Abstract
The relevance of explicit grammar instruction in foreign language classrooms has been discussed widely in the past, but there is no consensus regarding what is the best approach or how much time should be spent on explicit grammar teaching. This paper presents the results of three studies which focus on students’ knowledge of explicit grammar, their understanding of metalinguistic terminology, and their ability to correct agreement errors in their texts as a response to formative assessment. In the first study, the effect of different types of formative feedback on the improvement in agreement marking accuracy was tested. As there were no statistically significant differences found, two follow-up case studies were conducted to test the possible causes of the observed lack of effect. The first of the case studies tested the effect of formative assessment in a process writing task, but there was only limited effect found. The second case study focused on testing explicit grammar knowledge and understanding of metalinguistic terminology in an inverted classroom setting. The results suggested that the understanding of metalinguistic terminology was rather low, and the knowledge of explicit grammar was varying. The students found the task difficult. The Norwegian English language curriculum gives the teachers freedom to choose their methods and only sets requirements for the results of the students. These three studies show that there is a need for a discussion of the relevance, methods, and extent of explicit grammar teaching and the use of metalinguistic terminology in formative assessment in English language classrooms in Norway.
Highlights
The recommended approaches to instructed second language acquisition have undergone a development from heavily drill-based to heavily communication-based over the past few decades (Burner, Carlsen, & Kverndokken, 2019; Drew & Sørheim, 2016; Munden & Sandhaug, 2017)
This paper examines the role of explicit grammar knowledge and metalinguistic understanding in formative feedback practices
2019, 7 (1), 67-83 Peer reviewed have some degree of understanding of metalinguistic terminology
Summary
The recommended approaches to instructed second language acquisition have undergone a development from heavily drill-based to heavily communication-based over the past few decades (Burner, Carlsen, & Kverndokken, 2019; Drew & Sørheim, 2016; Munden & Sandhaug, 2017). While teacher autonomy to choose the methods and tools in the classroom is extremely important, it is essential to scrutinize the results of various approaches to grammar instruction and feedback practices in order to provide researchbased advice to teachers and teacher educators. It is often argued by the proponents of communicative approaches to language instruction that communicative competence should be a more important aim in language classrooms than explicit grammar knowledge. If such feedback is not comprehensible for the students, it cannot have an effect on their future linguistic behavior (Burner, 2016a)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
