Grammar teaching: diversified didactic-methodological possibilities in a continuous training project for first language teachers

Language is often simply defined as a means of communication. However, communication is a highly complex and intricate process that involves an adequate mastery of a number of linguistic and non-linguistic components. Knowing a language that can effectively be used for successful communication includes, among other things, attaining a functional knowledge of the various language systems including the syntactic system, or the grammar of the language in the narrow sense of the term. The scope of traditional grammar has been confined to sentence structure. That is probably why this approach to grammar has been referred to as sentence-based grammar. However, teaching this form of grammar contributes to the development of learners’ grammatical competence rather than to their communicative ability. This paper argues for integrating discourse grammar in language teaching, and provides evidence to support the role that discourse grammar plays in developing foreign language learners’ communicative competence. Specifically, this paper attempts to answer the following questions: (1) What does it mean to know a language? (2) What are the differences between sentence-based grammar and discourse grammar? (3) Why do foreign language teachers, curriculum designers and textbook writers accord more prominence to sentence-based grammar than to discourse grammar in teaching foreign languages? (4) What extra linguistic aspects does discourse grammar offer to language teaching that sentence-based grammar does not? In other words, what are the justifications for incorporating discourse grammar in foreign language teaching?.

In the last several decades, vast amounts of effort have been devoted to both theorizing and empirical research concerning various aspects of the teaching and learning of second or foreign language grammar. These endeavors have been undertaken not only in the fields of second language acquisition (SLA) and foreign language teaching, but also in related research areas such as linguistics, cognitive science, or psychology. A few examples of the issues which have been investigated are the sequences and orders of acquisition of different grammatical elements (e.g. Dulay and Burt 1974b; Meisel et al. 1981; Klein and Perdue 1992), the processing and storage of the grammatical component in the mind/brain, including explicit and implicit representation of grammatical knowledge (e.g. Levelt 1989; Paradis 2004; Loewen et al. 2009), and the nature and effectiveness of various techniques and procedures aimed at developing the mastery of diverse grammatical features (e.g. Smith 1970; VanPatten and Cadierno 1993; Erlam 2003; Nassaji and Fotos 2011). Naturally, all of these issues, and many more, feature to varying degrees in this book, the general interest of which is in the teaching of grammar. Equally relevant to this work, however, is linguistic theory. This is because the teaching of grammar cannot do without descriptions of the grammatical elements of the language being taught, which may only be produced with any degree of systematicity with the help of some theoretical assumptions, if not within the confines of some linguistic theory or theories. In fact, Taylor ([1993] 2008, p. 37) observes that “[a]ny major innovation in linguistic theory is bound, sooner or later, to have an impact on the language teaching profession.”KeywordsLinguistic TheoryForeign Language TeachingCognitive LinguisticPedagogical ApplicationTheoretical LinguisticThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

TEACHING AND LEARNING GRAMMAR IN FRENCH –AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE – CLASSES

This study investigates teachers’ beliefs relating to grammar teaching in modern foreign language (MFL) learning in England. Focus on grammatical form has been consistently supported by linguistic research and teacher practice, and has progressively been reinstated in England’s National Curriculum. However, MFL learning assessment in England has remained focused on generic communicative, skill-focused criteria, leaving teachers caught in the conflicting discourses of policy, linguistic research, teacher education and teaching practice. This exploratory–interpretive enquiry explored how eight MFL teachers translated grammar teaching policy and theoretical guidelines into their teaching practices. Data from interviews, observations and think-alouds were collected and analysed using an inductive approach. The findings revealed disparate interpretations of the concept of grammar and grammar teaching. In this period of ongoing reform of MFL examinations at age 16 in England, critical exploration of what happens in the range of MFL classrooms should inform clearer theoretical and methodological guidelines for MFL teaching and learning, leading to a more consistent pedagogic rationale and more consistent strategies for teacher education and MFL provision.

