International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research

and Science (IJAERS)

Peer-Reviewed Journal
ISSN: 2349-6495(P) | 2456-1908(O)
Vol-10, Issue-3; Mar, 2023
Journal Home Page Available: https://ijaers.com/
Article DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijaers.103.10

Does Blended Learning Approach Affect Madrasa

Students English Writing Errors? A Comparative Study
Mohammad Usama

PhD Scholar, National Institute of Technology Raipur, India

Received: 12 Feb 2023, Abstract— Previous studies analyzed errors in English as a second
Receive in revised form:08 Mar 2023, language writing in school or university; no work has been conducted on
Indian Madrasa (Islamic institution) students’ errors in English writing.
Accepted: 15 Mar 2023,
The current study analyzes Madrasa students’ English writing errors. The
Available online: 25 Mar 2023 students were grouped into an experimental group (EG) and control group
©2023 The Author(s). Published by AI (CG) and engaged for twenty-eight days, where only EG learners received
Publication. This is an open access article blended learning (BL) treatment. The investigation used a pre-and post-test
under the CC BY license purposive design across all the groups. The errors were spotted from their
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). write-ups belonging to morphological, syntactical, and orthographical
categories. Next, errors were analyzed both quantitatively and
Keywords— Madrasa students, blended
qualitatively. Though the results revealed that both groups committed
learning approach, error analysis, English
errors in all seven categories: morphological (article and preposition),
writing, ESL.
syntactical (tense and word order), and orthographic (capitalization,
spelling, and punctuation) types, EG’s errors were fewer than CG’s. This
implies that BL can lead to effective remedial writing in Madrasa
classrooms. In addition, EG’s pre-test scores were also greater than post-
test scores, which has implications for adopting BL at different Madaris in
India.

I. INTRODUCTION In order to examine Madrasa students’ English writing

Previous studies on writing errors have helped language errors, the authors of this study asked students to produce a
teachers figure out which errors English learners make small essay writing in English. Following it, frequent
pretty often when they write in English (Riyaz, 2020; errors were identified and classified morphologically,
Jinny, 2019; Dhar, 2016; Saikia, 2016; Farooqi, 2015; syntactically, and orthographically. Also, the sources and
Rupinder, 2014; Fakhar, 2013; Vijayalakshmi, 2008; causes of errors were looked into, and strategies for
Mathai, 2007; Lalitha, 2011 and Obeid, 2000; Ahmad, improving writing were given to both teachers and
1996; Parasher, 1977). These findings play a crucial role in students. The analysis further provides insights into areas
designing effective writing syllabi. Following this trend, like English advancement in order to eliminate writing
the study sheds light on the common error types committed inaccuracies among EFL learners. As a result, the primary
by Alim students (certificate equivalent to senior objective of this work is to ascertain the most prevalent
secondary) English learners at a public Madrasa in India. types of writing errors made by Madrasa students in
However, to our knowledge, no study has explored English English. In this regard, our study’s findings indicated that
writing errors committed by Madrasa students, especially students who received BL treatment improved writing
from a blended learning perspective. The findings of this significantly and made fewer errors. This has implications
study will provide educators with the classroom reality, for reducing English writing errors among Madrasa
demonstrating what needs to be taught and which students in India.
techniques can be employed to teach English effectively.

www.ijaers.com Page | 97
Sousa et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science, 10(3)-2023

