Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
HOW TO TEACH GRAMMAR - Coggle Diagram
HOW TO TEACH GRAMMAR
The Case For Grammar
The sentence machine argument-Grammar is a kind of sentence making machine. teaching of grammar offers the learner the means for potentially limitless
linguistic creativity.
The discrete item of argument-A discrete item is any unit of the grammar system that is sufllciently
narrowly defined to form the focus of a lesson
The fine-tuning argument -This is particularly the case for wrinen language,
which generally needs to be more explicit than spoken language,
-
Attitudes To Grammar
According to Joseph Webbe (1622) he mentioned that grammar could be picked up through communicating: by exercise of reading, writing & speaking.
Differences in attitude to the role of grammar between methods, between teachers and between learners.
-
Grammar Now
Grammar Teaching
Covert Grammar Teaching
-
Example, dealing grammar questions that arise during grammar teaching
-
Overt Grammar Teaching
-
Example, explicitly presenting the rules of grammar using grammar terminology
-
research suggests that without some attention to form, learners run the risk of fossilisation. A focus on form docs not necessarily mean a return to drill-and-repeat type methods of teaching. Nor does it mean the use of an off-the-shelf grammar syllabus. A focus on form may simply mean correcting a mistake. In this sense, a focus on form is compatible with a task-based approach.
-
The Case Against Grammar
The knowledge-how argument
The knowledge-how contends that language is learnt through experiential learning – learning by doing – similar to riding a bike. It is not simply learned by studying a language since learners struggle to translate their information into skill. Rather than studying grammar, the learner need classroom experience that simulates the type of situation in which he or she would use the language.
The communication argument
The communication argument is based on the learner picking up a language through implicit instruction. It is believed that the language should be utilised in real-life circumstances where it has significance for the student and where the language may be acquired. The students would not need to comprehend the rules. “Studying grammatical rules is therefore simply a waste of time.” Thornbury (1999)
The acquisition argument
The argument in acquisition learning is whether it improves the efficacy of our language learning. Language acquisition is divided into two halves, according to Krashen. First, there is a formal learning, such as studying grammar and other subjects. Second, acquisition learning occurs organically around us while we live in a foreign place; every day we are exposed to the language of that country, and with time we will become fluent with the language as a first or second language.
The natural order argument
The natural order hypothesis proposes that infants developing their first language acquire grammatical structures in a predetermined, 'natural' sequence, with some being learned sooner than others. In Krashen's theory of language acquisition, this notion has been expanded to account for second language learning.
The lexical chunks argument
According to the Lexical Chunks argument, item learning also includes vocabulary, entire sentences, and idioms. A lexical chunk is a collection of words that appear often together. Collocations are included in lexical chunks, although they often include only content words rather than grammar.
The learner expectations argument
Regardless of the academic and ideological reasons for or against grammar instruction, many students arrive at language lessons with pretty definite expectations of what they will do. These beliefs may be influenced by past classroom language learning experiences. They may also originate from classroom process in general, when (at least historically) teaching is of the transmission kind indicated above. On the other hand, people expectations that education will be grammar-focused may arise from frustrations encountered while learning a second language outside of the classroom, such as through self-study or immersion in the target language culture. Such students may have registered in language lessons especially to provide a more efficient and methodical learning experience. A teacher who disregards this requirement by pushing students to just encounter language would certainly irritate and alienate them.
Grammar and Method
The Direct Method:
:pencil2: Using the Natural Approach (Krashen), depicts formal instructions as unnecessary and learners exposed to comprehensible input.
:pencil2: Prioritizing oral skills and follows grammar syllabus while rejecting explicit grammar teaching.
Audiolingualism: :pencil2: Following Behaviorist theory (Chomsky), language is an innate human capacity learned through pattern-practice drills.
:pencil2: Agrees with Direct Method belief in primary of speech, but strictly rejecting grammar teaching. also derived of Behaviorist which describes language as a form of behavior.
Grammar Translation: Grammar as a starting point for instruction. Grammar syllabus and lessons typically begins with rule followed by exercise.
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT):
:pencil2: Motivated by the new science of sociolinguistics and belief that communicative competence consist of more than simply knowing the rules of grammar.
:pencil2: Grammar is the main component of the syllabus practiced in functional labels i.e. asking directions, open speech etc.
Deep-End CLT: Reject both grammar-based syllabuses and grammar instruction (N.S. Prabhu), where students work through syllabus of task with no formal grammar instructions.
-
-