Teaching sentence-level grammar for writing: the evidence so far

The article deals with the correlation between linguistic (LG) and pedagogical (PG) grammars. The author considers LG as a set of data from all existing linguistic theories, and PG as information about the conditions and ways of performing grammatical actions in the process of their acquisition in the classroom. Analysing this general problem, the author outlines the range of questions that need to be answered in the course of his study. Is there a single theory of LG that can independently provide a basis for designing an adequate PG? What is the relationship between the amount and content of LG and PG information? Does the amount and type of PG depend on specific learning objectives and conditions? What are the best ways of presenting PG information for its effective use in the learning process? What factors influence the choice of presentation method? Should the structure of the PG reflect the structure of the LG? What factors influence the order in which grammatical phenomena are introduced in the process of acquiring the relevant grammatical actions in the classroom, and what determines the way in which such phenomena are grouped into organisational units of the course material (topics, units, etc.)? Having outlined the scope of these questions, in this paper the author analyses the potential of several LG models: traditional, structural, transformational and case grammar. In the authorʼs view, the traditional model of grammar, which has been used in language teaching for centuries, remains a good source of information about the surface structure of a language, but it may lack data about its functional aspect. Although structural grammar, which served as the basis for the audiolingual method, has been much criticised, the failures of this method are more related to the inadequacy of the underlying psychological model. While the potential of the transformational and case models of grammar is assessed positively, the paper considers them too complex to be used in the classroom without additional processing. Based on the conclusions, the author outlines the prospects for further research.

This paper reviews a selection of research from the field of foreign and second language teaching into what is referred to here as teacher cognition – what teachers think, know, and believe and the relationships of these mental constructs to what teachers do in the language teaching classroom. Within a framework suggested by more general mainstream educational research on teacher cognition, language teacher cognition is here discussed with reference to three main themes: (1) cognition and prior language learning experience, (2) cognition and teacher education, and (3) cognition and classroom practice. In addition, the findings of studies into two specific curricular areas in language teaching which have been examined by teacher cognition – grammar teaching and literacy – are discussed. This review indicates that, while the study of teacher cognition has established itself on the research agenda in the field of language teaching and provided valuable insight into the mental lives of language teachers, a clear sense of unity is lacking in the work and there are several major issues in language teaching which have yet to be explored from the perspective of teacher cognition.

Research on Applications of the Communicative Principle in Russian Teaching

It is increasingly recognised that language teachers’ self-efficacy (LTSE) beliefs, i.e. their beliefs in their abilities to fulfil specific language teaching-related tasks that support learning, play a crucial role in filtering the way that their knowledge is transformed into action. Nevertheless, despite their importance, these beliefs remain under-researched in specific domains of language teachers’ work, including grammar instruction. Set in a Turkish university foundation programme context, this study addressed the gap, drawing on research instruments that elicited LTSE beliefs for grammar instruction, together with self-reported classroom practices and self-perceived language proficiency, while grammatical awareness was assessed. Factor analysis led to the identification of three different types of grammar teachers. Calibrating individuals onto the three factors and making use of qualitative data helped the researchers to identify positive relationships between higher LTSE beliefs, greater levels of grammatical awareness and self-reported, discovery learning, grammar instruction practices in some teachers. Implications for in-service language teacher education are discussed.

Teaching grammar has been a major area of debate and controversy in language teaching and second language acquisition for some time. Harsh criticism of traditional grammar teaching has continued over the last few decades, which has resulted in great confusion and lack of confidence among language teachers. This paper aims to encourage second language (L2) teachers and second language acquisition (SLA) researchers to reconsider the role of grammar instruction, through examining an alternative approach to grammar teaching, known as “form-focused instruction” (FFI), that reconciles with communicative language teaching (CLT). To this end, the paper reviews a number of studies in favor and against the direct teaching of grammar, and presents a brief discussion of four FFI options; namely, structured input, explicit instruction, production practice and negative feedback. Finally, the paper shows that grammar teaching is necessary to help students possess greater command of the target language. However, more input from L2 teachers and SLA researchers is needed to define the most effective FFI instructional options and strategies.

Grammar teaching dates back to many years ago. It is a critical issue since its importance has been clarified in second/foreign language teaching and learning. There are always some hints about a good grammar teacher, but one cannot easily find a holistic framework for a successful ESL/EFL grammar teacher. For this reason, the present study investigates the qualities of a good and effective grammar teacher based on observations and interviews. An Iranian EFL grammar teacher’s class was observed for about ten hours in order to see why his students and colleagues considered him to be a successful English grammar teacher. The results demonstrate that there are some important features for an effective ESL/EFL grammar teacher, which should be taken into account by other practitioners doing a similar job. Finally, this study provides a coherent framework for grammar teachers in order to make the outcome of their grammar lessons more fruitful.

