Grammar-Translation Approach of Learning

Grammar-translation approach of learning English as
a Second language: A case study of the Secondary

School Students in the Tribal Schools of Odisha.
Introduction
Translation itself was an academic exercise rather than one which would actually help learners to use language, and
an overt focus on grammar was to learn about the target language rather than to learn it. But at the height of the
communicative approach to language learning in the 1980s and early 1990s it became fashionable in some quarters
to deride so-called old-fashioned methods and, in particular, something broadly labeled "Grammar Translation". As
with many other methods and approaches, Grammar Translation tended to be referred to in the past tense as if it no
longer existed and had died out to be replaced world-wide by the fun and motivation of the communicative
classroom. In examination of the principal features of Grammar Translation, however, we will see that not only has
it not disappeared but that many of its characteristics have been central to language teaching throughout the ages and
are still valid today.
The Grammar Translation method embraces a wide range of approaches but, broadly speaking, foreign language
study is seen as a mental discipline, the goal of which may be to read literature in its original form or simply to be a
form of intellectual development. The basic approach is to analyze and study the grammatical rules of the language,
usually in an order roughly matching the traditional order of the grammar of Latin, and then to practice manipulating
grammatical structures through the means of translation both into and from the mother tongue. The method is very
much based on the written word and texts are widely in evidence. A typical approach would be to present the rules
of a particular item of grammar, illustrate its use by including the item several times in a text, and practice using the
item through writing sentences and translating it into the mother tongue. The text is often accompanied by a
vocabulary list consisting of new lexical items used in the text together with the mother tongue translation. Accurate
use of language items is central to this approach.
Generally speaking, the medium of instruction is the mother tongue, which is used to explain conceptual problems
and to discuss the use of a particular grammatical structure. It all sounds rather dull but it can be argued that the
Grammar Translation method has over the years had a remarkable success. Millions of people have successfully
learnt foreign languages to a high degree of proficiency and, in numerous cases, without any contact whatsoever
with native speakers of the language (as was the case in the former Soviet Union, for example).
There are certain types of learner who respond very positively to a grammatical syllabus as it can give them both a
set of clear objectives and a clear sense of achievement. Other learners need the security of the mother tongue and
the opportunity to relate grammatical structures to mother tongue equivalents. Above all, this type of approach can
give learners a basic foundation upon which they can then build their communicative skills. On the one hand they
have motivating communicative activities that help to promote their fluency and, on the other, they gradually acquire
a sound and accurate basis in the grammar of the language. This combined approach is reflected in many of the EFL
course books currently being published and, amongst other things, suggests that the Grammar Translation method,
far from being dead, is very much alive and kicking as we enter the 21st century. Therefore without a sound
knowledge of the grammatical basis of the language it can be argued that the learner is in possession of nothing
more than a selection of communicative phrases which are perfectly adequate for basic communication but which
will be found wanting when the learner is required to perform any kind of sophisticated linguistic task.
MEHTORDS OF TEACHING GRAMMAR
Public institutions everywhere have been preaching the concept of grammar for years, yet for some mystical reason,
society cannot seem to figure it out. If one is truly honest about the topic, he or she will have to admit that the
collective grammar of this country is simply tragic. Into whose lap does this task fall? English teachers. Teaching
English grammar to a group of students is a job that should grant super human status to any teacher who manages to
do it successfully. There is a steaming buffet of options to pick from when it comes to choosing the best way to
teach this age old and ever-relevant area of study. There is the new-age method of teaching grammar, which
ironically doesn't actually teach grammar at all, but instead hopes students just sort of "pick it up" as they read
different texts; then, there is a method somewhere in the middle, the "discuss some grammatical concept in a mini-
lesson format, then analyze that concept as students read and write" method. Each method depends on who is doing
the teaching, what kind of students occupy the classroom, and the demands of the school system, and each method
has plenty to smile about and sneer upon.
The traditional method of teaching grammar is still very popular among experienced teachers and teachers that have
been in the profession for a while. Everyone knows these kinds of teachers. They proclaim this world has gone to
the deepest pits of hell in the roughest of hand baskets, and truly the rest of the teachers wonder why they are still
teaching at all.
There are a few young, fresh, braves who enter the teaching field and follow the example set by their teachers in
high school-- the traditional, grammar book, worksheet, right or wrong example. Regardless of whether they look at
the student population and see the wasting away of society or a field of young and potential-filled flowers, these
teachers see grammar as something that should be taught in isolation. It should be given its own time, its own unit,
and its own space in the curriculum. Not incorrectly, they see their chosen field of study as something so highly
important that it cannot be ignored nor tainted with other subjects; the students must learn it because, well, that's
what students do: they learn grammar. .
Well, there may be one fact these traditionalists are overlooking when it comes to teaching grammar. Why is it that
students, when taught grammar the traditional, isolated way, have to be re-taught the same grammatical concepts
year after year? It seems to the common observer that they're simply not learning it. They remember the concepts for
the worksheet and the test but soon forget and have to learn the next year There is certainly something awry in this
system. Are teachers wasting their time trying to fill young minds with grammatical facts? If they're not, then why
do so many adults who have graduated high school and gone through years of repetitive grammar instruction display
horrific grammatical skills.
Based on this information, many have decided to abandon the practice of teaching grammar all-together. They have
brushed it off as worthless and have instead chosen to cross their fingers in hopes that if students read enough and
write enough, they will start to naturally see the patterns of the English language. For some students this may work.
In fact, it may work for many students. However, teachers may collide into a problem with this system. In every
state, teachers have a curriculum to follow, a list of "to-do's" These curriculum lists usually contain a set of pure
grammatical skills that the students must learn, and unless the teacher wants to rebel against the curriculum that
teacher must teach those things, the endless dilemmas of the English teachers would arise.For those teachers who are
neither traditional nor rebellious, there is a middle road of grammar instruction. This type of instruction combines
grammar with reading and writing as an everyday experience in the classroom. This method is very much dependent
on the teacher's creativity and his or her ability to weave grammar into every other area of the English classroom. It
