Of the four skills in English, writing is considered to be the

most complex and difficult skill to master. (Cabansag, 2013)

"We perceive meaningless lines and our imaginations strive to
give them meaning, but in order to make its meaning complete, it must
be named. And the meaning and naming come from experience (Villanueva,
V., 2007). Writing has never been absent when it comes to human
experiences for writing is an extension of the minds thoughts. Since
the human brain cannot contain all information that it wants to gather
and store, writing would come in the picture. In the book entitled
Academic Writing in a Global Context by Lillis and Curry (2010), one
of its critic said that English is an international language for
academic knowledge production to which it is found agreeable for the
reason that once a person does not know how to apply the language,
then, knowledge production might not be possible. A good communication
skill in this 21st century is a strong factor to determine a persons
knowledge and abilities. Compared to speaking, reading and listening,
writing is the most dominant manifestation of errors for writing is
the most intricate and most complex task. It is the most difficult of
the language abilities to acquire. (Allen & Corder, 1974).

It would

take a lot of writing exercises and use of the language in

compositions for a person to completely be adept with writing.
Learning to write is a gradual process which begins with simple
copying and ends with free expression. Under the teachers guidance,
students are to be trained systematically through several stages of
writing experience. (Al-Buainain, H., 2008).

Traditionally, the Cognitive Model is used to teach writers in

composition. In this model, writers are instructed to test the quality
of their work through comparing it to exemplar essays. But now, the
process approach is the new way teachers help their writing learners
in their works. It is a problem-solving method where the writers will
have 3 processes: pre-writing, writing, and rewriting. In the past 30
years, this has become the standard approach to language classes
(Welsh, C and Tatum, J., 2008).
In the process of writing, teachers and students come across with
errors. Errors is defined as an alterations of the rules of the
accepted norm and are termed as surface errors which may be further
classified as omission errors, addition errors, malformation errors,
wrong order, spelling error, systems error, and the like. Also, the
terms overt and covert errors. (Corder, 1973, Faerch, 1984, & Medges,
1989 as cited in Catalan, n.d.).
According to Barnett (1989 as cited by Homstad and Thorson,
1994), frustrations on these errors and the lack of improvement not
only belongs to students but also to teachers. She claims that
students may become more involved in editing their own work if the
teacher does less correcting. She suggests that teachers look at
writing as a process, or a series of drafts, including prewriting,
writing, and rewriting. Less attention to correction of grammatical
errors, together with real attention to content, leads ultimately to
better student compositions. These have to do with the strategies the
teacher does to effectively address errors the students are
committing.

In a study entitled Students Writing Errors in EFL: A Case Study by

Al-Buainain (2008), he said that tactful correction of students
writing is essential because if not, the writer would assume that
his/her writing errors are not important factors to consider in
writing and probably, these errors will recur from time to time until
it has become a habit and once it becomes a habit, then, it would be
really hard to unlearn it. Ferris, (2002, as cited by Al-Buainain,
2008) said that different strategies must be used in correcting
students errors. He enumerated strategies on how to respond to these
errors and included are: Direct/ Indirect Feedback, Global/ local
Errors/ and treatable / Untreatable errors. He also suggested that
error analysis must be considered as the center of writing classes.
These can be done through writing these erroneous sentences provided
by students on paper or any transparent areas or the blackboard
perhaps then other students will point out the errors. Lile, (2002:1
as cited by Al-Buainain, 2008) asserts that if students are not given
a reword or credit for their efforts, and no feedback is given to the
student, then most students intrinsic motivation would begin to
decrease. Teachers then must encourage the students to continue
writing since these errors are considered to be essential in writing.
Only through practice can students meet these inevitable errors and
learn to engage themselves in the process of negotiating meaning
through different stages. Students must be encouraged to try different
activities and strategies on their own to improve their writing.
Keeping a journal, getting a pen-friend, keeping copies of everything
they write, using a word processor (Ellis and Sinclair 1991: 106) can

be a unique way to encourage them. Using computer is also highly

suggested.

