209 EEJ 13 (2) (2023) 209-220 English Education Journal http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej Errors in Discourse Marker Usage in Descriptive Texts by SMA Negeri 12 Semarang Students Nurtilek Kadyrov, Januarius Mujiyanto, Sri Wuli Fitriati Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia Article Info ________________ Article History: Accepted 30 January 2023 Approved 8 March 2023 Published 20 June 2023 ________________ Keywords: discourse markers; descriptive text, error analysis, text coherence ____________________ Abstract ___________________________________________________________________ This study delves into the analysis of common errors found in descriptive texts authored by a sample of 32 students, randomly selected from SMA Negeri 12 Semarang. Its primary objective is to identify, categorize, and evaluate errors pertaining to adverbial phrases, conjunctions, prepositional phrases, and discourse markers while assessing their impact on the coherence of the text. Employing a rigorous research methodology encompassing both quantitative and qualitative techniques, this study provides a thorough evaluation of the student's writing abilities. Quantitative analysis of the collected data exposes a spectrum of errors, encompassing discourse marker misuses, sentence structure deficiencies, inaccuracies in prepositional phrases, conjunction errors, and problems with adverbial phrases. Notably, discourse marker errors, including the omission of commas and the repetitive use of words, emerged as the most prevalent issues. These errors have the potential to significantly hinder the clarity and overall flow of the text. The motivation for this study arises from the recognition that students often encounter challenges when it comes to effectively utilizing discourse markers and other grammatical elements in their descriptive writing. These difficulties can adversely impact text coherence and, consequently, the overall quality of the students' compositions. In light of the quantitative findings, this research underscores the critical importance of targeted grammar instruction and consistent writing practice to enhance students' writing skills. Addressing these common errors collaboratively, educators and learners can work towards improving the quality of descriptive texts. Correspondence Address : Kelud Utara 3 Kampus Pascasarjana UNNES 34572 E-mail: kadyrovindo@students.unnes.ac.id p-ISSN 2087-0108 e-ISSN 2502-4566 Nurtilek Kadyrov, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 209-220 210 INTRODUCTION English language education is an ever- evolving domain, characterized by a dynamic interplay of pedagogical methodologies, teaching strategies, and learning outcomes (Ade, 2023). Language educators and researchers continually explore innovative approaches to enhance students' language skills, addressing both the foundational aspects of language acquisition and the more nuanced dimensions of language usage and comprehension (Arsyikin, 2021). This study seeks to contribute to this ongoing discourse by examining a specific facet of English language learning: the use of chained message games as a pedagogical tool to improve listening comprehension among seventh-grade students (Faticha, 2019). A thorough examination of the existing literature reveals a wealth of research exploring diverse aspects of language learning and teaching. Some noteworthy studies have probed into the intricacies of written language, such as Aldhawiyah's (2021) meticulous error analysis of the use of English articles in descriptive texts. Aldhawiyah's work illuminated the common errors made by learners in the usage of articles like 'a,' 'an,' and 'the,' highlighting the importance of mastering these fundamental elements of English grammar. In a different vein, Choemue and Bram (2021) undertook an investigation into the use of discourse markers in the written works of Thai EFL learners. Their study discerned variations in marker usage patterns between academic and non-academic contexts, offering insights into the influence of context on language production. Such research aids in better understanding the nuances of language usage across different communicative settings. Furthermore, Erlangga et al. (2019) conducted an analysis of grammatical errors prevalent in descriptive texts authored by seventh-grade students. Their work identified common grammatical pitfalls, providing valuable insights for educators aiming to address these issues effectively in the classroom. These studies collectively underscore the significance of a multifaceted approach to language education, encompassing grammatical precision, discourse coherence, and context-appropriate language use. However, amid this rich tapestry of research, there exists a noticeable gap—a dearth of empirical investigations into innovative methods for enhancing listening comprehension skills among middle-grade students. While written language skills have received substantial attention, the development of listening proficiency, an equally vital facet of language acquisition, remains relatively underexplored in the context of seventh-grade English language learners. This research gap is particularly relevant in an era when effective communication, including active listening, is recognized as a fundamental skill set for academic and professional success. Effective written communication is a cornerstone of language development, academic achievement, and professional success. Proficiency in crafting descriptive texts not only showcases a student's language skills but also their ability to convey ideas clearly and coherently. This research embarks on a comprehensive exploration of adverbial phrases, conjunctions, prepositional phrases, and discourse markers in students' descriptive texts at SMA