Metacognitive Approaches in Error Correction: Methods and Pedagogical Technologies for Developing Metacognitive Competence in Future German Language Teachers
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20843024Ключевые слова:
metacognition; error correction; German language teaching; metacognitive competence; pre-service teachers; error typology; phonetic errors; self-correction; foreign language pedagogyАннотация
This article examines metacognitive approaches to error analysis and correction in the context of foreign
language teaching, with particular emphasis on the preparation of future teachers of German. The study addresses a
significant gap in the existing literature: although numerous researchers have explored the technical dimensions of error
correction–namely, who corrects errors, which types of errors are corrected, and when corrections occur–the metacognitive
competence required to perform these corrections effectively has received comparatively limited scholarly attention.
Drawing on theoretical frameworks of metacognition, error typology, and communicative language pedagogy, the article
explores the classification of errors across different linguistic levels, the distinction between competence-based and
performance-based errors, and the pedagogical strategies available to teachers for fostering learner autonomy through
self-correction. Particular attention is devoted to the correction of phonetic errors during the initial stages of language
acquisition, the role of implicit and explicit correction techniques, and the use of technical recording tools to support
reflective practice. The article argues that developing metacognitive competence in pre-service teachers is essential not
only for enhancing the quality of error correction in classroom settings but also for equipping future educators with the
self-regulatory skills necessary for lifelong professional development.
Библиографические ссылки
1. Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language
Teaching, 5(4), 161-170.
2. Ellis, R. (2009). Corrective feedback and teacher development. L2 Journal, 1(1), 3-18.
3. Ferris, D. R. (2011). Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing (2nd ed.). University of Michigan Press.
4. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American
Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911.
5. Jalolov, J. (2012). Chet til o‘qitish metodikasi. O‘qituvchi. 414 p.
6. Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37-66.
7. Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10(1-4), 209-231.
8. Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327-369.
9. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M.
Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 13-39). Academic Press
Загрузки
Опубликован
Выпуск
Раздел
Лицензия
Copyright (c) 2026 MAKTABGACHA VA MAKTAB TA’LIMI JURNALI

Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution» («Атрибуция») 4.0 Всемирная.