is by no means the easiest way to teach grammar, but as research has shown, it may be the most effective. It is
definitely the method that takes the most time and creativity on the part of the teacher, but for a dedicated
professional, these are both secondary concerns to the level of learning the students achieve.There are teachers who
make the traditional method work; somehow they have found a way to get bits of information to implant themselves
into student minds like tiny eggs of precious information. There are teachers who don't handle grammar at all, but
they make their students read enough and write enough that somehow they pass their state tests and grow up with a
basic knowledge of the concepts; and there are teachers who creatively combine grammar to other classroom
activities.
Learning and teaching grammar requires some creativity in order to make learning grammar a communicative
process (The way to learn is to do. Learn by doing. Doing is learning) So this would depend the grammar structure
you are targeting, the learners' level, and what "learning grammar" means to the learner. Traditional method book
exercises and worksheets are, also, helpful. A multi-faceted approach is practical. Grammar should be part of an
integrated approach. Of course, there is any number of ways to consider an integrated approach. And, also, grammar
items should not be taught in isolation. They can be, but in rigidly adhering to doing just one thing at a time. A target
structure or target structures indicate direction and focus but other things may come up along the way and there's no
sense, of course, in ignoring them. Speaking is primary, and learning to use grammar should be integrated with
speaking practice. Combine functions of language with grammar instruction. Still grammar requires some separate
attention and focus apart from everything else in order to ensure a solid understanding. What is "modern" outside of
an integrative approach which has a strong focus on grammar as a base and facilitating conversation in learning
vocabulary, tenses, and sentence structure?
Most grammatical errors of non-native speakers of English would not be found among native speakers of English.
Non-native speakers of English require explicit instruction in grammar forms, the meaning of those forms, and how
and when to use the forms. Native speakers of English don't require this A point of instruction that may be common
to both non-native speakers of English and native speakers of English would be utilizing the variety of grammatical
form, combined with lexical choices, to produce better writing or to be a more articulate speaker. However, even for
this purpose, the needs of native speakers and non-native speaker would not always be in alignment.
Review of literature
Sentence combining is the strategy of joining short sentences into longer, more complex sentences. As students
engage in sentence-combining activities, they learn how to vary sentence structure in order to change meaning and
style. Numerous studies (Mellon, 1969; O'Hare, 1973; Cooper, 1975; Shaughnessy, 1977; Hillocks, 1986; Strong,
1986) show that the use of sentence combining is an effective method for improving students' writing. The value of
sentence combining is most evident as students recognize the effect of sentence variety (beginnings, lengths,
complexities) in their own writing.Hillocks (1986) states that "sentence combining practice provides writers with
systematic knowledge of syntactic possibilities, the access to which allows them to sort through alternatives in their
heads as well as on paper and to choose those which are most apt" (150). Research also shows that sentence
combining is more effective than freewriting in enhancing the quality of student writing (Hillocks, 1986).Hillocks
and Smith (1991) show that systematic practice in sentence combining can increase students' knowledge of syntactic
structures as well as improve the quality of their sentences, particularly when stylistic effects are discussed as well.
Sentence-combining exercises can be either written or oral, structured or unstructured. Structured sentence-
combining exercises give students more guidance in ways to create the new sentences; unstructured sentence-
combining exercises allow for more variation, but they still require students to create logical, meaningful sentences.
Hillocks (1986) reports that in many studies, sentence-combining exercises produce significant increases in students'
sentence-writing maturity. Given Noguchi's (1991) analysis that grammar choices affect writing style, sentence
combining is an effective method for helping students develop fluency and variety in their own writing style.
Students can explore sentence variety, length, parallelism, and other syntactic devices by comparing their sentences
with sentences from other writers. They also discover the decisions writers make in revising for style and effect. The
National Council of Teachers of English and the International Reading Association (1996) published Standards for
the English Language Arts, which defines "what students should know and be able to do with language"
Objectives
To study the grammar translation approach of teaching English.
To study the grammar translation approach of learning English.
To focus on error correction and confidence building in communication
Methodology
Survey research method is followed for conducting the study. Secondary data is collected from the Circle Inspector
of Schools ,Department of Education, Govt. of Odisha concerned district and block offices. Fieldwork is
conducted by generating primary data.
Universe of the study
For the purpose of the study, schools of two districts in Odisha state are selected. These are 8 Secondary Schools
(Tribal Schools under welfare Department, Govt. of Odisha) in Dhenkanal District and 8 Secondary Schools(Tribal
Schools under welfare Department, Govt. of Odisha) in Phulbani District. In each districts there are 160 students (20
from each school) and 48 instructors (24 from each district).The total student population of 320 are taken into the
study.
Tools for collecting data
A questionnaire was used to collect data for the study, and the Z-test of proportion used to test the two hypothesis.
Important items which are relevant to the implementation of the program me were included in the questionnaire. The
socio – economic profile of the instructors, educational qualifications of the instructors, educational qualifications of
the learners, their training and infrastructure available in the study centre, supervision and the impact of the program
were covered in the questionnaire. The questionnaire prepared with the inclusion of the above mentioned items were
administered among 320 secondary school students in a nearby institution. After the testing, it was administered
among 48 instructors. 82 percent responded to the questionnaire.
Analysis of data
Analysis of the data was conducted item-wise. Items which are related to the implementation of effective English
communication skill program were analyzed .The qualitative level of the instructors was analyzed the first parameter
influencing effective communicative skill program. In the educational level of the instructors, additional
qualification, previous experience of the instructors was studied .54.21% of the sample possessed the minimum
requirement to conduct the program .13.19%posesses higher qualifications. In addition to the basic qualification,
instructors in certain centers possesses technical qualifications in various skills like computer programming, internet,
proper articulation of speech organs phonetics and rules of syntax.35.71% of the instructors possessed functional
skills. In the qualitative level, yet another factor taken to study was the previous experience in the field and the study
showed that 69.27% possesses experience in the conduct teaching English grammar to the students of EFL.
Another important factor analyzed in the qualitative level of instructors was the training received by the instructors.
Adequacy of training in relation to the needs of effective skill of teaching English in grammar translation method