Muslims and Madrasa Education Board in India The Blended Learning Approach (BL) is perceived as a
Muslims have been identified as a minority in India framework for conducting teaching-learning activities that
(National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992). The incorporate both face-to-face (F2F) and online learning
census report 2011 further notes that the minority (OL) formats (Boelens et al., 2015; Graham et al., 2013;
population is 18.64% of the Indian population. Of these, Ferdig et al., 2012; Horn and Staker, 2011; Larson and
more than 14% of the total minorities in India are Sung, 2009; Doering 2006; Garrison and Kanuka, 2004).
Muslims. Moreover, 72.92 percent of minorities are the In other words, BL is also quite often explained as a blend
most marginalized and deprived communities in India of both physical classroom teaching and OL sessions
regarding literacy, economic, and health indices. In a few through the internet to provide optimum education (Chao
cases, the share of Muslims in education is comparatively et al., 2021; Stain and Graham, 2014; Moskal et al., 2013;
lower than other minorities in India. The Indian State Bersin 2004; Garrison and Kanuka 2004). The
constitution defines Muslims as a minority community combination of F2F and internet-based OL sessions is
with the freedom to set up minority and autonomous employed pedagogically in the BL approach (Stain and
academic institutions, including Madrasa. The Indian Graham 2014). The BL can be utilized to address specific
Constitution guarantees minority languages, scripts, and student requirements like enthusiasm, educational
cultures protection and grants them the right to establish preference, and capabilities (Smith and Hill, 2019;
and govern religious, and educational institutions of their Williams & Chinn (2009). In this way, it improves student-
choice. teacher and student-student communications and develops
a more dynamic and collaborative learning atmosphere,
Madaris (plural of Madrasa) in the Indian educational
leading to increased participation in the classroom
system plays a significant role in history, where Islamic
(Donnelly 2010). Previous research on writing assessment,
theology, sciences, literary, and philosophical subjects are
in particular, revealed that when using BL, students’
taught. The central objective of Madrasa education is to
writing skills improved significantly (El-Maghraby, 2021;
instil Islamic beliefs and practices among Muslim learners
Vu et al., 2020; Rahman et al., 2020; Mabuan and Ebron,
and to educate them to follow the Quran (Muslim’s holy
2017; Adas and Bakir, 2013; Keshta and Harb, 2013). The
book) and the teachings of the Prophet (Alam, 2020;
BL approach enhances the long-term retention of
Moosa, 2015). Here, they mainly teach Urdu, Persian,
knowledge for upgraded cognitive learning outcomes.
Arabic literature, and the fundamental philosophies of
Consequently, this study uses the word “blended learning.”
Islam (Pedersen et. al., 2019). They are well-known for
In this respect, it can be argued that adopting the BL in
promoting literary and philosophical teaching. The courses
teaching and learning will be advantageous in attaining
run by Madrasa are as follows (level-wise) (Reetz, 2010):
better output and an enhanced learning experience in
• Hafiz – Recitation of Quran only (traditional madaris Madrasa.
have been offering this degree) Background of Error Analysis
• Tahtania - equivalent to primary (1-5th standard)
In language learning, the occurrences of mistakes are said
• Munshi - upper primary (6-8th standard)
to be “failures in performance”, whereas errors are
• Maulvi – higher secondary (9-10th standard)
learners’ “failures incompetence” (Camargo, 2020; James,
• Alim - senior secondary (11-12th standard)
2013; Iseni, 2011; Corder, 1982; Dušková, 1969). It is not
• Fazil - equivalent to graduate (Bachelor’s degree) advisable to rely on the frequency of errors to identify
Recent studies have revealed that students have not yet whether learners have committed an error or a mistake.
fully benefited from the government’s qualitative However, this is still not enough on certain occasions, so
educational schemes designed to modernization the we need to go deeper and investigate their sources and
Madrasa (Pandey, 2019 & 2017; Wani, 2012; Akhtar and reasons to provide a remedial solution. It is possible to
Narula, 2010), including English language skills unearth the causes of errors into two major groups, intra-
improvement (Hussain, 2017; Sultana, 2017). There is no and inter-lingual errors (Dušková, 1969; Richards, 1971;
connection between what Madaris syllabi offer and what Corder, 1975; Touchie, 1986; James, 2013; Keshavarz,
students need, hindering them from improving their 2015). Inter-lingual errors result from the first language’s
knowledge acquisition from modern perspectives (Pandey, rules being transferred to the second language’s grammar.
2019). Consequently, the key objective of this work On the contrary, intralingual transitions are attributable to
remains to explore the main reasons for the low accuracy the negative effect of second language structure in the
in English writing among Indian Madrasa students. same language. Intralingual errors show learners’
Underpinning Blended Learning in English Writing inadequate L2 awareness. In their studies, James, 2013;
Corder (1971), and Richards (1974) have categorized six

www.ijaers.com Page | 98
Sousa et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science, 10(3)-2023

intralingual errors: incorrect categorization, rule ignorance, EA provides comprehensive coverage of the difficulties
hyperextension, false analogy, and overgeneralization. faced by language learners during learning (Corder, 1967).
Before the inception of Error Analysis (EA), learners In a study, Lightbown and Spada (2006) argue that EA is a
produced errors that needed prompt correction. Unlike EA, critical component of language learning and a vital source
Contrastive Analysis (CA) successfully identified learners’ of information about students’ learning progress. Hence,
errors, including their origins, and noted that errors in the EA has emerged to respond to CA. Two types of EA
second language (L2) occurred chiefly because of first processes have been considered. First, describing errors
language (L1) interference. CA concentrated mainly on requires applying linguistic theory to incorrect utterances.
teaching techniques and materials intending to minimize Second, as analysts identify and linguistically explain
the effects of L1 interference on L2 (Fisiak, 1985). It was errors and point out the psychological explanations for
assumed that the similarity between the L2 and the L1 their existence, interpretations of errors exist. In addition,
bears a positive impact and encouraged learning. The CA EA is an Applied Linguistics branch that has two features:
argued that the two-language variations cause issues in a) theoretical EA defines the awareness of learners in the
second language learning that could be expected compared second language, and b) functional EA overcomes any
to L1 and L2. barrier between the learner’s awareness and the context.

During the 1950s and 1960s, CA was influenced by Notably, Corder (1982) proposes five steps of EA:
Structuralist and Behaviourist ideas of language collecting data from learners’ language, highlighting,
acquisition (LA). In Behaviourists’ opinion, LA happens explaining, and evaluating errors. Additionally, Kashavarz
mainly through stimulus, response elicitation, and (2015) introduced a five-way linguistic classification of
repetition of successful behavior (Brown, 2007). errors: orthographic, phonological, lexical, morphological,
Nevertheless, soon after the Chomskyan theory of and syntactic. Such groups are further subdivided to
innateness emerged in 1959, the CA was declared provide a detailed understanding of errors.
incompetent in forecasting the vast majority of errors, as it Previous Studies on L2 Writing Errors in India
only compared the structure of two languages. According Prior studies have focused on Hindi native speakers’
to Chomsky (1959), humans are born with a universal English writing errors mainly from the two most frequent
grammar that hard-wires intrinsic language ability in the errors perspectives, such as morphological (article,
human brain, contrary to the behaviorist theory of LA. preposition) and syntactic (verb tense and word order)
However, in the 1970s, the audio-lingual method came rather than orthographic (spelling, capitalization,
with remarkable results soon after, which significantly punctuation) (Ahmad, 1996; Farooqi, 2015; Fakhar 2013;
helped learners avoid errors in L2 writing. This technique Parasher, 1977). In this line, Ahmad (1996) examined the
encourages learners to avoid errors through complete errors in eighty essays written in English and found that
repetition and chunked language memorization. article, preposition, verb tense, and word order were the
Moreover, the idea of EA lies in generative and cognitive most frequently committed errors. The most common
linguistics theories of second language acquisition. causes of grammatical errors were interlingual and
However, the error is not an indicator of learners’ intralingual errors.
insufficiency but requires immediate elimination (Ellis & Additionally, the errors were explored for their
Barkhuizen, 2005). Errors are a potential factor in second contributing origins, with the findings that 39.7% were
language learning, which offers learners inputs to validate interlingual and 51.3% were developmental and
and change hypotheses about the target language intralingual errors, respectively. Another study analyzed
(Keshavarz, 2015). Teachers get insights through the the written errors committed by 32 participants in senior
description of errors to recognize language’s secondary school (Parasher, 1977). He found that seven of
distinctiveness that causes language learning difficulties the most common committed errors by Hindi speakers
(Ellis, 1994). By following several LA techniques, EA were articles (39%), prepositions (31%), verb tense (22%),
shows how learners deal with the process of learning. It is and word order (8%). The results further revealed that
a vital aspect of learning that provides teachers with most writing errors occurred due to the L1 influence and
insights into the development of languages and allows culture-related negative transfers in L2. Farooqi (2015)
them to monitor the learners’ learning progress. In brief, observed the English written errors of junior high school
recognizing and explaining errors from a linguistic learners. The findings noted that morphological and
standpoint encourages learners to self-correct (Macaro, syntactical errors were higher than orthographic errors.
2010). The nature of the errors was interlanguage.

