TEACHERS PERCEPTIONS ABOUT DIFFICULTIES IN TEACHING AND

LEARNING GRAMMAR OF EFL

Intan Trine Chodija

intan_soleil@ymail.com
Post Graduate English Study Program
Teacher Training and Education Faculty University of Lampung
Abstract: The aim of this study is to investigate teachers perceptions
concerning the difficulties faced by teachers and learners in teaching and
learning EFL grammar. Forty teachers in junior and senior high school in
Metro participated in this study. All participants completed a questionnaire
using five-point Likert-type to find out how are the teachers perceptions
regarding grammar teaching and learning. Mean scores were used to
interpret the data. The result shows that the teachers and students still face
many difficulties in teaching and learning EFL grammar. This finding may
help the teacher in choosing the right teaching option that would pose fewer
difficulties and problems to their learners and encourage students learning
of English grammar.
kkj
Keywords: teachers perceptions, difficulties, teaching and learning
grammar

INTRODUCTION
The first foreign language obliged to be taught at junior and senior high school is
English as determined by central government policy since indepent day in 1945.
Teaching English, to Indonesia should result in the students being able to use the
language to express themselves. Being able here should be taken to mean that not only
the students can use the language to communicate with other people in daily life
whenever possible, but also they are able to utilize the language well with regards to its
grammar. Teaching approaches have been developed over the years . Lee (2004) states
that most Indonesian schools are still facing difficulties in terms of Teaching English
grammar
to Indonesian Language, eventhough some approaches have been
implemented in the public schools curriculum, such as grammar-translation (1945), oral
(1968), audio-lingual (1975) and communicative language teaching methods (1984 and
1994).Thus, Indonesian government has decided to rethink, reformulate, and redesign
the KTSP curriculum into the 2013 curriculum. The teachers are obliged to guide
students with communicative activities unconsciously focus on grammar. In fact, some
difficulties always appear behind the implementation of new curriculum. Being aware
of teachers and learners difficulties in teaching and learning English grammar may
help the teacher in choosing the right teaching option that would pose fewer difficulties

and problems to their learners and therefore, enhance students learning of English
grammar.
Previous studies on students' and teachers' perceptions of grammar instruction in the
context of language teaching and learning suggest a disparity between students and
teachers. While students favour formal and explicit grammar instruction and error
correction, teachers favour communicative activities with less conscious focus on
grammar (e.g., Schultz 1996, 2001; Spratt 1999; Al-Mekhlafi & Nagaratnam 2011;
Kacani & Mangelli 2013). Thus, this study aimed to answer the following questions:
1. Are there any difficulties faced by teachers and by students based on teacher
perceptions?
2. Do these perceptions of difficulties vary according to the teachers gender, level
taught, qualifications, and experience?
3. How are the EFL teachers perceptions of the difficulties faced by students and
teachers with regard to grammar instruction in an EFL context?
LITERATURE REVIEW
Teachers Perception
Perception is what we see in the environment around us, in other words how an
individual interpret the information for example, seeing, hearing, tasting, feeling and
smelling about his environment. Robbins (2005) states that perception is a process by
which individuals organize and interpret their sensory impressions in order to give
meaning to their environment. According to B. Von Haller Gilmer, perception is the
process of becoming aware of situations, of adding meaningful associations to
sensations. We see an object and it is understood and interpreted variously by people.
Teachers have also their perceptions especially in teaching. English teachers often
believe that teaching grammar explictly will provide the generative basis on which
learners can build their knowledge and will be able to use the language eventually. For
them, prescribed rules give a kind of security. A better approach is perhaps to see
grammar as one of many resources that we have in language which helps us to
communicate. We should see how grammar relates to what we want to say or write, and
how we expect others to interpret what our language use and its focus.
According to Widdowson (1990: 86), " . . . grammar is not a constraining imposition but
a liberating force: it frees us from a dependency on context and a purely lexical
categorization of reality." Given that many learners and teachers tend to view
grammar as a set of restrictions on what is allowed and disallowed in language use a
linguistic straitjacket in Larsen-Freemans words (2002: 103) the conception of
grammar as something that liberates rather than represses is one that is worth
investigating.
Difficult Of Learning And Teaching FL Grammar

This issue has been of considerable interest to researchers and teachers. Referring to
some of them, grammatical difficulty is considered in relation to:

Comprehension and production. DeKeyser and Sokalski (1996) argue that some
grammar structures are easy to comprehend but difficult to produce, some others are
easy to produce, but difficult to comprehend.
Complexity of the grammatical feature. Some researchers (DeKeyser, 1995; Ellis et
al. 2009; Nassaji & Fotos, 2011; Spada & Lightbown, 2008) consider some linguistic
forms (such as English articles) structurally simple but functionally very complex as
they perform a number of different functions (relating to type of the noun they
determine, the situational context and the discourse context). In such cases, the
complex feature will require a complex explanation, using even technical
metalanguage (as generic/specific reference or countable/uncountable nouns).
Linguistic form (the accurate use of a grammatical feature), semantic meaning
(understanding the message encoded by a lexical item or a lexico-grammatical
feature) and pragmatic use (using a lexico-grammatical feature appropriately in a
context) (Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman, 1999). According to Larsen-Freeman, a
grammar feature can be easy relating to one aspect, but difficult to another. For
example, the form of the English passive is easy to learn, but its use is more difficult.
Thus, it is challenging for FL learners to learn to use grammar structures accurately,
meaningfully, and appropriately in a certain communicative context.
Implicit/explicit knowledge: Ellis (2006) distinguishes two senses of grammatical
learning difficulty: (1) the difficulty learners have in understanding a grammatical
feature, and (2) the difficulty [learners] have in internalizing a grammatical feature
so that they are able to use it accurately in communication (p. 88). Ellis argues that a
grammatical feature may be difficult to learn as explicit knowledge, but easy as
implicit knowledge, and vice versa (Ellis et al. 2009, p. 164).
Grammatical difficulty has also been discussed in FL acquisition with reference to other
factors, including: complexity of rules, salience of a grammar form in the input,
communicative force of a grammar form, learners developmental stage, L1 transfer,
individual differences in language aptitude (Nassaji & Fotos, 2011; Burgess &
Etherington, 2002).
There have been a number of studies on teachers belief system about grammar and
grammar teaching and learning. Al-Mekhlafi and Nagaratnam (2011), Burgess and
Etherington (2002), Baleghizadeh and Farshchi (2009) have also studied teachers
perceptions regarding teachers and learners difficulties in EFL grammar instruction
and learning.
The findings from these studies indicate that in teachers perceptions, both teachers and
learners faced difficulties regarding EFL grammar instruction and learning. Speaking in
more details regarding these three studies:

the learners favored explicit grammar teaching because of their expectations and
feelings of insecurity;

they had difficulty in internalizing grammar rules though they valued positively both
the use; of formal instruction and natural exposure to language through authentic
materials, their learners;
their learners found grammatical terminology useful, but not in Burgess and
Etheringtons survey (2002); its use did not present a particular difficulty for
learners;
all the teachers believed that grammatical errors should be corrected, even when
communicative goals are attained. Al-Mekhlafi and Nagaratnam (2011), Burgess and
Etherington (2002) also concluded that the responded teachers experienced more
difficulty in correcting their learners spoken rather than written communication.
Unlike them, Baleghizadeh and Farshchi (2009) found that most of the teachers did
not seem to have difficulty correcting learners errors of grammar within
communicative context;
though teachers valued the use of authentic texts, their use for presenting and
practicing grammar was seen as posing problems to teachers and students because of
the variety of structures, culture, vocabulary, form-function matches, amount of time
needed for using them and producing suitable tasks from them. Unlike Al-Mekhlafi
and Nagaratnam (2011), Baleghizadeh and Farshchi (2009), teachers in Burgess and
Etheringtons survey (2002) did not believe that grammar in authentic texts was too
difficult for their learners; the existence of the specialized vocabulary seemed to be a
problem for them;
all teachers valued the use of practice and problem-solving tasks in learning grammar
and improving grammar accuracy. Al-Mekhlafi and Nagaratnam (2011) concluded
that both written and communicative activities posed difficulties to learners in
learning grammar, where writing activities were more challenging than spoken ones.

METHOD
Research Design
The study was descriptive qualitative design, using a questionnaire and the subjects
responded to each statement on a five-point Likert-type attitude scale (from 5 for
'strongly agree' to 1 for 'strongly disagree'). The respondents also provided background
information on gender, qualification, teaching experience and the level they teach, for
creating their profile in terms of variables.
Data Sources
The research was conducted only in Metro, in order to be specific and make a close
connection between teachers. Ten schools were chosen randomly. The subjects fairly
represented the context of EFL teaching at different levels in Metro. The sample size
was 40 that consists of 20 teachers teaching English in junior high school and 20 in
senior high school. The number of the subjects is more than the minimum number
required for making useful statistical analyses according to Cohen and Manion
(1994:77).