has been analyzed and the result shows that 73.08 % of the instructors opined the training is adequate.
The second factor influencing the program implementation is the facility like language lab at the study
centre.86.97% respondents opined that the facilities available at the study centre are not adequate. In 78.13% cases
the instructors opined the agency conducting the program had taken proper care to distribute study materials in time.
Another factor examined in this parameter is the learners’ regarding study materials and found that 87.73 %were
satisfied with the study materials.
It was also observed that adult students (62.95%) appreciated the benefit from direct instruction that allows them to
apply critical thinking skills to language learning. Instructors took the advantage of this by providing explanations
that gave the students a descriptive understanding (declarative knowledge) of each point of grammar.
The trained instructors taught the grammar point in the target language and in the students' first language and
sometimes in both. The goal was to facilitate understanding. The time limit devoted to grammar explanations was
10 minutes, especially for lower level students whose ability to sustain attention can be limited.
Present grammar points in written and oral ways were addressed as per the needs of students with different learning
styles.
An important part of grammar instruction is providing examples. Teachers planned their examples carefully around
two basic principles i.e. on the basis of accuracy and appropriateness 73 21% of the instructors presented the
language appropriately, that is culturally appropriate for the setting in which they are used, and be to the point of the
lesson.
Different examples were used as teaching tools. Examples were focused on a particular theme or topic so that
students got more contact with specific information and vocabulary.
In the communicative competence model, the purpose of learning grammar is to learn the language of which the
grammar is a part. Instructors therefore teach grammar forms and structures in relation to meaning and use for the
specific communication tasks that students need to complete.
A Comparison was made between the traditional model and the communicative competence model for teaching the
English past tense:
Traditional: grammar for grammar's sake
Teach the regular -ed form with its two pronunciation variants
Teach the doubling rule for verbs that end in d (for example, wed-wedded)
The students were given the Hand out of a list of irregular verbs that students must memorize to which 32.85% of
the students could achive the target memory. The students were asked to do pattern practice drills for -ed and to do
substitution drills for irregular verbs .in this test 52.81% of the students became successful.
Communicative competence: grammar for communication's sake.
Two short narratives about recent experiences or events were distributed to each one to half of the class
The instructor taught the regular -ed form, using verbs that occur in the texts as examples. And taught the
pronunciation and doubling rules of those forms occurring in the texts.
The irregular verbs that occur in the texts were also taught.
Students read the narratives, ask questions about points they don't understand.
Students worked in pairs in which one member has read Story A and the other Story B. Students were interviewed
one after another; using the information from the interview, they then wrote up and orally repeated the story they
have read.
At all proficiency levels, learners produced language that was not exactly the language used by native speakers.
Some of the differences (45.83%) were grammatical, while others involved vocabulary selection and mistakes in the
selection of language appropriate for different contexts.
For implementation of the program like effective English teaching skill in grammar translation method, the
participation of the people of the locality is essential. All the agencies conducting program insisted on the
constitution of local committees. It was observed that local committees are functioning in 35.42 % a case which is
not adequate. These committees provide necessary help to the program centers for its implementation. Study of the
working of the local committees show that their influence is mainly in three ways-mobilizing the public support,
encouraging the learners and acting as mediator in cases of disputes.
Another factor examined in the study is the visit of the district level instructors to different blocks of the districts.
Actually the block level officials have to monitor the program. In addition to the block level instructors, one district
level resource person for every 10 program centre was engaged.66.94%of the block level officials opined that the
district level officials are regular in their visit to inquire about the problems in teaching and learning effective
English teaching skill.
The objective of the program is to achieve functional skills of English language communication to create awareness
among the students about the essential requirement of English language communication in the modern world. One
aspect studied was the attitude the communication in English language in everyday life and after the completion of
the program90.46% instructors observed specific changes in the attitude of the learners towards English language
communication skills. After the completion of the program, majority of the learners were aware of the various
development schemes implemented by the government .80.35%of the learners were aware of it .Only 19.65% of
the learners were unaware of it which was studied by taking their perception relating to the language, their
minimum qualification, their social and cultural background, education of their parents and the family they belong
to. It has been revealed that 73.28% of the learners were aware of essentiality of the communication in English
language, 86.45% were with minimum qualification knowing the minimums of the language, 64.29% were of a
sound social and cultural background, 69.82% learners belonged to educated families.
The results revealed that majority of the teachers could identify the different methods used in teaching grammatical
structures in English language (Z = 8.6023). The findings further revealed that the teachers were very
conversant with the traditional methods (Informative and Cognitive code-learning methods), while the
Grammar Translation Teaching method was yet to gain high usage among the teachers (Z = 3.028, 5.574, 1.634
and .929). The findings are indication of the need for retraining programmes for English language teachers in
secondary schools.
Recommendation
In responding to student communication, teachers need to be careful not to focus on error correction to the
detriment of communication and confidence building. Teachers need to let students know when they are making
errors so that they can work on improving. Teachers also need to build students' confidence in their ability to use the
language by focusing on the content of their communication rather than the grammatical form. Teachers can use
error correction to support language acquisition, and avoid using it in ways that undermine students' desire to
communicate in the language, by taking cues from context. When students are doing structured output activities that
focus on development of new language skills, use error correction to guide them. When students are engaged in
communicative activities, errors should be corrected only if they interfere with comprehensibility and be responded
by using correct forms, but without stressing them.
The goal of grammar instruction is to enable students to carry out their communication purposes. This goal has three
implications: Students need overt instruction that connects grammar points with larger communication
contexts. Students do not need to master every aspect of each grammar point, only those that are relevant to the
immediate communication task. Error correction is not always the instructor's first responsibility.
Which method works the best is up to the individual teacher, but one thing is certain: it is the English teacher's job to