www.ijaers.com Page | 99
Sousa et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science, 10(3)-2023

Furthermore, Fakhar (2013) looked at grammatical errors two, i.e., pre and post-test groups. The EG and CG groups
among 179 essays. The findings distinguished between had reported that they had been studying English as a
errors, wrong article usage, and incorrect use of subject through Urdu instructions since they were admitted
prepositions. The quantitative analysis revealed the to the Munshi/Maulvi course. All participants were natives
negative impact of the native language that resulted in such of Urdu and functionally bi-multilingual and had lived all
errors. The author recommended that CA would help of their lives in the same language region (Sitapur, Uttar
teachers provide evidence about both the commonness and Pradesh, India). The students who participated in the study
the differences between L1 and L2. belonged to a semi-urban background.
Aims of the Study Experimental Group
The work was carried out to identify descriptive writing The experimental group (BL group) of learners received
errors in English among Madrasa students in India. This treatment from an experienced teacher using a blended
study aims to achieve two objectives: firstly, an learning approach for learning English grammar. Students
investigation of Madrasa students’ English writing errors; received English lectures by the teacher for 60 min. The
and secondly, a comparison of morphological, syntactical, teacher explained and discussed the rules of English
and orthographical errors to capture variation between the grammar face-to-face with the students for 30 minutes.
two groups (EG and CG), if any. In this line, this work The students spent the remaining time (e.g., the last 30
attempts to answer the following three research questions minutes) working online on assignments and activities on
(RQs): the laptop using the internet. If they needed assistance, the
i) When Madrasa English students write in English, what teacher was on hand to provide it. Students were seated in
mistakes do they often make? a smart classroom, enabling them to communicate with
one another and the lecturer.
ii) What are the factors causing such errors?
Control Group
iii) Are there any significant differences in these errors
between the groups exposed to BL and those who are not? All fifty students were given 45 minutes to write an essay
on the same topic “Introducing India to Foreigners,” for
both the pre-and post-tests.
II. METHODOLOGY
Data Collection and Analysis Procedure
The study used a blended learning method to analyze
A pre-and post-experimental design were employed for
Madrasa students’ English writing errors using quantitative
this study, including two groups: the control group
and qualitative techniques. The data for this study was
received a traditional teaching approach, and the
gathered from four public Madaris in India. A step-wise
experimental group received a blended learning approach.
description of the methodological procedures has been
A pre-experiment questionnaire was distributed between
outlined in the following sub-sections.
both groups to collect context information about them,
Participants and Sampling including gender, age, and years of English study. Then,
Using purposive sampling, the participants for this study the authors of this study distributed the topic ‘Introducing
were selected. The number of regular students at Madrasa India to Foreigners’ (Hamid, 2007) among both groups,
has decreased significantly due to the current COVID-19 and students were instructed to write on a sheet of paper
situation. Therefore, the experiment was conducted at the for 45 minutes. After task completion, they were given a
four public Madaris. In this study, 100 students chance to read their written sentences carefully and correct
participated in Alim’s final course (equal to senior any mistakes, if any. The same task was redone after the
secondary). At Madrasa, English was offered as a lecture, and they were asked to rewrite the essay on the
mandatory subject, and participants were required to attend same topic as they had done earlier, and the same
three hours of English lectures per week. Each lecture procedure was applied as that utilized for pre-intervention.
session lasted 30 minutes, for a total of 180 minutes per The current study utilizes Corder’s (1974) methods of EA,
week. To ensure compliance with ethical standards, the which consists of three stages: collecting the data
study’s authors first obtained consent from all students by (recognition of errors), describing the errors (accounting
having them sign a consent form. Notably, participants in for the errors), and explaining learners’ written errors
this study were only males, as Madrasa does not have a co- (description of errors). Following that, we used Dulay et
educational system. Those aged between 18 and 22 years al.’s (1982) classification of linguistic errors. Additionally,
were equitably split into experimental (N=50) and control the study delves into the three types of errors: omission,
(N=50) groups. Each ground was further subdivided into addition, and misformation. Later, a checklist was