As Cook, (cited by King: 1997:2) suggests there is more

to computer technology than simply word processing software, and if

you are not using it, you are missing out on some exciting and
valuable ways of teaching writing. These recommendations are only
some of the strategies teachers can use to address these errors
present in writing.
In a study by Mabuan (2015), wherein he looked on to 58 weblogs
of students in their school to in order to determine the views of
students on the use of blogs in facilitating the acquisition of
English writing skills. Results show that the most pervasive errors
committed by the participants were tenses, subject-verb agreement,
prepositions, morphology, articles, verbs, and pronouns. He stated
that blogging is a good tool in letting the students their grammar and
vocabulary. He encouraged teachers to incorporate the use of blogging
in their instructions because it increases students motivation, selfconfidence, and sense of ownership (Campbell, 2004 as cited by
Mabuan, 2015).
In a study conducted by Cabansag (2013), he used 140 essays of
high school students in a state university to check the errors that
are commonly present in their works. It turned out that most students
are not very proficient in the use of mechanics particularly in
capitalization and punctuation. Most students commit the highest
number of errors in the use of verbs and verb tenses and the
capitalization rules in their compositions. As a result, he enumerated
strategies for teachers and activities that students will do to target

these needs. He also suggested that a revision of the curriculum in

their school must be done immediately.
In a study by Gustilo and Magno (2012), they checked 150 essays
coming from five universities in Manila, to which 30 essays per
school. The results show that word choice and capitalization are the
significant errors students committed that lessened their essay scores
compared to other writing errors. He said that students must be given
more effective strategies on how to enlarge students vocabulary
because it is an important aspect in surviving todays academic and
global world that regards the use of the English language as a major
medium for instruction and communication.

He also said that teachers

need to remind students that although punctuation or mechanics errors

do not greatly impede meaning in the sentence as compared with other
language aspects, they are still important because readers considers
these damaging to the overall quality of the essays.
In a study by Lasaten (2014), 100 essays were checked the
outcomes show that errors in verb tenses are the most common
linguistic errors. The next pervasive errors are sentence structure,
punctuations, word choice, spelling, use of prepositions and articles.
The cause of these errors would be the learners poor knowledge of the
target language specially in using the rules in grammar in sentence
construction. Also, one of the cause are pointed out as the learners
mindlessness during the process of writing where students do not go
back to the previously constructed sentences and do not check errors
as long as the sentences are coherent. Another reason is the influence
of the first language. Students tend to follow the sentence pattern of
their native language to the sentence pattern of the target language.
The last reason is the lack of vocabulary in sentence construction.

The study advised that the findings must serve as a guide to

researchers who want to widen the scope of the research and directs
the teachers to consider the results of the study in formulating
activities in the classroom that would help the students apply and
sharpen their skill. It also addressed the Curriculum developers need
to revisit the existing language curriculum in the tertiary level to
develop a relevant and coherent program to address the students needs
and difficulties.
In a study by Ulla (2014), most of the respondents committed
misuse and omission of punctuation marks and pronoun-antecedent
agreement which marked the highest percentage of errors the
respondents had difficulty to deal with. This was followed by misuse
and omission of verb and misspelling being the least committed error.
At the end of the study, an intensive summer course on grammar and
composition was proposed which will be implemented during every summer
of the coming academic years.

References:
Homstad T. & Thorson, H. (1994). Writing theory and practice in the
second language classroom: A selected annotated bibliography. Homstad
and Thorson. University of Minnesota.
Ulla, M. B (2014). Analysis of the language errors in writing among
bsee and ab english students. European journal of academic essays
1(3): 39-47, 2014, Retrieved on August 31, 2016 from
www.euroessays.org.
Lasaten, R.C (2014). Analysis of errors in the english writings
of teacher education students. International refereed research
journal. Retrieved on August 31, 2016 from wwww.researchersworld.com
Gustilo, L. & Magno, C. (2012). Learners Errors and their
Evaluation: The Case of Filipino ESL Writers. Philippine ESL Journal.
Cabansag, J.N, (2013). Written language proficiency of laboratory
high school students in a state university
in cagayan valley philippines. International refereed research
journal. Retrieved on august 31, 2016 from www.researchersworld.com.
Theresa, L. & Curry M. (2010). Academic writing in a global context.
Routledge 270 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016.