make sure this information is cleverly presented. Therefore grammar is one of those issues that do not have an easy
solution. It is tricky and it is tough, kind of like all important things in life. It is not for the faint of heart or the
creatively shallow.
Modern methods of teaching English grammar
Meaningful planning
Where possible, learning in English is linked with subjects within the creative curriculum we follow: the
International Primary curriculum (IPC). Well in advance of teaching, teachers should collaborate and share their
ideas for planning through a mind mapping process. Meaningful, creative activities must be planned for, ensuring
that all staff members know exactly what the children will be learning and why.
Focused on strategies
The teaching of reading is not easy. As children's fluency in reading increases, it's hard to know what reading skills
need to be taught, and when. Specific reading strategies are to be modeled explicitly to the class; this provides
children with a holistic bank of skills to draw upon. This could include scanning a text, making an inference,
predicting or creating a mental image. Our teachers use 'think aloud' statements to model to the children how these
skills are used, and how they can help them become better readers. These strategies are then shared as a class, and
then assessed in follow up guided reading activities.
Inspirational learning environment
The classroom environments should inspire adults and children alike. Not only is the children's work displayed
creatively, but there is a range of learning prompts to inspire and support all pupils. The study suggests to
encourage our children to discover new texts, genres and authors, so our reading areas are inviting, well resourced
and highly organized. Pupils can choose from an exciting array of reading material: newspapers, classic texts,
reference books as well as the children's own published stories are just some examples of what book corners might
offer.
Drama to engage and inspire
The use of drama is a powerful tool. Taking the lead from our drama specialist, all teaching staff should use a range
of techniques to promote the exploration of characters, situations and historical events. This process expands the
pupils' imaginations, and provides them with the ideas they need to give their writing that extra spark and flair.
Rigorous teaching of spelling and phonics
In the infants, phonics is streamed, so all children can benefit from tailored teaching, making maximum progress as
a result. All phonics and spelling activities should be fun, multi sensory and as physical possible, the aim being to
meet all learning styles in the class. In the juniors, we must try to make homework lists as personalized to the child
as possible to ensure that the spelling patterns stick in a meaningful way.
Grammar concepts taught creatively
Grammar cannot be taught as a standalone activity. Children begin to understand grammar concepts, and start to
apply them in their own writing, when they start to read with a writer's mind. Punctuation rules and techniques
should be drawn from shared texts; texts which the children have already been immersed in and have a good
understanding of. Exploring these and embedding them creatively is how the learning takes place.
Self assessment
What child doesn't love marking somebody else's work? With a clear marking key, success criteria and purpose in
mind, children set about assessing either their own, or a partner's piece of writing. Modeled through the teacher's
own formative marking, pupils know what the expectations are. They are well trained in searching for successful
examples of the learning intention, articulating their responses to the work, checking the writing matches any targets
and giving constructive feedback. Seeing the children learn from each other in this way is hugely positive; the
teacher can know that he has done his job well.
Conclusion
Grammar instruction is most naturally integrated during the revising, editing, and proofreading phases of the writing
process. After students have written their first drafts and feel comfortable with the ideas and organization of their
writing, teachers may wish to employ various strategies to help students see grammatical concepts as language
choices that can enhance their writing purpose. Students will soon grow more receptive to revising, editing, and
proofreading their writing. In writing conferences, teachers can help students revise for effective word choices. As
the teacher and student discuss the real audience(s) for the writing, the teacher can ask the student to consider how
formal or informal the writing should be, and remind the student that all people adjust the level of formality in oral
conversation, depending on the listeners and the speaking context. The teacher can then help the student identify
words in his or her writing that change the level of formality of the writing. To help students revise boring,
monotonous sentences, teachers might ask students to read their writing aloud to partners. Both the partner and the
writer can discuss ways to vary the sentence beginnings. After the writer revises the sentences, the partner can read
the sentences aloud. Then both can discuss the effectiveness of the revision. Teachers can help students edit from
passive voice to active voice by presenting a mini lesson. In editing groups, students can exchange papers and look
for verbs that often signal the passive voice, such as was and been. When students find these verbs, they read the
sentence aloud to their partners and discuss whether the voice is passive and, if so, whether an active voice verb
might strengthen the sentence. The student writer can then decide which voice is most effective and appropriate for
the writing purpose and audience. Teachers can help students become better proofreaders through peer editing
groups. Based on the writing abilities of their students, teachers can assign different proofreading tasks to specific
individuals in each group. One person in the group might proofread for spelling errors, another person for agreement
errors, another person for fragments and run-ons, and another person for punctuation errors. As students develop
increasing skill in proofreading, they become responsible for more proofreading areas. Collaborating with
classmates in editing, students improve their own grammar skills as well as understand the importance of grammar
as a tool for effective communication. As teachers integrate grammar instruction with writing instruction, they
should use the grammar terms that make sense to the students. By incorporating grammar terms naturally into the
processes of revising, editing, and proofreading, teachers help students understand and apply grammar purposefully
to their own writing. Strategies such as writing conferences, partnership writing, grammar mini lessons, and peer
response groups are all valuable methods for integrating grammar into writing instruction.
References
1. Braddock, R., Lloyd-Jones, R., & Schoer, L. (1963). Research in Written Composition. Urbana, IL: National
Council of Teachers of English.
2. Calkins, L. M. (1980). "When Children Want to Punctuate." Language Arts.
3. Cooper, C. (1975). "Research Roundup: Oral and Written Composition." English Journal.
4. DiStefano, P. & Killion, J. (1984). "Assessing Writing Skills Through a Process Approach." English Education.
5. Harris, R. J. (1962). "An Experimental Inquiry into the Functions and Value of Formal Grammar in the Teaching
of Written English to Children Aged Twelve to Fourteen." Ph.D. dissertation. University of London.
6. Hillocks, G., Jr. (1986). "Research on Written Composition: New Directions for Teaching." Urbana, IL: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills and the National Conference on Research in English.
7. Hillocks, G., Jr. & Smith, M. (1991). "Grammar and Usage." In J. Flood, J. M. Jensen, D. Lapp & J. R. Squire
(Eds.), Handbook of Research on Teaching the English Language Arts. New York: Macmillan .
8. Mellon, J. C. (1969). "Transformational Sentence-Combining: A Method for Enhancing the Development of