www.ijaers.com Page | 100

Sousa et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science, 10(3)-2023

employed to record the committed errors and their Furthermore, the findings show a statistically significant
frequency in learners’ writing. Finally, the English difference in errors between the groups, F (1, 49) =14.355,
language teacher looked at all the written sheets (made by P=.001, ²p = .227, revealing the result that the mean of
L2 students) to ensure they were correct and valid for the errors was higher for CG as compared to EG (Fig. 1 b).
further analysis. The primary effect of the tests was F (1, 49) =16.451,
Using repeated measures ANOVAs, the error frequency P=.001, ²p = .251, revealing the result that the mean of
for each student was measured and arranged through errors was higher for the pre-test than the post-test (Fig. 1
variables using the SPSS software package (version 22). c). Further, the interaction between groups (CG and EG) 
Significant (a =.05) differences were identified and noted tests (pre and post-test) was also significant, F (1, 49)
for interpreting the findings in a series of repeated =9.616, P=.003, ²p = .164, entailing the result that there
ANOVA using between and within-subject variables of was no difference across test (pre & post) for the CG (Fig.
each group (experimental and control) and pre and post- 1 d). Contrastively, EG group learners committed higher
tests. errors in pre-test than post-test (Fig. 1 d). Remaining two-
III. RESULTS way interaction between types of errors  groups (p>
.131), types of error  test (p > .579) and three-way
Statistical Analysis of Errors
interaction between the types of errors  group  test (p>
A three-way ANOVA analysis on the mean with 3 types of .129) were all non-significant.
errors (morphological, syntactic, and orthographical)  2
groups  2 tests showed the main effect on error types, F
(1, 49) =67.915, P=.001, ²p = .739, revealing a higher
mean for morphological errors, which outperformed
syntactic and orthographic writing errors (Fig. 1 a).

5.0 3.5 1b
1a
4.5
3.0
4.0
3.5 2.5
Error (%)

Error (%)

3.0
2.5 2.0
2.0 1.5
1.5
1.0 1.0
Morphological Syntactical Orthographical Experimental Control

3.5 1d Pre-Test
Post-Test
3.5 1c 3.0

3.0
2.5
Error (%)
Error (%)

2.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5

1.0 1.0
Pre-Test Post-Test Experimental Control

Fig.1. Showing the differences in morphological, syntactical, and orthographical errors between groups and tests in writing
(a) the mean of morphological, syntactical, and orthographical errors; (b) the mean of errors for groups; (c) the mean of
errors for tests; (d) the mean of errors in tests for groups.
Morphological Analysis of Errors This study used two-way ANOVA on the mean of errors
Quantitative Analysis between two groups  two tests analysis to illustrate a
main-effect on groups, F (1, 49) =8.079, P=.007, ²p =
.142, revealing the higher mean of morphological errors in

www.ijaers.com Page | 101

Sousa et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science, 10(3)-2023

CG essays than in EG. This indicates that the CG group and post-test (Fig. 1 c). However, the EG’s pre-and post-
learners committed more errors than the EG group (Fig. 1 test results show a statistical error difference. This
a). Additionally, the analysis further captured the main indicates that the BL approach intervention helped EG
effect of tests, (1, 49) =4.218, P=.045, ²p = .079, learners overcome writing errors (Fig. 1 c). After the
revealing the higher mean of morphological errors in meaningful lecture through the BL approach, the learners
writing for pre-test than post-test (Fig. 1 b). The two-way of the EG group enhanced their writing skills and reduced
interaction between groups (CG and EG)  tests (pre and their errors compared to the CG group learners who
post), F (1, 49) = 7.468, P=.009, ²p = .133, indicates that received a non-BL learning approach.
there is no variation in errors in the CG group across pre
Figure 2

5.0 2a 5.0 2b
4.5 4.5
4.0 4.0
3.5 3.5
Error (%)

3.0 3.0

Error (%)
2.5 2.5
2.0 2.0
1.5 1.5
1.0 1.0
Experimental Control Pre-Test Post-Test

5.5 2c Pre-Test
5.0 Post-Test
4.5
4.0
Error (%)

3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
Experimental Control

Fig.2. Showing the differences in morphological errors between groups and tests (a): the mean of errors for groups; (a) the
means of errors for tests; (c) the mean of errors for tests for groups.

Qualitative Analysis 3. EG Addition of indefinite article: *A foreigners stayed

Errors in article and prepositions were committed in the in a hotel for one night. (Foreigners stayed in a hotel for
morphological category, which is given below and one night.)
indicated with an asterisk*: 4. CG Addition and misuse of indefinite article: A* India
Errors in Article is a* biggest and great county because people of all
religion live together. (India is the biggest and great
1. Experimental Group (EG) Omission of the definite
country because people of all religions live together.)
article: Taj Mahal was built in *Mughal period by Shah
Jahan in *17th century. (The Taj Mahal was built in the 5. EG Misuse of indefinite article: India has a* most
Mughal period by Shah Jahan in the 17th century.) beautiful thing * Himalaya. (India has the most beautiful
thing, the Himalayas)
2. Control Group (CG) Omission of the definite article:
Taj Mahal is *seventh wonder in India. (Taj Mahal is the
seventh wonder in India.)

www.ijaers.com Page | 102

Sousa et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science, 10(3)-2023

6. CG Misuse of indefinite article: Dholavira is a* oldest A two-way ANOVA on the mean of error with 2 groups 
building in India. (Dholavira is the oldest building in 2 tests, revealed a significant main effect of groups, F (1,
India.) 49) =5.864, P=.019, ²p = .107, proving the higher mean
Errors in Preposition of errors for CG than EG (Fig. 2 a). This implies that the
learners of English have used English prepositions
7. EG Misuse of preposition: Peoples in villages wake in
correctly in EG. It implies that learners could comprehend
the early morning and sleep *in early night. (People in
the preposition rules in English writing. The interaction
villages wake up in the early morning and sleep early at
between tests was found to be insignificant (p<.677). In
night.)
addition, the two-way interaction between groups  tests, F
8. CG Omission and misuse of prepositions: We reached (1, 49) =7.079, P=.011, ²p = .126, indicated a slight
5 o’clock on* taj mahal entrance gate. (We reached at 5 difference in the mean of prepositional errors between
o’clock at the entrance of the Taj Mahal.) CG’s pre-and post-test, but the significant mean difference
Syntactical Analysis of Errors was found in EG’s pre and post-test due to the intervention
Quantitative Analysis of the BL approach (Fig. 2 b).