Negeri 12 Semarang. The primary focus is to identify errors, assess effectiveness, and discern their significance in the context of language education. Language acquisition and development are dynamic processes, particularly in today's increasingly globalized world, where English plays a pivotal role in international communication. SMA Negeri 12 Semarang, like many educational institutions, is dedicated to equipping its students with the language skills necessary for both academic and practical purposes. However, despite concerted efforts in language instruction, challenges persist, and one of the foremost challenges is the effective utilization of discourse features in written expression. The existence of errors in the use of adverbial phrases, conjunctions, prepositional phrases, and discourse markers in students' Nurtilek Kadyrov, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 209-220 211 descriptive texts constitutes a significant concern. These errors not only hinder the clarity, coherence, and overall quality of written work but also have the potential to impede effective communication in academic and professional contexts. Understanding the nature and extent of these errors is, therefore, essential for the development of targeted pedagogical interventions. This research holds multifaceted significance. Firstly, it contributes to the ongoing discourse on language instruction and writing proficiency, enriching the body of knowledge in the field. Secondly, it provides educators with valuable insights into the common pitfalls in students' writing, enabling them to formulate tailored strategies to address these issues effectively. Thirdly, it empowers students by enhancing their language skills, ultimately preparing them for future academic and professional endeavors where effective communication is paramount. The existing body of literature underscores the pivotal role of adverbial phrases, conjunctions, prepositional phrases, and discourse markers in achieving coherence and cohesion in written texts. These linguistic elements serve as indispensable tools in organizing ideas, signaling relationships between different parts of a text, and guiding the reader through the narrative. However, studies also reveal that students often grapple with the appropriate usage of these elements, resulting in errors in their writing. These findings underscore the pressing need for further investigation into the specific challenges faced by students at SMA Negeri 12 Semarang in mastering these elements. This study seeks to achieve comprehensive research objectives: This study aims to conduct a comprehensive examination of the existence of errors in the use of adverbial phrases in students' descriptive texts at SMA Negeri 12 Semarang. It also investigates the presence of errors in the use of conjunctions in students' descriptive texts at SMA Negeri 12 Semarang. Furthermore, it delves into the existence of errors in the use of prepositional phrases in students' descriptive texts at SMA Negeri 12 Semarang. This research rigorously assesses the effectiveness of students' deployment of discourse markers in their descriptive texts at SMA Negeri 12 Semarang. Lastly, it seeks to establish a nuanced understanding of the relationship between the existence of errors in the use of discourse markers and the overall text quality in students' descriptive texts at SMA Negeri 12 Semarang. By addressing these research objectives, this study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the specific areas where students encounter difficulties, offering invaluable insights that can inform instructional practices and bridge the divide between theoretical knowledge and practical application in the realm of language education. METHOD This study, involving 32 randomly selected students from SMA Negeri 12 Semarang, aimed to achieve several research objectives. Specifically, it sought to investigate the presence of errors in the utilization of adverbial phrases, conjunctions, prepositional phrases, and discourse markers within descriptive texts authored by these students. Additionally, the research aimed to assess the effectiveness of students' use of discourse markers by examining their influence on text coherence and cohesion. To accomplish these objectives, a mixed- methods approach was adopted, encompassing both quantitative and qualitative research methods. The research design employed was cross-sectional, focusing on the analysis of descriptive texts at a specific moment in time. The primary research object consisted of the diverse collection of descriptive texts created by the participating students. To protect the confidentiality of the students, these texts were anonymized and assigned unique identifiers for reference purposes. To assess errors in linguistic elements, four checklists were meticulously developed, each tailored to evaluate specific categories: adverbial phrases, conjunctions, prepositional phrases, and discourse markers. These checklists contained detailed criteria designed to evaluate the correctness and appropriateness of the students' writing. The research followed a structured process, commencing with data collection through the Nurtilek Kadyrov, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 209-220 212 acquisition of the students' descriptive texts. Subsequently, a thorough analysis was undertaken to identify and categorize errors related to the designated linguistic elements, considering their nature and severity. The qualitative assessment of the effectiveness of discourse markers in enhancing text coherence and cohesion was conducted by examining their overall impact on the clarity and flow of the text. Data analysis encompassed both quantitative and qualitative techniques. Quantitative analysis involved tabulating data on the frequency and types of errors in each category, subjecting them to statistical analysis. Qualitative analysis, on the other hand, focused on evaluating the quality of discourse marker integration within the text through content analysis. Additionally, correlation analysis was employed to explore potential relationships between the existence of errors and overall text quality. The theoretical underpinning for this research was rooted in established principles of grammar, syntax, and discourse analysis. This theoretical framework facilitated a comprehensive examination of linguistic elements and their profound influence on text quality, aligning with the research's overarching objectives. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Table 1. Error Types Error Type Frequency Adverbial Phrase 3 Conjunction 3 Discourse Marker 22 Prepositional Phrase 3 The analysis of the students' texts in Table 1 reveals several common error types. Discourse markers were the most frequently observed error type, with a total count of 22 instances. These errors include missing commas before "because" in sentences, which could improve clarity and structure. For example, in Student 5's text, the sentence "My favorite toppings are mushrooms, olives, and also bell peppers" should have a comma before "because" to separate clauses. Another prevalent error type was the use of conjunctions, with a count of 3 instances. Student 4, for instance, used the phrase "between the break time," which sounded awkward and might require rephrasing to enhance fluency. Adverbial phrases were identified as an issue in 3 instances. Student 2's text contained an unclear sentence structure with the phrase "I pray Subuh," which would benefit from improvement for better comprehension. Prepositional phrases also accounted for 3 errors, such as in Student 20's text, where the phrase "between beach" was used instead of the correct "by the beach." Correcting prepositional phrases is essential for clarity. Additionally, the excessive repetition of the word "also" was observed in 3 instances. This repetition can be removed or sentences can be revised to avoid redundancy, as seen in Student 10's text. Lastly, there were issues with sentence structure in some texts, identified in 2 instances. Student 3 and Student 11 both had texts with sentence structure issues that may require revision for improved readability. In summary, the qualitative analysis of the students' texts highlighted several error types, including discourse marker issues, conjunction errors, adverbial phrase clarity, prepositional phrase correctness, repetition of words, and sentence structure problems. Addressing these errors will help enhance the overall quality and clarity of their writing. Error 1: Adverbial Phrase In the context of written communication, the use of adverbial phrases is crucial to convey information effectively and maintain clarity within sentences. Adverbial phrases modify verbs, adjectives, or adverbs and provide additional details about the action or situation. However, errors in adverbial phrases can result in sentences that are ambiguous or unclear. For instance, in Student 2's writing, there is an error in the adverbial phrase within the sentence "My morning routine: I pray subuh." Here, the phrase "I pray Subuh" lacks context and clarity, making it challenging for the reader to understand the writer's morning routine accurately. To address this issue, the writer can provide more context or restructure the sentence to make it more explicit. Nurtilek Kadyrov, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 209-220 213 Similarly, Student 13's sentence, "My pet dog: here is always summer," demonstrates a lack of clarity due to the adverbial phrase "here is always summer." It is unclear how this phrase relates to having a pet dog. To enhance comprehension, the writer can separate this information into different sentences or offer additional details to establish a clear connection between having a pet dog and the perpetual summer. In summary, errors related to adverbial phrases can hinder the clarity and coherence of sentences. To rectify these errors, writers should aim to provide context, maintain sentence structure, and ensure that adverbial phrases enhance rather than obscure the intended message. Adverbial phrase errors were detected in some of the students' descriptive texts, affecting the clarity and precision of their writing. Adverbial phrases provide essential information about the time, place, manner, frequency, or condition of actions, enhancing the reader's understanding of the text. However, incorrect or unclear adverbial phrases can lead to confusion. One common adverbial phrase error found was the sentence, "I pray Subuh." The adverbial phrase "Subuh" does not provide sufficient context, as it refers to a specific Islamic prayer time, but the sentence lacks clarity in explaining this. A more precise adverbial phrase like "I pray the Subuh prayer at dawn" would convey the intended meaning effectively. Another issue was the use of the adverbial phrase "here is always summer." This phrase lacks specificity and might confuse readers. It's unclear whether it refers to the geographical location or simply the season. To improve clarity, the phrase could be revised to something like "the weather here is always warm like summer," providing a more precise adverbial description. To address adverbial phrase errors, students should be encouraged to use descriptive adverbial phrases that provide clear and specific information about the actions or situations described in their texts. Teachers can emphasize the importance of context and precision when using adverbs and adverbial phrases to enhance the overall quality of their writing. In conclusion, rectifying adverbial phrase errors is