Syntactic Fluency in English Composition." NCTE Research Report No. 10. Urbana, IL: National Council of
Teachers of English.
9. National Council of Teachers of English and the International Reading Association. (1996). Standards for the
English Language Arts. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
10. Noguchi, R. R. (1991). Grammar and the Teaching of Writing: Limits and Possibilities. Urbana, IL: National
Council of Teachers of English.
11. O’Hare, F. (1973). Sentence-Combining: Improving Student Writing Without Formal Grammar Instruction.
Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
12. Shaughnessy, M. P. (1977). Errors and Expectations: A Guide for the Teacher of Basic Writing. New York:
Oxford University Press.
13. Chastain, Kenneth. The Development of Modern Language Skills: Theory to Practice. Philadelphia: Center for
Curriculum Development,1971.
14. Rippa, S. Alexander 1971. Education in a Free Society, 2nd. Edition. New York: David McKay Company, 1971.
15. Richards, Jack C.; Rodgers, Theodore S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nd ed.).
Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Grammar-translation method; A challenge to
teach English language to the higher
Secondary students of Odisha
The grammar-translation method is one of the methods of teaching a foreign language. The
method originated from the practice of teaching Latin. In the early 1500s, Latin was the most
widely-studied foreign language due to its prominence in government, academia, and business.
However, during the course of the century the use of Latin dwindled, and it was gradually
replaced by English, French, and Italian. After the decline of Latin, the purpose of learning it in
schools changed. Whereas previously students had learned Latin for the purpose of
communication, it came to be learned as a purely academic subject.
Throughout Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries, the education system was formed primarily
around a concept called faculty psychology. This theory dictated that the body and mind were
separate and the mind consisted of three parts: the will, emotion and intellect and the intellect
could be sharpened enough by the control of will and emotions. The way to do this was through
learning classical literature of the Greeks and Romans, as well as mathematics and an adult with
such an education was considered mentally prepared for the world and its challenges.
When modern languages appeared in school curricula in the 19th century, teachers taught the
language with the same grammar-translation method .As a result, textbooks were essentially
copied for the modern language classroom. In the United States of America, the basic
foundations of this method were used in most high school and college foreign language
classrooms. The students learned grammatical rules and then applied those rules by translating
sentences between the source language and their native language.
There are two main goals to grammar-translation classes. One is to develop students’ reading
ability to a level where they can read literature in the target language. The other is to develop
students’ general mental discipline. The users of foreign language wanted simply to note things
of their interest in the literature of foreign languages. Therefore, this method focuses on reading
and writing and developed techniques of speaking unconsciously.
Grammar-translation classes are usually conducted in the students’ native language. Grammar
rules are learned deductively; students learn grammar rules by rote, and then practice the rules by
doing grammar drills and translating sentences to and from the target language. More attention is
paid to the form of the sentences being translated than to their content. When students reach
more advanced levels of achievement, they may translate entire texts from the target language.
There is not usually any listening or speaking practice, and very little attention is placed on
pronunciation or any communicative aspects of the language. The skill exercised is reading, and
then only in the context of translation.
Objectives (Start)
1.to provide children with a clear purpose to all reading, and writing skills.
Whether it's an invitation to the head teacher to attend a class assembly, an email
to an author or an article for a school newspaper, our children know why the
quality of their writing matters: because there will be a real audience for their
writings..
effective way of valuing children's work as well as providing a real incentive, is to plan for a
range of ways to publish their writing. Recent examples include a whole school bookmaking
project. Following a whole school Inset on bookbinding techniques, every class published their
own shared book; one example being an anthology of short spooky stories composed by year 6.
Their stories were mounted on handmade paper, accompanied with each child's art work (lino cut
style prints on metallic paper) with a dramatic paper cut out front cover. The effort the children
put into their work was immense, and the results were stunning as a result. The anthology has
been enjoyed by parents and other pupils and the children's pride in their work is clear to see.
Anna Warren is the English subject leader and the year 6 teacher at Holy Trinity and St Silas
School, London.
Grammar Teaching Techniques