4.0
3b Pre-Test

3.5 Post-Test
3a 3.5

3.0 3.0
Error (%)

2.5 2.5
Error (%)

2.0 2.0

1.5 1.5

1.0 1.0
Experimental Control Experimental Control

Fig.3. indicates the difference in syntactical errors between groups and tests (a): the mean of errors for both groups; (b) the
mean of pre and post errors for both groups.

Qualitative Analysis childhood. (Many foreigners have been living in India

The examples presented below reveal that learners make since childhood.)
errors in tense and word order. Errors are marked with an 12. CG Present continuous instead of Present Perfect
asterisk*: Continuous: All Indian are* living* in India with freedom
Errors in Verb Tense from* 1947. (All Indians have been living in India with
freedom since 1947.)
9. EG Present continuous instead of Simple Present:
Some Indian are* living* in village and some are living in 13. EG Present Perfect instead of Past Perfect: When a
very big cities. (Some Indians live in villages and some live foreigner was in Taj Mahal then he has* pointed out a
in very big cities.) river. (When a foreigner was in the Taj Mahal, he pointed
out a river.)
10. CG Present continuous instead of Simple Present:
Mostly foreigners are* going* to temple mosque and 14. CG Present Perfect instead of Past Perfect: When I
historical place but less people going* to village and small have* gone sudden flight came. (When I had gone, a
place of India. (Most foreigners go to temples, mosques, sudden flight came.)
and historical places, but fewer people go to the villages Errors in Word Order
and small places in India.) 15. EG: We tajmahal seeing to field. (We are/were seeing
11. EG Present continuous instead of Present Perfect the Taj Mahal from the field.)
Continuous: Many foreigners are* living* in India from*

www.ijaers.com Page | 103

Sousa et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science, 10(3)-2023

16. CG: Some foreigners tell we love live India in. (Some tests (pre and post-test), (1, 49) =7.299, P=.009, ²p =
foreigners said that we love to live in India.) .130, revealing the higher mean of errors in L2 writing for
Orthographical Analysis of Errors pre-test than post-test (Fig. 3 b). However, the two-way
interaction between groups tests, F (1, 49) = 11.980,
Quantitative Analysis
P=.001, ²p = .196 which indicated no statistical variation
In this study, two-way ANOVA was used on the mean in CG’s pre- and post-test results, but EG’s pre- and post-
scores of errors with two groups  2 tests. The analysis test results show a statistical difference, which is due to the
reveals the main effect on groups, F (1, 49) =4.447, intervention of the BL approach (Fig. 3 c). This implies
P=.040, ²p = .083, revealing the higher score of errors in that meaningful-lecture through the BL approach helped
L2 writing for CG than EG. This infers that the CG EG learners enhance their writing skills, which reduced
learners committed more significant errors than EG (Fig. 3 their writing errors compared to those with the non-BL
a). Further, the results also showed a significant effect of approach, i.e., CG.
2.4
2.4 4b
4a
2.2
2.2
2.0
2.0
1.8
Error (%)
1.8
Errors (%)

1.6 1.6

1.4 1.4

1.2 1.2

1.0 1.0
Experimental Control Pre-Test Post-Test

2.4 Pre-Test
4c
2.2 Post-Test

2.0

1.8
Error (%)

1.6

1.4

1.2

1.0
Experimental Control

Fig.4. shows the differences in orthographical errors between the groups and tests (a): mean of errors for two groups; (b)
means of errors for tests; (c) the mean of errors for tests and groups.

Qualitative Analysis Muslim, Sikh, and Christian, we all live in the same
Errors concerning incorrect spelling, capitalization, and society.)
punctuation are marked with an asterisk* below: 20. CG Capitalization & Punctuation: Tajm*ahal* j*ama
17. EG Spelling: Many forners* come India see historical m*asjid* l*al k*ila* Qutub m*inar India g*ate is famous
place. (Many foreigners come to India to see historical in our country. (The Taj Mahal, Jama Masjid, Lal Qila
places.) (Red Fort), Qutub Minar, and India Gate are famous in
our country.)
18. CG Spelling: In India animal laife* is also matter.
(Animals’ lives matter in India.) IV. DISCUSSION

19. EG Capitalization & Punctuation: Hindu* m*uslim* The main objective of this work was to compare frequent
s*ikh c*hristian we all are live in same society. (Hindu, morphological, syntactic, and orthographical errors in the
English writing produced by the two groups in the