crucial for improving the readability and coherence of students' descriptive texts. By guiding them in the use of precise and context- rich adverbial phrases, their writing can become more engaging and communicative for the readers. Error 2: Conjunction Conjunctions play a fundamental role in the structure of sentences, as they are used to connect words, phrases, or clauses to convey relationships and logical connections. Errors involving conjunctions can lead to sentences that are grammatically incorrect or lack coherence. For example, in Student 4's writing, the sentence "My best friend: between the break time" contains an error in the conjunction "between." The phrase "between the break time" results in awkward phrasing that does not effectively convey the intended meaning. To improve the sentence, the writer should use a more appropriate conjunction or rephrase the sentence to clarify the relationship between their best friend and the break time. Likewise, Student 12's sentence, "My favorite sport: at weekends," contains an error in the preposition "at" where "on" would be more appropriate. The phrase "at weekends" is not in line with standard English usage, and it can lead to confusion. To rectify this error, the writer should replace "at" with "on" to accurately convey the timing of their favorite sport. In summary, errors involving conjunctions can impact the grammatical correctness and clarity of sentences. Writers should ensure that conjunctions are used correctly to establish coherent connections between elements in their writing, whether they are joining words, phrases, or clauses. Proper use of conjunctions contributes to the overall readability and understanding of the text. Conjunction errors were identified in some of the students' descriptive texts, impacting the flow and coherence of their writing. Conjunctions play a crucial role in connecting words, phrases, and clauses within sentences, ensuring that the text flows smoothly. However, incorrect usage of Nurtilek Kadyrov, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 209-220 214 conjunctions can disrupt the natural progression of ideas. One common conjunction error observed was the use of the phrase "between the break time." The phrase "between" in this context is not the appropriate conjunction. Instead, "during" or "in" should be used to indicate the time during which an action takes place. Correcting this error would result in "during the break time." Another issue was the use of "because" where "but" or similar contrasting conjunction was more appropriate. For example, in the sentence "because my mother is short and has brown hair," the conjunction "because" suggests a cause-and-effect relationship, which may not be the intended meaning. Replacing "because" with "but" or "although" would provide a more accurate contrast between the mother and father's physical attributes. To address conjunction errors, students should receive guidance on selecting the appropriate conjunctions based on the logical relationship between clauses or elements. Encouraging them to consider the intended meaning of their sentences and choosing conjunctions that align with that meaning can significantly improve the coherence of their writing. In conclusion, rectifying conjunction errors is vital for enhancing the overall clarity and flow of students' descriptive texts. By teaching them to choose conjunctions that accurately convey the intended relationships between ideas, their writing can become more cohesive and engaging for readers. Error 3: Discourse Marker Discourse markers are essential linguistic tools that help structure conversations and written text, providing cues to readers or listeners about the organization of ideas and relationships between sentences or clauses. However, errors in discourse markers can lead to misunderstandings or disrupt the flow of information within a text. For example, in Student 1's writing, there is an error in the use of a discourse marker. The sentence "My family: My father is tall and has black hair, because my mother is short and has brown hair," lacks a comma before the word "because." This error can make it challenging for the reader to distinguish between the two clauses and their respective meanings. To resolve this issue, the writer should include a comma before "because" to clearly separate the clauses and indicate the causal relationship. Similarly, in Student 5's sentence, "My favorite food: My favorite toppings are mushrooms, olives, and also bell peppers," there is a missing comma before the discourse marker "because." This omission can affect the sentence's overall structure and understanding. To improve clarity, the writer should insert a comma before "because" to signal the introduction of a new clause. In summary, errors involving discourse markers can impact the coherence and organization of sentences within a text. Writers should pay close attention to the appropriate use of discourse markers, ensuring that they are placed correctly to enhance the flow of information and facilitate the reader's understanding of the text's structure. In the analysis of students' descriptive texts, we identified several discourse marker errors that can impact the overall clarity and effectiveness of their writing. One prevalent error was the omission of necessary commas before discourse markers like "because" and "but." These missing commas resulted in sentences that lacked the appropriate structure and clarity. For example, a sentence such as "My father is tall and has black hair, because my mother is short and has brown hair" could be misinterpreted as a single, continuous thought, when in fact, it intends to convey two related but separate ideas. To address this issue, it is crucial to emphasize the significance of commas in distinguishing