Spacing Error Patterns in University Students’ Argumentative Writing and Their Educational Implications : A Study of First-Year Students at P University

This study aims to analyze the patterns of spacing errors that appear in argumentative writing produced by first-year university students and to derive educational implications with a focus on error types that are particularly reinforced in the process of argumentative development. The data consist of 83 argumentative essays of at least 800 Korean characters written immediately during Weeks 1-2 of the course Open Thinking and Expression (Spring 2025) by first-year students at P University, and without administering a prior diagnostic test, the study observed orthographic patterns that naturally emerged in authentic writing situations immediately after university entrance. Based on the Hangeul Matchumbeop (Korean Orthography) as the reference standard, spacing errors were classified into “errors of writing without a space where a space is required” and “errors of inserting a space where no space is required,” and subtypes were further categorized according to parts-of-speech domains, including nouns, dependent nouns, modifiers, auxiliary verbs, and particles, in order to calculate frequency and error rates. The results showed a total of 933 errors, of which 888 cases were “errors of writing without a space where a space is required,” accounting for the majority, and errors in the domains of nouns and dependent nouns were most frequently observed. However, errors involving nouns and dependent nouns appeared to be general errors that recur across genres and did not exhibit clear specificity limited to argumentative writing. In contrast, errors were found to concentrate in expressions directly related to the discourse structure and functions of argumentative writing, with relatively high error rates observed in discourse marker expressions serving functions of restatement, addition of arguments, and emphasis—such as “dasi malhae” (in other words), “tto dareun” (another), “dasi hanbeon” (once again), and “hanbeon deo” (one more time)—as well as in conventional background-introducing expressions such as “choegeun deureo” (recently). These findings suggest that, rather than treating spacing instruction in argumentative writing classes as an even listing of orthographic rules, a differentiated instructional strategy is needed that links “expression-function-orthography” by focusing on core expression groups frequently invoked in argumentative development. Specifically, discourse marker expressions with high error rates should be taught through checking activities that present their paragraph position and discourse function together, and items requiring orthographic verification, such as “deoukdeouk” (even more) and the construction “-eojida,” should be addressed through corrective instruction grounded in dictionary and normative resources.