www.ijaers.com Page | 104

Sousa et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science, 10(3)-2023

classroom of Madaris in India. This study has transformed articles, EG and CG made intralingual errors. The usage of
one group into a control and another group into the indefinite article with plural nouns could have been due
experimental with pre and post-test designs. The errors to the incomplete application of the rules. Also, students
committed by both groups were compared to capture formed an ungrammatical structure based on their learning
variation in error patterns. Next, a pre and post-test were experience when they overgeneralized the indefinite article
also employed to determine significant variation between preceding a noun in the target language (TL).
tests regarding L2 writing errors. It was found that Errors in Preposition
Madrasa students committed morphological, syntactic, and
The two sentences in examples (7 and 8) above
orthographical errors in their writing (RQ 1) due to
demonstrate that learners use incorrect prepositions. These
interlingual and intralingual interference (RQ 2). It was
prepositions “in, on, and at” were used interchangeably in
also found that CG and EG committed significantly
their L1 that’s why both the EG and CG had trouble
differently, wherein CG committed more errors than EG
employing the correct prepositions (Agnihotri (2013),
(RQ 3). We found that Madrasa students committed
Koul (2008), Jain (2007, 1995) and Kellogg (1972). The
morphological which outperformed syntactic and
findings of Ahmad, 1996; Farooqi, 2015; Fakhar 2013;
orthographical errors in their writings. These results
Ahmad, 1996; Parasher; 1977 study also support our
correspond with Riyaz (2020); Jinny (2019); Dhar (2016);
findings that Hindi learners made errors due to L1 transfer
Saikia (2016); Rupinder (2014); Vijayalakshmi (2008);
in TL. Such an error occurred due to the negative L1
Mathai (2007); Lalitha, N. (2011) and Obeid (2000)
transfer.
studies reported morphological, syntactic and orthographic
errors as the most frequent errors committed by Kashmiri, Syntactic Errors in Writing
Panjabi, Assamese, Marathi, Bengali, Malayalam, The second category of errors made by students in English
Kannada and Tamil learners in English. In the following writing was syntactical ones. But the findings revealed
sub-sections, each type of error has been discussed in significant variation between EG and CG errors, wherein
detail. EG made fewer errors than CG. In this line, Farooqi’s
Morphological Errors in Writing (2015) findings revealed that students had made frequent
errors in verb tense and word order categories but could
Morphological errors are the prime category of errors in
not provide the reasons for the errors. In this regard, the
English writing by learners. This demonstrates a
current study offers the sources of errors among Madrasa
significant difference between EG and CG. It was
students’ writing as interlingual and intralingual errors but
discovered that students in CG made more errors than
contradicts previous findings (Rupinder; 2014; Dhar; 2016
those in EG at Madrasa. The students were troubled to
and Lalitha; 2001).
place the correct articles and prepositions. The current
investigation found that interlingual and intralingual Errors in Verb Tense
transfers were both groups’ primary sources of errors. The Madrasa students substituted the Present Continuous
current study’s findings also contradict Pondra’s (2015) instead of the Simple Present, the Present continuous
findings, which affirmed that article and preposition errors instead of the Present Perfect Continuous, and the Present
made by Telugu students were primarily due to mother Perfect instead of the Past Perfect (see examples from 9 to
tongue influence. However, the outcomes of the current 14). The errors in writing related to verb tense resulted
study revealed that both groups committed interlingual and from intralingual and developmental issues between CG
intralingual errors in English writing. However, our and EG. The findings further report verb-tense errors,
findings were identical to Farooqi’s (2015) results, where mainly analogous to Ahmad’s (1996) study, and frequent
he reported articles and prepositions as the most common errors in previous studies (Farooqi, 2015 & Ahmad, 1996).
errors among learners.
Errors in Word Order
Errors in Article
As Hindi is a verb-final language (see e. g., 15 and 16);
Madrasa students’ writings (see examples 1, 2, 5 & 6) also consequently, the mother tongue’s influence could be seen
show omission and incorrect usage of the definite article, in both groups’ writings by their incorrect word order
which could be due to the L1 influence, as the definite (Agnihotri, 2013; Koul, 2008; Jain, 2007, 1995 and
article is not used in Hindi (Agnihotri (2013), Koul (2008), Kellogg, 1972).
Jain (2007, 1995) and Kellogg (1972). In addition, the
Orthographic Errors
errors in examples 2 and 3 suggest students
overgeneralized indefinite article use prior to all the nouns. The subsequent examples (17, 18, 19, and 20) present the
Due to their incorrect hypothesis regarding using indefinite orthographic capitalization errors caused mainly by L1