different parts of a sentence. Another discourse marker error we observed was the repetition of certain markers like "also." Repetition of discourse markers without a clear purpose can lead to redundancy and disrupt the flow of the text. This overuse can hinder the variation in sentence structures, making the writing less engaging. For instance, the sentence "My favorite animal is the dog. But, dogs are known for their loyalty and friendly nature. They come in various shapes, sizes, or Nurtilek Kadyrov, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 209-220 215 breeds" contains repetitive use of "also" and "but." To rectify this, students should aim to eliminate unnecessary repetitions and use discourse markers purposefully to convey meaning or emphasize contrast. Furthermore, we noted instances of awkward phrasing caused by the incorporation of discourse markers. Clear and concise sentence structure is vital for effective communication, and awkward phrasing can hinder comprehension. For instance, the phrase "I pray Subuh" in the sentence "Every morning, I wake up at 5 o'clock. The first thing I do is brush my teeth and wash my face. After that, I pray Subuh" may sound unclear in sentence structure. To improve clarity, students should focus on restructuring sentences to facilitate better understanding. In conclusion, addressing discourse marker errors is essential for enhancing the quality of students' writing. By emphasizing the proper use of commas, reducing unnecessary repetition, and avoiding awkward phrasing, students can significantly improve the clarity and coherence of their descriptive texts, making them more engaging and comprehensible to readers. The analysis of errors in the use of adverbial phrases, conjunctions, prepositional phrases, and discourse markers in students' descriptive texts at SMA Negeri 12 Semarang yielded several noteworthy findings. It is essential to discuss these results and provide explanations for them. a. Discourse markers were the most frequently observed error type, with a total count of 22 instances. This result was somewhat expected, given that discourse markers can be challenging for students to use correctly. Discourse markers serve as guides for readers, indicating the organization of ideas within a text. When used incorrectly, as seen in the students' texts, they can lead to confusion and disrupt the flow of the text. b. Conjunction errors were the second most common, with a count of 3 instances. While this number is relatively low compared to discourse marker errors, it is essential to note that even a small number of conjunction errors can significantly impact the clarity and coherence of a text. Students may struggle with selecting the appropriate conjunction to convey relationships between ideas accurately. c. Adverbial phrase errors, prepositional phrase errors, and repetition of "also" each accounted for 3 errors. These results indicate that students sometimes face challenges in using adverbial and prepositional phrases correctly and avoiding unnecessary repetition. Adverbial phrases and prepositional phrases contribute to the specificity and clarity of descriptive texts, and errors in their usage can hinder understanding. d. The moderate negative correlation between the number of errors in the use of discourse markers and text quality (r = -0.54, p < 0.05) suggests that addressing discourse marker errors is crucial for improving the overall quality of descriptive texts. When students make errors in discourse marker usage, it can lead to a lack of clarity, coherence, and logical progression of ideas in their writing. To provide context and support for the findings, it's essential to reference relevant previous research. The studies conducted by Fharazila (2021) on using cooking instructions as a teaching tool for procedure texts, Fitriati et al. (2020) on lexical bundles in EFL teacher talk, Geizha Medhea (2021) on teaching writing ability through cooking instructions, and Hardiyanti (2020) on using picture series to improve reading comprehension all offer valuable insights that can be related to the issues of discourse marker errors and overall text quality in descriptive texts. a. Fharazila's research highlights the significance of innovative teaching methods to enhance writing skills, which can be applied to address discourse marker errors in descriptive writing. Innovative teaching approaches can help students grasp the importance of proper discourse marker usage for clarity and coherence. b. Fitriati et al.'s study on lexical bundles emphasizes the importance of language choices and the usage of discourse markers. While their research focuses on teacher talk, the findings can be extrapolated to analyze and rectify discourse marker errors in descriptive texts. Proper discourse marker usage is essential for maintaining coherence and guiding readers through the text. Nurtilek Kadyrov, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 209-220 216 c. Geizha Medhea's research on teaching writing ability through cooking instructions aligns with the theme of this study, highlighting the effectiveness of specific teaching techniques. These techniques can be adapted to discuss how discourse markers are taught and used in descriptive texts, emphasizing their role in enhancing clarity and coherence. d. Hardiyanti's study on using picture series to improve reading comprehension underscores the importance of visuals in aiding understanding. This connection can be made to the importance of clear and concise sentence structures in descriptive texts, which can be improved through proper discourse marker usage. Based on the results and the connection to previous research, it is clear that addressing discourse marker errors is crucial for enhancing the quality of descriptive texts. To