In recent years, micro teaching, which can assess teachers' comprehensive quality and ability, has become a new form for teacher recruitment test, teacher title promotion examination, teaching skills contest and so on (Lu Jian, P45-49)。 Comparing with the whole 45-minute class teaching, micro teaching is to make teachers present part of class, which the given time is usually 10 minutes。 It is used as a contest mode in Teaching Skill Contest of Education Students。 In the implementation of micro teaching, participants should pay attention to the clarity of the target, the content of the presupposition, structural integrity and virtual context。 Through the completion of the specified teaching tasks, participants express their own teaching ideas, teaching competence and basic teaching skills。 Micro teaching presents part of the content, but it still requires a clear and integral implementation of teaching process。 And the audiences in the contest are not the students, but the judges, which make the class more virtual。

The objective of this study is to identify and analyze grammatical errors in micro teachings of the winners’ in the Ninth Teaching Skill Contest of Education Students in Zhejiang Province。 The author chose the winners who were awarded with the first three prizes in 2015。 Since the English competence of those education students is quite higher than other average college students, it’s more meaning to analyze their grammatical errors。 And errors analysis becomes a tool of diagnostic significance because the study can provide teachers with insight into causes of errors and the solution。 

The present studies mainly have researched grammatical errors made by English teachers, especially for university English teachers。 However, very few studies have analyzed these grammatical errors made by pre-service teachers。 Since pre-service teachers lack teaching experience, it is more demanding for them to identify their own grammatical errors and try to avoid these errors。

Through the analysis of the grammatical errors in teacher talk made by pre-service teachers, we are able to have a further understanding about the grammatical errors made by pre-service students, and help them to improve their teacher talk and lay a more concrete foundation for their teaching career。

2。 Literature Review

2。1 Classroom Discourse

In 1952, American structural linguist Zellig Harris (1952) published a thesis titled Discourse Analysis in Language Magazine。 In that look, he said that language doesn’t happen in separated words or sentences but I coherent discourse。 After that, the phrase “discourse analysis” is gradually known as a linguistic terminology, and a brunch of researchers onto this area and make exploration。 In 1960s, classroom discourse analysis gradually rise, some scholars put forward the four-step framework of classroom discourse, that is, construction, triggering, response and feedback。 In the next two decades, more foreign scholars made further research on classroom discourse and discourse analysis also gradual developed to a dependent new subject。 After the 1980s, most linguists analyzed classroom discourse from the perspective of linguistic and explained the characteristics of classroom discourse in grammar, vocabulary, syntax and discourse。 

Studies on teacher’s classroom discourse flourish in China recently。 Classroom discourse is the kind of language use produced in classroom situation (Cheng Xiaotang, 2009)。 Wang Yinquan (1999) discusses the influence of teacher classroom discourse on learners’ language input。 And he pointed out that the biggest difference between foreign language classroom discourse and other classroom discourse is that “teacher classroom discourse is both the purpose of learning and the medium of teaching”, and then he formally cited the study of teacher classroom discourse to the domestic linguistic research。