www.ijaers.com Page | 105

Sousa et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science, 10(3)-2023

interference. In this line, previous studies reported that [5] Alam, A. (2020). Inside a madrasa: Knowledge, power and
there is a high probability of such errors (capitalization) Islamic identity in India. Routledge India.
among L2 learners learning English as a second language. [6] Antulay, A. R. (1999). Recommendations Made in Annual
Report- Period 1998–99 and Action Taken Report. National
The leading cause of such errors is that languages like
Commission for Minorities.
Hindi and Urdu do not use the capitalization system. The
[7] Bersin, J. (2004). The blended learning book: Best practices,
first word and proper name start with a small letter, while proven methodologies, and lessons learned. John Wiley &
the English language follows the opposite. Moreover, Sons.
Shaughnessy (1977) indicated that non-advanced writers [8] Boelens, R., Van Laer, S., De Wever, B., & Elen, J. (2015).
make errors in punctuation mainly because they believe Blended learning in adult education: towards a definition of
that the use of spoken language can be transferred to blended learning.
writing without any change. [9] Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and
teaching (Vol. 4). New York: Longman.
[10] Camargo Angelucci, T., & Pozzo, M. I. (2020). Errors and
V. CONCLUSION Mistakes in Foreign Language Learning: Drawing
Boundaries from the Discourse of Argentine Teachers. In
To our knowledge, no study has examined second
Mistakes, Errors and Failures across Cultures (pp. 383-398).
language writing errors from Madrasa students’ Springer, Cham.
perspective. Therefore, this is the first study to compare [11] Chao, H. W., Wu, C. C., & Tsai, C. W. (2021). Do socio-
the frequency of common errors committed in English cultural differences matter? A study of the learning effects
writing by Alim course students at Madrasa belonging to and satisfaction with physical activity from digital learning
EG and CG. The findings of this study demonstrate that assimilated into a university dance course. Computers &
there was a difference between the two groups over time. Education, 165, 104150.
Further, it was also found that both the groups committed [12] Chomsky, N. (1959). Verbal behavior by BF Skinner.
Bobbs-Merrill.
common errors, but EG’s post-test scores were
[13] Corder, S. (1974). Error Analysis and Remedial Teaching.
significantly higher than their pre-test scores, indicating
[14] Corder, S. P. (1967). 1967: The significance of learners’
the usefulness of BL in remedial writing instruction and errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics 5, 161–
providing a paradigm shift for successful BL adoption at 170.
Madrasa in India. Overall, the findings justify using BL as [15] Corder, S. P. (1971). Idiosyncratic dialects and error
a teaching approach at various Madrasa. On a broader analysis.
scale, BL could be a practical approach for improvising [16] Corder, S. P. (1975). Error analysis, interlanguage and
English writing skills. Finally, the authors of this study say second language acquisition. Language teaching, 8(4), 201-
that the long-term effects of the new BL approach in 218.
[17] Corder, S. P. (1982). Error analysis and interlanguage.
Madrasa education need to be studied in more detail,
Oxford University Press.
taking into account things like different age groups,
[18] Dhar, N. Chandra (2016). Young learner and the English
gender, previous educational background, and more this language. University of Calcutta, India (unpublished
study may have ignored. doctoral dissertation). http://hdl.handle.net/10603/158899
[19] Doering, A. (2006). Adventure learning: Transformative
hybrid online educaion. Distance Education, 27(2), 197–
REFERENCES 215. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910600789571.
[1] Adas, D., & Bakir, A. (2013). Writing difficulties and new [20] Donnelly, R. (2010). Harmonizing technology with
solutions: Blended learning as an approach to improve interaction in blended problem-based learning. Computers &
writing abilities. International journal of humanities and education, 54(2), 350-359.
social science, 3(9), 254-266. [21] Dulay, H. (1982). Language two. Oxford University Press,
[2] Agnihotri, R. K. (2013). Hindi: An essential grammar. 200 Madison Ave., New York, NY 10016.
Routledge. [22] Dušková, L. (1969). On sources of errors in foreign
[3] Ahmad, S. (1996). Analysis of the errors commonly language learning.
committed by the Urdu-Hindi speaking children learning [23] Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition.
English. Aligarh Muslim University, India (unpublished Oxford University.
doctoral dissertation) http://hdl.handle.net/10603/52293 [24] Ellis, R., & G. Barkhuizen (2005). Analyzing learner
[4] Akhtar, N., & Narula, M. (2010). The role of Indian language.
Madrasahs in providing access to mainstream education for [25] El-Maghraby, A. L. (2021). Investigating The Effectiveness
Muslim minority students: A West Bengal experience. of Moodle Based Blended Learning in Developing Writing
Journal of International Migration and Integration/Revue de Skills for University Students. Journal of Research in
l'integration et de la migration internationale, 11(1), 91- Curriculum Instruction and Educational Technology, 7(1),
107. 115-140.