apply these findings more generally, several recommendations and deductions can be made: a. Innovative teaching methods: Educators can explore innovative teaching methods, as demonstrated by Fharazila's research, to help students understand the role of discourse markers in descriptive texts. Practical exercises and real-life examples, such as cooking instructions, can make learning more engaging and relatable. b. Awareness of lexical bundles: Building on Fitriati et al.'s research, teachers can raise awareness among students about common lexical bundles and discourse marker patterns in descriptive writing. By recognizing these patterns, students can improve their use of discourse markers. c. Visual aids: Taking inspiration from Hardiyanti's study, teachers can incorporate visual aids to help students understand the structure and organization of descriptive texts. Visual representations can be particularly useful for illustrating how discourse markers contribute to coherence. d. Critical thinking and comprehension: Hasanah's research on reading habits and critical thinking skills underscores the importance of comprehension in writing. Effective discourse marker usage can contribute to better comprehension and critical thinking in descriptive texts. Teachers should encourage students to think critically about the role of discourse markers in conveying meaning. In conclusion, this discussion has provided a comprehensive analysis of the results, connected them to previous research, and offered deductions and recommendations for addressing discourse marker errors in descriptive texts. Effective teaching methods, awareness of language patterns, visual aids, and fostering critical thinking can all contribute to improved discourse marker usage and, subsequently, enhanced descriptive writing quality. In summary, these research papers provide valuable insights that can be connected to the theme of "Errors in Discourse Marker Usage in Descriptive Texts." They highlight the significance of innovative teaching methods, language choices, and comprehension skills in addressing discourse marker errors, particularly in the context of descriptive writing. These insights offer a foundation for improving discourse marker usage and overall writing quality in descriptive texts. Error 4: Prepositional Phrase Prepositional phrases are vital components of sentences that provide additional information about location, time, manner, or other relationships within a sentence. Errors involving prepositional phrases can lead to confusion or disrupt the intended meaning of a sentence. For example, in Student 7's writing, the sentence "My pet cat: also bell peppers" contains an unnecessary space before the phrase "bell peppers." This extra space affects the sentence's readability and structure. To correct this error, the writer should remove the unnecessary space, resulting in a more coherent sentence. In Student 20's sentence, "My favorite season: between beach," there is a missing preposition, as "between" is not the appropriate choice here. Instead, it should be "by the beach" to convey the intended meaning accurately. This error can lead to ambiguity in the sentence. To rectify it, the writer should replace "between" with "by" for clarity. In summary, errors related to prepositional phrases can impact the clarity and coherence of sentences. Writers should be Nurtilek Kadyrov, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 209-220 217 vigilant in using prepositions correctly, ensuring that they are appropriate for the context and do not introduce unnecessary confusion or ambiguity into their writing. Properly constructed prepositional phrases contribute to the overall clarity and comprehension of the text. Prepositional phrase errors were identified in several of the students' descriptive texts, contributing to issues with sentence clarity and precision. Prepositional phrases, which consist of a preposition and its object, are essential elements in sentence construction. However, their misuse or misplacement can lead to confusion in writing. One recurring error was the unnecessary use of prepositional phrases, as seen in the phrase "also bell peppers." The word "also" in this context does not require a prepositional phrase and can be omitted for more concise and clear writing. Encouraging students to identify and remove unnecessary prepositional phrases can help streamline their sentences. Another issue was the omission of necessary prepositions. For example, the phrase "between beach" should include the preposition "by" to correctly convey the intended meaning, resulting in "by the beach." Correcting these omissions ensures that the text conveys the intended message accurately. Furthermore, word order issues were present in some prepositional phrases, such as "behind I do my homework." To enhance sentence clarity, students should be reminded to maintain a proper word order, as in "I do my homework behind my study desk." In conclusion, addressing prepositional phrase errors is essential for improving the precision and clarity of students' descriptive writing. Encouraging them to eliminate unnecessary prepositional phrases, use appropriate prepositions, and maintain correct word order can enhance the overall quality of their texts, making them more coherent and reader-friendly. The table of evaluation results above represents an assessment of written work by various students. This evaluation aims to assist students in understanding and enhancing the quality of their writing through the identification and rectification of grammar errors, punctuation usage, sentence structure issues, and inappropriate word choices. The primary objective of this evaluation is to offer constructive feedback to each student, enabling them to sharpen their writing skills and avoid