and Strategies for ESL Teachers
English grammar teaching techniques and strategies for ESL and
EFL teachers.
Intermediate Level Syllabus

This syllabus provides a general outline proposal for creating
courses for intermediate level students. This syllabus can be
easily adapted for individual classes while retaining an overall
structure aimed at helping students acquire the language they
need to communicate.
Teaching Grammar in an ESL / EFL Setting

Teaching grammar to English learners must ensure that learners
gain knowledge, but also the ability to use the target structures.
This guide provides effective tips and a model outline.
Basic English Curriculum for Teaching

This basic English curriculum can be used for lower level ESL
classes. It includes all important grammar, vocabulary, listening
and speaking objectives that should be covered in a ESL course.
Error Correction
Lesson focusing on error correction strategies for the teacher and
student
Quick Lessons - Short Grammar Activities

Quick grammar exercises for the ESL EFL classroom to fill the gaps and help out when you don't
know what to do or need to find a fun practice activity.
The Role Of Grammar In Improving Student's

Writing
by Beverly Ann Chin
Professor Of English
University of Montana
Grammar is the sound, structure, and meaning system

of language. All languages have grammar, and each
language has its own grammar. People who speak the
same language are able to communicate because they
intuitively know the grammar system of that language—
that is, the rules of making meaning. Students who are
native speakers of English already know English
grammar. They recognize the sounds of English words,
the meanings of those words, and the different ways of
putting words together to make meaningful sentences.
However, while students may be effective speakers of

English, they need guidance to become effective
writers. They need to learn how to transfer their
knowledge of grammatical concepts from oral language
to written language.
Effective grammar instruction begins with what

students already know about grammar, and it helps
them use this knowledge as they write. By connecting
their knowledge of oral language to written language,
teachers can demystify abstract grammatical
terminology so that students can write—and read—with
greater competence and confidence.
WHAT DOES RESEARCH SAY ABOUT GRAMMAR

AND THE TEACHING OF WRITING?
Research strongly suggests that the most beneficial

way of helping students improve their command of
grammar in writing is to use students' writing as the
basis for discussing grammatical concepts.
Researchers agree that it is more effective to teach
punctuation, sentence variety, and usage in the context
of writing than to approach the topic by teaching
isolated skills (Calkins, 1980; DiStefano and Killion,
1984; Harris, 1962).
As students revise and edit their writing, teachers can

provide grammar instruction that guides students in
their attempts to identify and correct problems in
sentence structure and usage. For example, a teacher
who sees that many students are writing sentences
containing misplaced modifiers can present a
minilesson on this concept, using examples from
student writing. The teacher can have students edit
their own and one another's drafts for this problem.
Integrating grammar instruction into the revising and

editing process helps students make immediate
applications, thus allowing them to see the relevance of
grammar to their own writing.
TO WHAT SPECIFIC ASPECTS OF WRITING DOES