Data Collection
The questionnaire used in the present study, which comprises 20 statements, was the
one employed by Burgess and Etherington (2002) in their study (see Appendix 1) . AlMekhlafi & Nagaratnam (2011) and Kacani & Mangelli (2013) also used this
instrument in their research. The questionnaire was delivered to 40 English teachers in
Metro. Mean scores were used to interpret the data.
The questionnaire concentrated on these pedagogical issues: 1) explicit grammar
teaching (statements 3, 4, 5, 13), the transfer of declarative knowledge into procedural
knowledge (1, 17, 18), the use of grammatical terminology (14, 19), error correction
(15, 16), problem-solving activities (2, 20), the use of authentic texts for grammar
teaching and learning (6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12), the use of spoken and written
communicative activities (17, 18). (See Appendix 1 for the questionnaire used in the
present study).
Data Analysis
By using a questionnaire, the subjects responded to each statement on a five-point
Likert-type attitude scale (from 5 for 'strongly agree' to 1 for 'strongly disagree'). The
mean scores were used to interpret the data.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Regarding to the first reseach question, the researcher found that there are difficulties
faced by teachers and learners in EFL grammar based on the teachers perceptions. The
overal mean of 3.39 in figure 1 below, indicates that teachers preference is quite high to
agree with difficulties in EFL grammar teaching and learning. It can be inferred that
teachers still find many problems in the classroom.

Figure 1. Teachers' Perceptions of Difficulties with EFL Grammar

The second question is about the variety in perception of difficulties in terms of the four
teacher variables: gender, level taught, qualification, and teaching experience.

Regarding to the gender, the male and female teachers perceptions are nearly the same.
It can be seen from the overal mean of male (3.38) and female (3.40) in figure 2. it
suggests that gender does not play important role in the teachers perceptions
concerning the difficulties faced by teachers and learners.
Teachers' Perceptions of Difficulties with EFL Grammar according to Gender
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
Mean
1.00
0.00

Male
Female

Statement

Figure 2. Teachers' Perceptions of Difficulties with EFL Grammar according to Gender

Based on the level taught, there are no difference too in the teachers views of some
constraints in teaching and learning EFL grammar. The teachers that teach at different
levels have similar perceptions about their own and their students' difficulties with
English grammar instruction, with a slightly higher mean for teachers of junior high
school (3.37) than the means for teachers of the senior high school (3.41), which are
nearly the same (See Fig.3 below).
Teachers' Perceptions of Difficulties with EFL Grammar according to Level Taught
6.00
5.00
4.00
Mean

3.00

Junior High School

2.00

Senior High School

1.00
0.00
Statement

Figure 3. Teachers' Perceptions of Difficulties with EFL Grammar according to Level

Taught

With regard to teachers qualifications, Figure 4 shows a little higher overall mean
for teachers with a diploma qualification (3.50) than the overall means for teachers
with higher qualifications, bachelor's (3.38). it means that teachers from bachelors
degree face a little lower difficulties than teacher from diploma. The reason can be from
their knowledge or their longer term of study from their qulification. Nevertheless,
generally, there is no slightly difference in their difficulties based on their overal mean
that tend to the same statement of agreement.
Teachers' Perceptions of Difficulties with EFL Grammar according to Qualifications
5.00
4.00
3.00
Mean 2.00
1.00
0.00

Bachelor's degree
Diploma

Statement

Figure 4. Teachers' Perceptions of Difficulties with EFL Grammar according to

Qualifications
According to teachers' experience, it does not seem that experience effects more in
teacher perceptions of their own and their students' difficulties with English grammar
instruction, as shows Fig. 5 below. The overal mean based on teachers experience
almost have the same value (3.26, 3.56 and 3.37)