recurring mistakes in the future. Some of the common errors detected in the students' writing include incorrect or excessive usage of words such as "also" or "because." Another issue is the improper placement of punctuation marks, such as the missing comma before the word "because" in certain sentences. Additionally, there are problems related to sentence structure, with some sentences appearing convoluted or not easily comprehensible. In evaluating each piece of writing, it is important to note that each student has specific errors that need to be addressed. For instance, some students struggle with the use of particular words or phrases, like "at weekends," which should be replaced with "on weekends." Through the feedback provided in this evaluation, it is anticipated that each student will become more attuned to these errors and will make a concerted effort to rectify them in their future writing endeavors. By effecting appropriate corrections, their writing will become clearer, better-structured, and more effective in conveying their messages to readers. Moreover, this experience will also serve to strengthen their overall writing skills. Furthermore, this evaluation serves as a valuable learning opportunity for these students. It encourages them to develop a critical eye for their own writing and fosters a sense of accountability for their language choices and sentence construction. By addressing specific issues highlighted in the evaluation, students can refine their writing skills and enhance the overall quality of their written communication. The identified errors, such as the unnecessary repetition of words like "also," missing commas before "because," awkward sentence structures, and incorrect prepositions, are not uncommon in writing, especially among learners. However, acknowledging and rectifying Nurtilek Kadyrov, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 209-220 218 these mistakes is a crucial step toward improvement. Additionally, students should be encouraged to seek clarification or guidance from their instructors or peers when they encounter challenges in their writing. Collaborative efforts and constructive feedback from others can further assist them in honing their writing abilities. In conclusion, the evaluation results provided in the table are a valuable tool for these students to reflect upon and refine their writing skills. It is a testament to their willingness to learn and grow as writers. With the right guidance, practice, and attention to detail, they can overcome these common errors and continue to develop as effective communicators through the written word. Writing is a skill that can be honed over time, and this evaluation is a stepping stone on their journey towards becoming proficient writers. During our analysis of the students' descriptive texts, we identified various sentence structure issues that can impact the overall readability and coherence of their writing. These issues primarily revolved around awkward phrasing, unclear sentence structures, and grammatical inconsistencies. One common issue was awkward phrasing, which often resulted from students attempting to construct complex sentences without considering the clarity of their expression. For instance, in the sentence "My pet cat named Whiskers is just a gray and white tabby kitten with bright green eyes," the phrase "just a gray and white tabby kitten with bright green eyes" could be restructured for improved readability. Encouraging students to simplify their sentences and straightforwardly convey information can enhance the overall quality of their writing. Unclear sentence structures were another challenge. An example can be found in the sentence "The school has a vibrant atmosphere, and the teachers are enthusiastic and caring." While not inherently incorrect, the sentence structure may benefit from reorganization for better flow and coherence. Encouraging students to focus on sentence clarity and logical progression can help address this issue. Additionally, grammatical inconsistencies were observed in some texts, affecting the overall quality of the writing. For instance, the phrase "because I love its sleek design and user-friendly interface" lacks a clear subject and verb, making it challenging to discern the intended meaning. To overcome this issue, students should be reminded to maintain consistent grammatical structures throughout their writing, ensuring that sentences are grammatically sound and logically coherent. In conclusion, addressing sentence structure issues is crucial for enhancing the clarity and readability of students' descriptive texts. By encouraging them to avoid awkward phrasing, prioritize clear sentence structures, and maintain grammatical consistency, we can help students improve the overall quality of their writing, making it more engaging and coherent for readers. CONCLUSION In conclusion, the analysis of the students' descriptive texts has provided valuable insights into the common errors they make in their writing, which primarily include discourse marker errors, sentence structure issues, prepositional phrase errors, conjunction errors, and adverbial phrase errors. These errors, although varied in nature and severity, have the potential to affect the overall clarity and coherence of their texts. Discourse marker errors often involve the incorrect use or omission of punctuation, such as missing commas or misuse of transitional words like "because" and "also." These errors can hinder the flow and understanding of the text. Sentence structure issues encompass problems with sentence length, complexity, and clarity. Some students tend to create lengthy and convoluted sentences that may confuse the reader. Clearer sentence structures can enhance the readability of their writing. Prepositional