors to optimize short- and long-term outcomes of treatment of idiopathic clubfeet using the Ponseti method. A literature search was performed using the following keywords: “Idiopathic Clubfoot” (All Fields) AND “Management” OR “Outcomes” (All Fields). Databases searched included PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and SCOPUS (age range: 0–12 months). A full-text review of these articles was then performed looking for “complications” or “errors” reported during the treatment process. A total of 61 articles were included in the final review: 28 from PubMed, 8 from EMBASE, 17 from Google Scholar, 2 from Cochrane Library, and 6 from SCOPUS. We then grouped the errors encountered during the treatment process under the different stages of the treatment protocol (diagnosis, manipulation and casting, tenotomy, and bracing) to facilitate discussion and highlight solutions. While the Ponseti method is currently the gold standard in clubfoot treatment, its precise and intensive nature can present clinicians, health care providers, and patients with potential problems if proper diligence and attention to detail is lacking. The purpose of this paper is to highlight common mistakes made throughout the Ponseti treatment protocol from diagnosis to bracing to optimize care for these patients.

Statistics are a quintessential part of scientific manuscripts. Few journals are free of statistics-related errors. Errors can occur in data reporting and presentation, choosing the appropriate or the most powerful statistical test, misinterpretation or overinterpretations of statistics, and ignoring tests of normality. Statistical software used, one-tailed versus two-tailed tests, and exclusion or inclusion of outliers can all influence outcomes and should be explicitly mentioned. This review presents the corresponding nonparametric tests for common parametric tests, popular misinterpretations of the P value, and usual nuances in data reporting. The importance of distinguishing clinical significance from statistical significance using confidence intervals, number needed to treat, and minimal clinically important difference is highlighted. The problem of multiple comparisons may lead to false interpretations, especially in p-hacking when nonsignificant comparisons are concealed. The review also touches upon a few advanced topics such as heteroscedasticity and multicollinearity in multivariate analyses. Journals have various strategies to minimize inaccuracies, but it is invaluable for authors and reviewers to have good concepts of statistics. Furthermore, it is imperative for the reader to understand these concepts to properly interpret studies and judge the validity of the conclusions independently. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The motivation for language learning is influenced by political, social and cultural influence. The Russian language was introduced to the academic curriculum at the University of Ghana several decades ago. To understand advantages and disadvantages of Russian learning, it is necessary to reveal what is behind the language policy in Ghana.In this paper, we consider how language structures are used in the Russian language, and how local languages affect it. By means of the influence of both English language and local languages, we observe common errors that appear in students’ speech and papers.

This study aimed to reveal the common errors in fractions, the associated thinking strategies among 5th graders, and the persistence of these errors. A quantitative method was applied in this study through calculating the percentages of every type of error the students made in the diagnostic test, The qualitative part was performed through individual interviews and analyzing them to probe the thinking strategies used by the students that lie behind their common errors, The test was conducted for 240 students and 30 students were interviewed. The results showed a variety of common mistakes the students made, and that the rates of these mistakes were as follows: the highest was due to dealing with the fractions as integers, followed by errors about the basic concepts of the fractions. The results further showed a diversification in the students' thinking and the associated mistakes. One of the most noticeable mistakes was expressing the fraction without attention to the equal parts. The rates of other common errors were as follows: considering that the fractional number is always higher than the figure A/B, and that figure A/B is always less than one; treating the fractions as integers; misinterpretation of the relation between the numerator and the denominator with the actual value of the fraction, and ignoring the integer in the fractional number. The results also showed that more than 50% of the students made errors associated with solution strategies in the fractions issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During my experience as an author, peer reviewer, and editor during COVID-19, I have encountered - and committed - various errors related to the interpretation and use of statistical measures and tests. Primarily concerning health sciences such as epidemiology, infodemiology, and public health, the evidence used to inform a conclusion carries an extremely high weight as it translates into decisions made to preserve the population's well-being. Therefore, the aforementioned evidence must be reliable. This short guide discusses the most common and dangerous mistakes I have experienced during my scientific journey. Real and invented examples have been proposed and analyzed in detail, showing possible interpretations, both correct and incorrect, and their consequences. Such a framework makes it clear that a statistical test alone cannot answer any scientific questions. Indeed, the interpretation of results and the verification of assumptions and test eligibility - subject to the author's evaluation - are crucial components of the integrity of the scientific investigation. Before using a test or adopting a measure, we must ask ourselves the following fundamental questions: Are there valid reasons to explore my research question? Am I sure my approach can fully and adequately answer my research question? Am I sure that my model's assumptions - basic and hidden - are sufficiently satisfied? How could violating those assumptions affect the validity of the results and stakeholders? Is the effect size relevant regardless of statistical significance?, Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2023, Rovetta et al.)

The main findings of this study investigating 1143 illegibilities which interfered with reading thehandwriting of learners of Arabic as a foreign language are reported. The results indicated 50.9% , 415 ofwhich is caused by asmin and dots, are connected with letter misformation, and 19.6% connected withgeneral writing characteristics. The implication of the results is a change of emphasis in the teachingmethods of handwriting, from being only decorative and attractive in appearance .to becoming mostly leg~ible and readable.

One of the issues affecting the efficacy of peer revision in the writing classroom is that of the knowledge of peer reviewers. Do peer reviewers have sufficient knowledge of content and language to critique the works of their peer writers? Do they provide feedback on content as much as they do for language? Proponents of social constructivism posit that learners learn best when they are involved in exploring, discovering and transforming their ideas and those of their peers through interaction, negotiation and collaboration. In the writing classroom, student writers and reviewers are given the opportunity to build meaning based on their own experiences. This study examined the types of comments made by Malay ESL peer reviewers and their perceived usefulness towards improving peer writers’ composition. Comments on peer writing were collected from ten upper secondary school peer reviewers for equal number of peer writers through reviewer feedback form, peer conferencing session, reviewer field notes and writers’ multiple drafts. Findings of the study show that peer reviewers were able to provide revisions in both areas of content and language. Additionally, the strategies used to providing feedback on content included alteration and reordering, clarification and suggestion, as well as praise and criticism. Overall peer revision has a positive impact on writing and this has implications for teaching and learning, more so for teachers who are overburdened with marking.

The use of an external fixator (EF) in the emergency department (ED) or the emergency theatre in the ED is reserved for critically ill patients in a life-saving attempt. Hence, usually only fixation/stabilization of the pelvis, tibia, femur and humerus are performed. All other external fixation methods are not indicated in an ED and thus should be performed in the operating room with a sterile environment.Anterior EF is used in unstable pelvic lesions due to anterior-posterior compression, and in stable pelvic fractures in haemodynamically unstable patients.Patients with multiple trauma should be stabilized quickly with EF.The C-clamp has been designed to be used in the ED to stabilize fractures of the sacrum or alterations of the sacroiliac joint in patients with circulatory instability.Choose a modular EF that allows for the free placement of the pins, is radiolucent and is compatible with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).Planning the type of framework to be used is crucial.Avoid mistakes in the placement of EF. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:204-214. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190029., Competing Interests: ICMJE Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare no conflict of interest relevant to this work., (© 2020 The author(s).)