Teachers' Perceptions of Difficulties with EFL Grammar according to Experience

5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
Mean 1.00
0.00

5 years
>5 10 years
>10 years

Statement

Figure 5. Teachers' Perceptions of Difficulties with EFL Grammar according to

Experience

The last question is about how the EFL teachers perceptions are of the difficulties faced
by students and teachers with regard to grammar instruction in an EFL context.
Explicit Grammar Teaching
From appendix 2, it is found that statement 3 (My students expect teachers to present
grammar explicitly) and statement 13 (A lack of explicit grammar teaching leaves my
students feeling insecure) produced a mean score in the medium level (3.05 and 2.95). It
means that teachers finds their learners feel neutral in terms of explicit or implicit
knowledge. It may still cofusing whether teaching in traditional grammar (explicit
teaching) or implicit teaching is better or continuum. Besides that, the recent curriculum
demand the teachers to teach grammar implicitly. It is in contrast with previous research
in Lindita and Suela (2013) study that prefer to explicit teaching.
Responses to Statement 5 (My students prefer to find matches between meaning and
structure for themselves) produced a mean score of 3.55 (see Appendix 2) that is quite
high. This perception of students preference for an inductive method of learning
grammar on the part of the same responding teachers is not surprising eventhough the
mean is not too high. The teachers may have referred to learners preference in learning
some grammatical structures inductively rather than deductively.
With regard to Statement 4 (My students prefer to learn grammar from one-sentence
examples), which links to explicit grammar teaching, responding teachers produced the
mean score of 3.55 of all statements in the questionnaire (see Appendix 2). It indicates
that the learners based on teachers perception, still need explicit teaching by learning
from one-sentence examples not from the authentic text or context.
Declarative Vs Procedural Knowledge
Statement 1 (My students find it difficult to transfer their grammatical knowledge into
communicative language use), designed to identify teachers beliefs about the possible
transfer of declarative knowledge (i.e., knowledge about grammar) into procedural
knowledge (i.e., ability to use that knowledge in actual communication), produced a
mean score of 3.50 (see Appendix 2). This indicates that responding teachers recognise
this process of transfer of one kind of knowledge into another as a difficulty for a
number of their students. Students can perform well on grammar exercises, but fail to
achieve such grammatical accuracy in actual communication. In the responded
teachers perceptions, their learners still have difficulties in the process of transferring
the knowledge about grammar (declarative knowledge) into ability to use that
knowledge in real life communication (procedural knowledge). It is also supported by
the results of statements 17 and 18 (respectively 3.55, 3.10) showing that learners find it
difficult to use the language accurately in both written and spoken communication.

The Use of Grammatical Terminology

The use of grammatical terminology, for example verb, adverb, adjective, etc, in the
EFL classroom is seen as a necessary part of the explicit method of teaching grammar.
When students and teachers talk about grammar (i.e., in meta-linguistic discussion),
which is one of the characteristics of explicit language teaching (Stern 1992: 327), they
need to use grammatical terms.
Two statements (14 & 19) sought to explore teachers perceptions of how their students
feel about the use of grammatical terminology. Statement 14 (My students find
grammatical terminology useful) and Statement 19 (My students find it difficult to use
grammatical terminology) produced a mean score of 4.10 and 3.35. This indicates that,
in the responding teachers perception, their students see grammatical terminology as
useful, but find difficulty in using the terms to be of a greater magnitude. Interestingly,
the usefulness of grammatical terminology seems to be linked to the students
preference for explicit grammar instruction.
The difference in mean between teachers of junior high school on the one hand (mean
of 4) and those of senior high school (mean of 4.00), however, seems to be higher
with regard to their perceptions of the usefulness of grammatical terminology to their
students. That is, teachers of the high level think that their students find grammatical
terminology more useful than those of the low level.
Error Correction
Error correction is needed even within a communicative context, either spoken or
written avoiding fossilization of errors in learners interlanguage. Statement 15
(Teachers find it difficult to correct student errors of grammar within a written
communicative context) and Statement 16 (Teachers find it difficult to correct student
errors of grammar within a spoken communicative context) produced a mean score of
3.05 and 3.75 respectively (see Appendix 2). It may be inferred from the results that the
responding teachers experience more difficulty in correcting their learners spoken
communication than written. It may caused by the teachers perceptions of learners
feeling of insecurity. The teacher should encourage the students not to be affraid to do
such errors because learning is made from errors. This has to be a consideration for the
teachers.
Problem-Solving Techniques
Problem-solving techniques in relation to grammar teaching are inductive techniques
that require learners to find form-function matches by themselves. (e.g., Hall and
Shepheard, 1991). Problem solving techniques (statements 2, 20): In teachers
perceptions, problems solving activities are motivating for their learners in learning

