What Error Analysis can still offer TESOL classrooms: A scoping review of research trends and pedagogical implications

Wei Shen; Afendi Hamat; Anis Nadiah Che Abdul Rahman; Jun Wang; Xiangyan Shan

doi:10.21153/tesol2026vol35no1art2292

Authors

Wei Shen Centre for Research in Language and Linguistics, Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia https://orcid.org/0009-0005-3791-5719
Afendi Hamat Centre for Research in Language and Linguistics, Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2060-9203
Anis Nadiah Che Abdul Rahman Centre for Research in Language and Linguistics, Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7530-1113
Jun Wang School of Foreign Studies, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao, Hebei, China
Xiangyan Shan College of Foreign Languages, Henan Institute of Science and Technology, Xinxiang, Henan, China

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21153/tesol2026vol35no1art2292

Keywords:

Error Analysis, TESOL classrooms, EAL/D, scoping review, pedagogical implications, learner writing

Abstract

Error Analysis (EA) has long been used in English language teaching to identify recurring learner difficulties and inform decisions about instruction and feedback. However, the research literature on EA has developed unevenly, making it difficult for TESOL practitioners to judge what this work can usefully offer in classroom settings.

This scoping review examines how EA has been used in English-language research and what it can reasonably contribute to TESOL classrooms. Guided by Arksey and O’Malley’s framework and reported in line with PRISMA-ScR guidelines, the review included 106 peer-reviewed studies published up to February 2025. Analysis of the literature showed three recurring patterns: a strong emphasis on grammatical and lexical errors, continued reliance on small datasets and manual coding, and uneven connections between error description, theoretical explanation, and pedagogical application. Taken together, the findings suggest that EA remains most useful when treated as a diagnostic rather than a prescriptive classroom resource.