With respect to English as second language learning in the field of spoken discourse, it is inevitable that learners’ utterances and sentences in communication and writing differ from those of native speakers, the extent to which errors generated by learners might occur. The reasons for their errors are many and varied. For instance, they are subject to their mother language, fail to master target language, or make errors unconsciously. On the part of teachers, taking this phenomenon into consideration, they should be well prepared to solve it, so as to improve learners’ linguistic accuracy and encourage them to participate in class exchanges.

The term error correction in research and application is applied in the same sense as corrective feedback as well as a number of other expressions that can be drawn upon to describe teachers’ response to learners’ inaccurate spoken and written output. The error correction is defined as that corrective feedback refers to the feedback that learners receive on the linguistic errors they make in their oral or written production in a second language.

Although a bulk of research has been done, this topic still renders a heated debate. Truscott once took a case against grammar correction and he regarded grammar correction as ineffective and useless which should be abandon, which is in sharp contrast to those scholars who are in favor of the effectiveness and merit of corrective feedback, which not only convey the correct messages given by teachers, but also infuse the correct forms of language to learners, leaving learners formulate a complete and correct oral language system. On the other hand, corrective feedback includes the explicit correction and implicit correction. The teacher should have a clear mind about these techniques and put them into practice in classroom respectively. Therefore, error correction employed by teachers to some extent can serve as a toolkit for scrutinizing learners’ inaccurate output and leading them to a more accurate input with confidence and positive attitude.

There are some implications for teachers in face of learners’ error. First of all, teachers should consider level of learners’ acquisition. Different level of cognition is a matter of attention teachers should pay. Second, teachers should master variety of error correction techniques. Last, what matters is learners’ attitude, as well as teachers’ attitude. Learners’ attitude should be an imperative option for teachers’ consideration. To develop a positive attitude towards error correction helps learners take a big step in language acquisition. Teachers could create an atmosphere in which learners are active and optimistic to learn language.