grammar as they are valued 4.25. This fact is inferred by the lower mean (3.10) of
statement 20, meaning that their learners are not much frustrated by problem-solving
activities.
The Use of Authentic Texts
The use of authentic texts (statements 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12): As language is contextsensitive (an utterance is fully intelligible only in its context), grammar is best taught
and practiced in context (Weaver, 1996). Though authentic texts show how the target
structure can be used in real communication, the linguistic load of unfamiliar
vocabulary and synthetic complexity can make them incomprehensible. For this reason
the approach generally adopted by course book writers nowadays is: simplifying
authentic texts in ways which retain their flavor (Thornbury, 2008). Therefore
simplified authentic texts are needed to be used. Authentic text can be narrative text,
recount text, descriptive text, letter, etc.
According to the responded teachers perceptions, students experience difficulties in
learning grammar when it is presented and practiced in authentic texts: they experience
more difficulties from from culture boundary (statement 8: 3.85), variety of structures
(statement 7: 3.60), finding form-function matches (statement 10: 3,55), than handling
from presentation within authentic texts (statement 6: 3.25) and vocabulary (statement
9: 2.90). The reason of the higher values might be the case of lack of explicitness in
grammar and different culture; while that of lower values might be the use of simplified
authentic texts and the integration of explicit and implicit grammar instruction.
Teachers, also, valued the use of authentic texts as they didnt find them timeconsuming (statement 11: 2.85). Surprisingly, teachers find less difficulty in producing
tasks of a suitable level from authentic texts (statement 12: 2.9).
The Use Of Communicative Activities
The use of communicative activities (statements 17, 18): Communicative activities are
used in FL classes to help learners receive comprehensible input and output what is
believed to lead to the development of both linguistic and communicative competence
(Richards, 2002, p. 36).
Statements 17 and 18 refer to the possible difficulties students might have in improving
the accuracy of their grammatical language within totally communicative activities.
Responding teachers produced a mean score of 3.55 and 3.10 for the two statements
respectively.
The results indicate that total communicative activities, whether written or spoken, pose
difficulties to students for learning grammar and improving grammatical accuracy,
writing activities proving more challenging than spoken ones. It might be caused by the

lack of sufficient focus on form in purely communicative activities or tasks for

developing students' grammatical knowledge.
CONCLUSION
From the result of this study, it indicates that both teachers and students still face
difficulties in teaching and learning EFL grammar. It suggests that this problem needs to
get attention for the success of EFL grammar. It helps teachers decide on the right
techniques for improving teaching and enhancing learning of EFL grammar to their
learners. EFL curriculum and material developers also should consider teachers and
learners difficulties to provide suitable materials. More interviews are needed to
explore the information details concerning these difficulties. This study is limited in one
region of Lampung (Metro) so that the future research should be conducted in a broader
area.

REFERENCES
Al-Mekhlafi, A. M. & Nagaratnam, R. P. (2011). Difficulties in Teaching and Learning
Grammar in an EFL Context. International Journal of Instruction, 4(2), 69-92.
Baleghizadeh, S. & Farshchi, S. (2010). An Exploration of Teachers Beliefs about the
Role of Grammar in Iranian High schools and Private Language Institutes.
Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 52(212), 17-38.
Burgess, J. and Etherington, S. (2002). Focus on grammatical form: explicit or
implicit? System, 30: 433-458.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL
teacher's course. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Cohen, L. and Manion, L. C. (1994). Research Methods in Education. London:
Routledge
DeKeyser, R. (1995). Learning Second Language Grammar Rules. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 17, 379-410.
DeKeyser, R. & Sokalski, K. (1996). The differential role of comprehension and
production practice. Language Learning, 46, 613642
Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective.
TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 83-108.
Ellis, R., Loewen, Sh., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., & Reinders, H. (2009). Implicit
and Explicit Knowledge in Second Language Learning, Testing and Teaching.
Multilingual Matters.

Forehand, G.A., & von Haller Gilmer, B. (1964). Environmental variation in Studies of
Organizational Behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 62(6), 361-382.
Hall, N. and Shepheard, J. (1991). The Anti-Grammar Grammar Book. London:
Longman
Kacani, L. & Mangelli, S. (2013). Albanian Teachers Perceptions about Difficulties in
Teaching and Learning Grammar of EFL. Journal of Educational and Social
Research, 3(3), 149-156.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2002). The Grammar of Choice. In E. Hinkel and S. Fotos (Eds.).
New Perspectives on Grammar Teaching in Second Language Classrooms.
Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2003). The grammar of choice. In E. Hinkel & S. Fotos (Eds.),
New perspectives on grammar teaching. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lee, P., & Azman, H. (2004). Global English and primary schools: Challenges for
elementary education. Melbourne: CAE Press.
Nassaji, H. & Fotos S. (2011). Teaching Grammar in Second Language Classrooms:
Integrating form-focused instruction in communicative context. Routledge Taylor
&Francis Group
Robbins, S.P. (2005). Organizational Behaviour.Prentice Hall Inc.
Schultz, R. (1996). Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: students and
teachers views on error correction and the role of grammar. Foreign Language
Annals, 29(3): 343-364.
Schultz, R. (2001). Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning
the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback. USA-Colombia. The
Modern Language Journal, 85(ii): 244-258.
Spada, N. & Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Form Focused Instruction: Isolated or
Integrated? TESOL QUATERLY, 42(2), 181-207.
Spratt, M. (1999). How good are we at knowing what learners like? System, 27:141155.
Stern, H. H. (1992). Issues and Options in English Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Thornbury, S. (2008). How to teach grammar. Longman.
Weaver, C. (1996). Teaching Grammar in Context. Boynton/Cook HEINEMANN