GRAMMAR CONTRIBUTE?
Because writing is a complex and challenging activity

for many students, teachers should focus on the
grammatical concepts that are essential for the clear
communication of meaning.
Research conducted since the early 1960s shows that

grammar instruction that is separate from writing
instruction does not improve students' writing
competence (Braddock and others, 1963; Hillocks,
1986). In addition, research indicates that the transfer
of formal grammar instruction to writing is not
applicable to larger elements of composition. Through
detailed studies of students' writing, Shaughnessy
(1977) concludes that the best grammar instruction is
that which gives the greatest return for the least
investment of time. Shaughnessy advocates four
important grammatical concepts: the sentence,
inflection, tense, and agreement. She recommends that
teachers encourage students to examine grammatical
errors in their own writing. She also cautions teachers
not to overemphasize grammatical terminology to the
detriment of students' ability to understand and apply
the concepts.
Weaver (1998) proposes a similar approach to teaching

grammar in the context of writing. She writes, "What all
students need is guidance in understanding and
applying those aspects of grammar that are most
relevant to writing." Weaver proposes five grammatical
concepts that enable writers to show improvement in
sentence revision, style, and editing. (See chart below.)
A MINIMUM OF GRAMMAR
FOR MAXIMUM BENEFITS
1. Teaching concepts on subject,

verb, sentence, clause, phrase,
and related concepts for editing
2. Teaching style though sentence
combining and sentence
generating
3. Teaching sentence sense
through the manipulation of
syntactic elements
4. Teaching both the power of
dialects and the dialects of power
5. Teaching punctuation and
mechanics for convention, clarity,
and style
Reprinted by permission of
Constance Weaver: Lessons to
Share on Teaching Grammar in
Context (Boynton-Cook, A division
of Reed Elsevier Inc., Portsmouth,
NH, 1998).
Rivers, Wilga M. Teaching Foreign Language Skills, 2nd Edition. Chicago: University of 1.
Methods, Approaches andTechniques of Teaching English Presentation by:- Shri. Dnyaneshwar
Khodave M.A.(Eng), M.Ed., SET Shardabai Pawar College of Education for Women,
Shardanagar.
2. Methods of Teaching English• Grammar Translation Method• Direct Method• Bilingual

Method• Eclectic Method
3. Grammar Translation Method• Old method• Useful to teach classical language• Word to word
translation• Word is unit of teaching• No use of AV aids• No practice of speaking• No direct
bond between thought and expression
4. Direct Method• Reaction against Translation method• NO use of Marathi language• Expert
Teachers are required• Use of AV aids compulsory• Practice of Speaking important• Not useful
of ordinary teachers• Not useful for crowed classes
5. Bilingual Method• Use of Marathi by Teacher only• Pattern Practice• Not burden on teachers•
Fluency in speaking• Easy understanding of ideas, concepts• Use of language habits already
acquired
6. Eclectic Method• Choice of different method• Frequent changes in methods• Can teach any
aspect• Flexibility in implementation• Doesn’t require extra source material• Skilled teacher can
integrate all the best points
7. Approaches of Teaching English• Structural Approach• Communicative Approach• Situational

Approach• Aural – oral Approach• Multi-skill Approach• Eclectic Approach
8. Structural Approach• Sentence Structures are more important• Useful for lower classes•
Emphasis on speech & ample practice• Stresses habit formation• Learner active participant• Drill
and repetitions are important• Teaches four-fold skills
9. Communicative Approach• Develops speech habits of the students• Stresses most of the skill
of language• Activities are important• Student Centered• Teacher is facilitator, manager, guide•
No interference of grammar• Functional side of language is important
10. Multi-Skill Approach• Linguistic Skills are important• Individual Skill developed• Listening,
Speaking, Reading, Writing• Individual Mastery• Skill based activities• Lot of practice• Logical
sequence in selection of skills
11. Techniques of Teaching English• Listen and Act• Listen and Say – Individual / Group• Listen
and Tell• Find difference• Listen and tell in short• Watch and say• Watch and act
12. Techniques of Teaching English• Say and Act• Find similarities• Find out• Watch and say –
letters, words, phrases, sentences, passages
Table of Contents
When the lesson presents “sentence work”, please ask your student to read the
entire sentence at least once before attempting to make changes to the targeted root
word. In the beginning, you may need to show your student how to actually write the
changed root word on the blank in the sentence. There are also exercises where the
student is asked to write the word which is produced by adding a prefix or suffix. The
student will want to “hook” the prefix or suffix to the word printed in the book. However,
recent research has shown the importance to long-term memory of actually writing a
word, forming the letters with a pencil on paper. This same advice holds true for writing
the rule which applies to the words he has just practiced modifying. Students who write
the new word forms and governing rules are more likely to learn them, providing a
lifetime of competency. The blank pages beside each lesson are provided as additional
practice space.
Explanations and rules for adding prefixes and suffixes ….……p. 2-5
Words ending vowel + y ………. …………………………………………..… p.6-8
Add ing to any word ending in y…………………………………………........ p.9-10
Words ending consonant + y ………………………………………………...p.11-15
Practice with words ending in y ……………………………………………….p.16-29
Double the final consonant of a short vowel word…………………….....p.30-49
Two syllable short vowel words …………………………………………….....p.44-50
Mixed short vowel and words ending in y …………………………………....p.51-52
When words end with e replace one vowel with another vowel……………p.53-69
Mixed short vowel, words ending with y, and ending with e………………p.70-78
Work with ible ……………………………………………..……..…. pages 73, 76, 79
Practice of mastery with prefix and suffix rules…………...………………….p.80-95
Parting details: capfuls, brothers-in-law, Williams’ play, and panicked……... p.96
Assessment of mastery….97, 98, 100 ©2010 Mary Maisner
How many quills does a porcupine have? _______________________
We see added prefixes more often than we realize.
Look: away. A is a prefix hooked onto way; away means on the way.
The mother porcupine is away from home, on her way to the river.
Look: aware. A is a prefix hooked onto ware, from the word wary, which
means to be watchful, to notice what is happening.
The porcupine was unaware that a big wind had disturbed the roof on
her nest and scared her babies. Now, the wind has blown the nest wildly
askew and it is sitting quite crooked. Her babies may fall through a hole.
askew, say as ku. A is a prefix hooked onto to skew. What do you suppose askew means:
slanted or skillful? The root word skew means: to twist, to slant to one side.
Look: astray. A is a prefix hooked to stray: astray means to wander outside
of where one is supposed to be, to wander away.