The grammar microteachings carried out by trainees in teacher education is a critical issue due to the fact that the teaching of grammar has always been a controversial issue throughout the foreign language teaching (FLT) acculturation. There is always some negative reaction to isolated teaching of grammar in communicative language teaching fashion. Traditional and mechanical ways of teaching grammar are always popular in all geographies. On the contrary, there are teachers who stay away from deliberate teaching of grammar. Such conflicts cause difficulties in the perception of the methodology of grammar teaching. The reflections of problems of this sort must be argued in English language teaching (ELT) methodology courses conducted in teacher training colleges. Facilitating the learners contact with the context which contains the new grammar input in a premeditated fashion may become a challenging task in the microteachings carried out in pre-service teacher education. The trainees who are doing practicum may observe grammar based teaching and this causes confusion from the standpoint of communicative language teaching. This study attempts to discuss the dynamics, construction and implementation of grammar teaching from the perspective of ELT teacher trainees. The strengths and weaknesses affecting the accomplishment of microteaching tasks are analyzed from methodological perspective and suggestions that may assist the trainees in order to activate their energy competently in the application stage are provided. The components of a grammar microteaching argued in the sections below symbolize the main parts that universally exist in the idiosyncratic order of lesson planning argued by communicative language teaching trend. Key words: Grammar teaching, microteaching, English language teaching, teacher training, grammar in context.

Introduction Pedagogical grammar is a slippery concept. The term is commonly used to denote (1) pedagogical process – the explicit treatment of elements of the target language system as (part of) language teaching methodology; (2) pedagogical content – reference sources of one kind or another that present information about the target language system; and (3) combinations of process and content. All three senses of the term will be addressed in this article. Throughout the history of language teaching, the word grammar has usually meant sentence grammar and has been associated with a strong pedagogical emphasis on inflexional morphology and syntax. Recent formal concern with language in use offers to extend the scope of “grammar” to include, for example, discoursal and pragmatic dimensions. These will play an important role in the arguments that follow, though without dislodging sentence grammar from its central position. If pedagogical grammar is simultaneously part of the process and part of the content of language learning, it also affects many decisions about what to teach in a language course. In other words, pedagogical grammar logically embraces all aspects of language teaching that in some way or other seek to systematize the target language for presentation to the learner. This includes the specification of learning objectives and the elaboration of the syllabus. The systematization on which learning objectives and the syllabus are founded may well (and appropriately) remain concealed from the language learner, but it should nevertheless be continuous with pedagogical grammar as part of the explicit process and content of teaching.

Purpose To date very few studies have explored how second and foreign language (SL/FL) teachers’ attitudes affect their grammar teaching expertise acquisition. To shed light on this question, this study looked at what teachers’ grammar teaching attitudes are and how these attitudes impact the frequency of explicit goals which are an integral component of expertise development through informal problem-solving. The effect of experience on explicit goal-setting was also investigated. Design/methodology/approach Teachers’ attitudes were explored through behavioral aggregation in a sample of 15 Bulgarian public school and university SL/FL teachers, who were divided into three experience groups. The behavioral aggregation was conducted on the basis of grammar teaching activities which the teachers performed, and then post-actively reported and elaborated upon. Explicit goals were uncovered through a planning task. Both descriptive and statistical analyses were conducted for an exhaustive picture. Findings and originality/value Two attitudes dubbed wholesale grammar teaching referring to a holistic approach to grammar teaching and high complexity task attitude involving student assignments of higher difficulty tasks significantly predicted the teachers’ explicit goal frequencies. The others did not. In contrast to previous findings, experience was not a significant factor which determined explicit goal frequencies, underscoring the fact that the grammar teaching attitude orientation played a key role in the effectiveness of grammar teaching knowledge acquisition. Although further studies with larger samples need to be conducted, these results provide direct evidence of the relationships between some groups of SL/FL teachers’ beliefs and expertise development.

Despite consensus on the important role of grammar instruction, there are debates about teaching it. Teachers' perceptions about grammar and how it should be taught influence their teaching. Classroom observations indicate that regardless of teachers’ experience and proficiency, their grammar teaching practices are not usually void of problems. Identifying language teachers’ areas of weaknesses in grammar teaching, finding such problematic areas, raising their awareness and providing solutions in line with effective grammar teaching principles can enhance the effectiveness of grammar instruction. This qualitative study aimed at identifying the main problems in the grammar teaching practice of 34 experienced Iranian English teachers through observing their classes, exploring their awareness of effective grammar instruction principles using a semistructured interview and finding mismatches between their grammar teaching knowledge and practice. The most frequently observed problems in grammar lessons and teachers’ corresponding beliefs were reported, and suggestions for alternative practices were made. The findings suggest that teacher educators should provide more focused training to preclude posttraining grammar teaching complications, and language teachers should be more reflective about the effectiveness of their grammar teaching practices.