www.ijaers.com Page | 106

Sousa et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science, 10(3)-2023

[26] Fakhar, S. (2013). English Prepositional Usage: A linguistic [45] Larson, D. K., & Sung, C. H. (2009). Comparing student
analysis of the errors committed by Urdu speaking students performance: Online versus blended versus face-to-face.
of English at AMU Aligarh. Aligarh Muslim University, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(1), 31-42.
India (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) [46] Le, T. N., Allen, B., & Johnson, N. F. (2021). Blended
http://hdl.handle.net/10603/21110 learning: Barriers and drawbacks for English language
[27] Farooqi, F. (2015). Articles and preposition in the English lecturers at Vietnamese universities. E-Learning and Digital
writing of undergraduate students at AMU an error Media, 20427530211048235.
analysis. Aligarh Muslim University, India (Unpublished [47] Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2006). How languages are
doctoral dissertation). http://hdl.handle.net/10603/163258 learned. Oxford University Press.
[28] Ferdig, R., Cavanaugh, C., & Freidhoff, J. (2012). Lessons [48] Mabuan, R., & Ebron, G. (2017). A blended learning
learned from blended programs: Experiences and approach to teaching writing: using e-mail in the ESL
recommendations from the field. Vienna, VA: iNACOL. classroom. Asian EFL Journal, 100, 83-103.
[29] Fisiak, J. (1985). Contrastive linguistics and the language [49] Macaro, E. (Ed.). (2010). Continuum companion to second
teacher. Pergamon Press. language acquisition. Bloomsbury Publishing.
[30] Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: [50] Mathai, P.A. (2007) A linguistic study of the errors of the
Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. second language learners of English Malayalam mother
The internet and higher education, 7(2), 95-105. tongue speakers. University of Mysore, India (unpublished
[31] Graham, C. R., Woodfield, W., & Harrison, J. B. (2013). A doctoral dissertation,). http://hdl.handle.net/10603/92335
framework for institutional adoption and implementation of [51] Moosa, E. (2015). What is a Madrasa?. UNC Press Books.
blended learning in higher education. The internet and [52] Moskal, P., Dziuban, C., & Hartman, J. (2013). Blended
higher education, 18, 4-14. learning: A dangerous idea?. The Internet and Higher
[32] Hamid, M. O. (2007). Identifying second language errors: Education, 18, 15-23.
How plausible are plausible reconstructions?. ELT Journal, [53] O’Shaughnessy, M. (1977). Errors and Expectations.
61(2), 107-116. [54] Obeid, K. N. (2000) A syntactico_semantic study of futurity
[33] Horn, M. B., & Staker, H. (2011). The rise of K-12 blended in standard English. Savitribai Phule Pune University, India
learning. Innosight institute, 5, 1-17. (unpublished doctoral dissertation,)
[34] Hussain Shah, A. (2017). A Study Of The Quality Of http://hdl.handle.net/10603/173104
Madrasa Teachers In Southern Punjab (Doctoral [55] Osguthorpe, R., & Graham, C. (2003). Blending learning
dissertation). environments: Definitions and directions. Quarterly Review
[35] Iseni, A. (2011). Assessment, Testing and Correcting of Distance Education, 4 (3), 227–233. Recuperado de
Studentsxs’ Errors and Mistakes. Language Testing in Asia, https://www. learntechlib. org/p/97576.
1(3), 1-31. [56] Owston, R., York, D., & Murtha, S. (2013). Student
[36] Jain, U. R. (1995). Introduction to Hindi grammar. Center perceptions and achievement in a university blended
for South & Southeast. learning strategic initiative. The internet and higher
[37] Jain, U. R. (2007). Advanced Hindi Grammar. Center for education, 18, 38-46.
South & Southeast. [57] Pandey, L. (2019). Madrasa Education System in Bihar. the
[38] James, C. (2013). Errors in language learning and use: NCERT and no matter may be reproduced in any form
Exploring error analysis. Routledge. without the prior permission of the NCERT., 44(4), 57.
[39] Jinny, J. (2019). A study of English writing skills of standard [58] Parasher, S. V. (1977). Focus on Learners’ English: A Case
ix students of Kodagu district Karnataka. Maharaja Study of Hindi-Speaking First Year Students’ Performance.
Sayajirao University of Baroda, India, (Unpublished CIEFL Bulletin, 13(2), 41-57.
doctoral dissertation). http://hdl.handle.net/10603/288823 [59] Pedersen, J., Makdisi, G., Rahman, M., & Hillenbrand, R.
[40] Kellogg, S. H. (1972). A grammar of the Hindi language. (2019). Madrasa. Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2.
Рипол Классик. [60] Pondra, R. (2015) Error Analysis Investigating the Errors in
[41] Keshavarz, M. H. (2015). Contrastive analysis, error Written English Made by Telugu Speaking Engineering
analysis, and interlanguage. Rahnama Press. Students in the State of Telangana. The English and Foreign
[42] Keshta, A. S., & Harb, I. I. (2013). The effectiveness of a Languages University, Hyderabad (unpublished doctoral
blended learning program on developing Palestinian tenth dissertation). http://hdl.handle.net/10603/207616
graders’ English writing skills. Education Journal, 2(6), [61] Rahman, A. M. A., Azmi, M. N. L., & Hassan, I. (2020).
208-221. Improvement of English Writing Skills through Blended
[43] Koul, O. N. (2008). Modern Hindi Grammar. Springfield, Learning among University Students in Malaysia. Universal
VA: Dunwoody Press. Journal of Educational Research, 8(12A), 7694-7701.
[44] Lalitha, N (2001) The influence of L1 Tamil on the learning [62] Ramamurti, A. (1986) (as modified in 1992). National
of L2 English of Std IX students error analysis. University of Policy on Education. Ministry of Human Resource
Madras, India (Unpublished doctoral dissertation,) Development 1968.
http://hdl.handle.net/10603/93108 [63] Reetz, D. (2010). From madrasa to University–the
Challenges and formats of Islamic Education. The Sage
Handbook of Islamic Studies, Thousand Oaks, CA.

www.ijaers.com Page | 107

Sousa et al. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science, 10(3)-2023

[64] Richards, J. (1971). Error Analysis and Second Language

Strategies.
[65] Richards, J. C. (1974). A non-contrastive approach to error
analysis. Error analysis: Perspectives on second language
acquisition, 172-188.
[66] Riyaz, H (2020) Error Analysis: A Study of Errors Made in
Written English by Secondary School Students in Kashmir
Valley. University of Kashmir, India (unpublished doctoral
dissertation) http://hdl.handle.net/10603/341811
[67] Rupinder (2014) An analysis of errors committed by the
undergraduate students of English: a micro study of Patiala
district. Punjab University, India (unpublished doctoral
dissertation) http://hdl.handle.net/10603/28042
[68] Saikia K. K. (2016) A Study of Syntactic Errors in English
committed by the Students of Vernacular Medium Secondary
Schools of Dibrugarh District Assam. Dibrugarh University,
India (unpublished doctoral dissertation).
http://hdl.handle.net/10603/215217
[69] Smith, K., & Hill, J. (2019). Defining the nature of blended
learning through its depiction in current research. Higher
Education Research & Development, 38(2), 383-397.
[70] Stein, J., & Graham, C. R. (2014). Essentials for blended
learning: A standards-based guide. Routledge.
[71] Sultana, S. (2017). Teaching of grammar and reading skills
in english classrooms: A case of madrasas in Hyderabad.
Language and language teaching, 6(1), 43-47.
[72] Touchie, H. Y. (1986). Second language learning errors:
Their types, causes, and treatment. JALT journal, 8(1), 75-
80.
[73] Vijayalakshmi, P.P. (2008) Error analysis- its use in the
teaching of English to Malayalee learners of English.
University of Calicut, India (unpublished doctoral
dissertation) http://hdl.handle.net/10603/13101
[74] Vo, H. M., Zhu, C., & Diep, N. A. (2017). The effect of
blended learning on student performance at course-level in
higher education: A meta-analysis. Studies in Educational
Evaluation, 53, 17-28.
[75] Vu, T. T., & Bui, D. B. H. (2020). Blended Learning in
University Writing Classes--Efficiency and Attitude.
THAITESOL Journal, 33(2), 20-45.
[76] Wani, H. A. (2012). Madrasah Education in India: A Need
for Reformation. ATIKAN, 2(2).
[77] Williams, J., & Chinn, S. J. (2009). Using Web 2.0 to
support the active learning experience. Journal of
Information Systems Education, 20(2), 165.

www.ijaers.com Page | 108