phrase errors involve the misuse or omission of prepositions, which can impact the precision and accuracy of their descriptions. Nurtilek Kadyrov, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 209-220 219 Correct preposition usage is essential for accurately conveying location, time, and other contextual details. Conjunction errors relate to the improper use of conjunctions like "between" and "because," leading to sentence fragments or awkward phrasing. Correct conjunction usage is vital for logically connecting ideas within or between sentences. Adverbial phrase errors often result in unclear or imprecise descriptions of actions, times, or places. Adverbial phrases should provide context and specificity to enhance the reader's understanding. REFERENCES Ade, A. (2023). The use of chained message games to improve students' ability in listening comprehension students' ability at the seventh grade of SMP Integral Minhajut Thullab (East Lampung) in the academic year of 2022/2023. Vol 10, No 1, UIN Raden Intan Lampung. Aldhawiyah, S. R. (2021). An error analysis of the use of English articles in descriptive text. Jakarta: FITK UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta. Choemue, S., & Bram, B. (2021). Discourse markers in academic and non-academic writings of Thai EFL learners. Studies In English Language And Education, 8(3), 1209- 1226. Erlangga, I. P. B., Suarnajaya, I. W., & Juniarta, P. A. K. (2019). An analysis of grammatical errors made by the seventh- grade students of SMP Negeri 2 Sukawati in writing descriptive texts in the academic year 2018/2019. Language And Education Journal Undiksha, 2(1). Faticha, D., Bharati, D. A. L., & Warsono, W. (2019). The effectiveness of write-pair- square and group investigation to teach writing descriptive text for students with high and low participation. English Education Journal, 9(3), 307-315. Fharazila, G. M. (2021). The use of cooking instruction on food packages as media in teaching writing ability in procedure text at 10th grade students of SMA Negeri 1 Jonggat in academic years 2020/2021. University Of Mataram. Fitriati S.W., et al. (2020). The comparison of lexical bundles in EFL teachers’ talk between non-native and native English teachers. English Education Journal, 10(1), 69–75. Geizha Medhea, F. (2021). The use of cooking instructions on food packages as media in teaching writing ability in procedure text at 10th grade students of SMA Negeri 1 Jonggat in academic year 2020/2021. Universitas Muhammadiyah Mataram. Hardiyanti, S. (2020). The effect of using picture series on students’ reading comprehension of procedure text at MA Hidayatul Insan Palangka Raya. Iain Palangka Raya. Hasanah, R. (2022). The correlation between students’ reading habit and critical thinking skills (a correlational study conducted at the eleventh grade students Of SMA Negeri 12 Rejang Lebong in the academic year of 2021/2022). UIN Fatmawati Sukarno Bengkulu. Lestari, N. (2020). The influence of using mime game towards students’ writing ability in descriptive text at the first semester of the eight grade of SMPN 3 Bandar Lampung in the academic year of 2019/2020. UIN Raden Intan Lampung. Masruddin, M. (2019). Omission: Common simple present tense errors in students' writing of descriptive text. Ethical Lingua: Journal Of Language Teaching And Literature, 6(1), 30-39. Muis, I. A. (2019). An error analysis of using present tense by the tenth grade students of senior high school in writing descriptive text at MAN 2 Model Medan (Doctoral Dissertation, Universitas Islam Negeri Sumatera Utara). Ningtyas, F. W., & Wulandari, M. (2023). An analysis of grammatical error in writing descriptive text at the tenth grade of SMAN 1 Bayat Klaten. UIN Raden Mas Said Surakarta. Saleh, M., & Bharati, D. A. L. (2022). The use of cohesive devices in descriptive text by Nurtilek Kadyrov, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 209-220 220 english training participants at PST”. English Education Journal, 12(1), 96-103. Sepúlveda-Torres, L., Sanches Duran, M., & Aluísio, S. M. (2019). Automatic detection and correction of discourse marker errors made by Spanish native speakers in portuguese academic writing. Language Resources and Evaluation, 53, 525-558. Sukmasari, A. (2022). Improving disciples' english speaking ability of descriptive text through project-based learning At Pondok Tahfidh Daar Al-Qolam. Universitas Islam Negeri. Susanto, D. A. (2020). English discourse markers in sociocultural perspectives: A compilation on dissertation frameworks. Upt Penerbitan Universitas PGRI Semarang Press. Syah, T. A., Nurhayaty, A., & Apriyanto, S. (2021, February). Computerized text analysis on self-description text to get student’s prevailing, confidence, and drives. Journal Of Physics: Conference Series, 1764(1), 012056. Tegar, A. B. I. H. (2023). An analysis of grammatical errors in English subtitle of "Shigatsu Wa Kimi No Uso Final Episode" Film. UIN Raden Intan Lampung. Titik, N. U. R. H. (2021). The effectiveness of using make a match technique towards students’ writing ability in procedure text at the second semester of the second grade students of SMKS Trisakti Jaya Bandar Lampung in the academic year of 2020/2021. UIN Raden Intan Lampung. Widhiyanto, W., et al. (2021). Comparison of the use of discourse markers in English speeches between non-native and native speakers of English. English Education Journal, 11(2), 198-207. Yanuarius, M., et al. (2018). Thinking critically while storytelling: Improving children’s HOTS and English oral competence. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 189–197. Zahra, A. A. A., Sutiono, C., Mu’in, F., & Febriyanti, E. R. (2020). An analysis on the students’ grammatical errors in writing descriptive texts and narrative texts. Lingua Educatia, 2(1), 14–28.