Widdowson, H. G. (1990). Grammar and nonsense and learning. In H. G. Widdowson,

Aspects of language teaching, pp. 79-98. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Appendix 1
Research Instrument Questionnaire
Student and Teacher Difficulties with Grammar
These are questions about how students and teachers deal with grammar in the
classroom. Please indicate your agreement or disagreement with these statements: 5
means strongly agree, 4 means agree, 3 means neither agree nor disagree, 2 disagree, 1
means strongly disagree!
No.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.

Statement
My students find it difficult to transfer their
grammatical
knowledge
into
communicative
language use.
My students are motivated by problem-solving
techniques for learning grammar.
My students expect teachers to present grammar
points explicitly
My students prefer to learn grammar from one
sentence examples.
My students prefer to find matches between meaning
and structure for themselves.
My students find it difficult to handle grammar
presented within authentic texts.
My students find authentic texts difficult because of
the wide variety of structures which appear.
My students find authentic texts difficult because
they are too culture bound.
My students find authentic texts difficult because of
the vocabulary used.
My students cannot find form-function matches in
authentic texts without explicit direction from
teachers.
Teachers find the use of authentic material too timeconsuming.
Teachers find it difficult to produce tasks of a suitable
level from authentic texts.
A lack of explicit grammar teaching leaves my
students feeling insecure.
My students find grammatical terminology useful.
Teachers find it difficult to correct student errors of
grammar within a written communicative context.
Teachers find it difficult to correct student errors of
grammar within a spoken communicative context.
My students find it difficult to improve the accuracy
of their grammatical language within a totally
communicative writing activity.
My students find it difficult to improve the accuracy
of their grammatical language within a totally
communicative speaking activity.
My students find it difficult to use grammatical
terminology.
My students are frustrated by problem-solving
techniques for learning grammar.

Disagree
1
2

Agree
3

Appendix 2
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Statement
My students find it difficult to transfer their grammatical knowledge into
communicative language use.
My students are motivated by problem-solving techniques for learning
grammar.
My students expect teachers to present grammar points explicitly
My students prefer to learn grammar from one sentence examples.
My students prefer to find matches between meaning and structure for
themselves.
My students find it difficult to handle grammar presented within
authentic texts.
My students find authentic texts difficult because of the wide variety of
structures which appear.
My students find authentic texts difficult because they are too culture
bound.
My students find authentic texts difficult because of the vocabulary used.
My students cannot find form-function matches in authentic texts
without explicit direction from teachers.
Teachers find the use of authentic material too time-consuming.
Teachers find it difficult to produce tasks of a suitable level from
authentic texts.
A lack of explicit grammar teaching leaves my students feeling insecure.
My students find grammatical terminology useful.
Teachers find it difficult to correct student errors of grammar within a
written communicative context.
Teachers find it difficult to correct student errors of grammar within a
spoken communicative context.
My students find it difficult to improve the accuracy of their
grammatical language within a totally communicative writing activity.
My students find it difficult to improve the accuracy of their
grammatical language within a totally communicative speaking activity.
My students find it difficult to use grammatical terminology.
My students are frustrated by problem-solving techniques for learning
grammar.

Profile of Respondents:
Gender
:
Male
Female
Level you teach English :
Grades 7-9 Grades 10-12
Your qualification
:
Bachelors Degree Diploma
Your experience:
5 years
> 5 10 years
> 10 years

Mean
3,50
4,25
3,05
3,55
3,55
3,25
3,60
3,85
2,90
3,55
2,85
2,90
2,95
4,10
3,05
3,75
3,55
3,10
3,35
3,10