One baby porcupine has gone astray and is lost in the tall weeds.
Do you see how we use about 30 prefixes and 30 suffixes to build thousands of words from a
small
group of root words? yes no maybe
Answers: maybe as many as 30,000 quills; askew means crooked. ©2010 Mary Maisner
Name ______________________________
English is a bit like a porcupine. A porcupine
has many quills but they all trace back to one
small body. English has thousands of words
but they trace back to a much smaller group
of root words. We create the words by
hooking on prefixes and suffixes.
Trees have roots.
Do words have roots?
yes no maybe probably

Is it easier to eat cereal with a spoon or a knife? spoon knife
Is it faster to travel ten miles in a car or to walk? car walk
Spoons and cars are tools. Using the best tools to do a job is smart; it
saves time and energy. Knowing how to add prefixes and suffixes to words
is a tool that can save me time and energy.
Letter blocks added to the start of a word are called prefixes. Prefixes are
easy; just hook them onto the front. I see that this rule applies even when
the root word begins with the last letter of the prefix:
unè unneeded reè reenter disè dissatisfy il è illegal
Letter blocks added at the end of a word are called suffixes:
s è eyes, ed è washed, ing è asking, y è snowy, ly è slowly
Look: help helper helpless Most of the time, I just hook
helps helpful helplessness on the suffix. However,
helped helpfully there are words that need a change
helping unhelpful before a suffix can be added. è
Ans: spoon, car. ©2010 Mary Maisner
Name __________________________________.
Prefixes and suffixes are added to root
words. Look at the root word: escape è
escapes, escaped, escaping, escapee,
escapable, inescapable, inescapably. The
word escape is over seven hundred years old. These days,
we wear coats and jackets but in those long ago days, people
wore capes. The word escape means to leave in such a
rush, that one’s cape got left behind.
$ I. Adding a suffix to a word that ends with y:
Rule 1) Add ing to any y word, no change: obeying, buying / worrying
Rule 2) Add any ending to vowel + y; no change: obeys, obeyed, buys, buyer
Rule 3) When words end with consonant + y: no change for ing, but all other endings
require changing y to i: carry, carrying, carries, carried, carrier
worry, worrying, worries, worried, worried, worriedly, worrisome
And when y changes to i, s always becomes es: puppy, puppies; fly, flies
Rule 4) Three other times to use es: J When words end with an s-like sound letters
s, sh, ch, x, or z: buses, wishes, matches, boxes, buzzes.
JJ When words end in long o: hero, heroes echo, echoes Exceptions: some musical terms and
some round things: solos, cameos.
JJJWhen words end in f that changes to v: half, halves wolf, wolves
No changes for other endings: wished, wishing, echoed, echoing, loafed, loafing
F II. Adding a suffix to a short vowel word, like hop

Remember the Long Vowel Rule: a vowel can reach back around one consonant to make
the preceding vowel “say its name,” as in hide, hiding; notice: hidden.
Long: hope, hoped, hoping, hopes, hopeful, hopefully; s and f are consonants.
In contrast: short vowel: hop, hopped, hopping, hops; s is a consonant.
Rule 5) Adding a suffix to a short vowel word; double the final consonant to protect
the short vowel when the suffix starts with a vowel: ed, ing, er, est, able
stop, stopped, stopping, stops, s is a consonant no need to double p
sad, sadder, saddest, sadly, sadness, l and n are consonants, do not double d
% III. Adding a suffix to words ending with e:
Rule 6) Replace one vowel with another vowel: escape, escapes, escaped, escaping,
inescapable, inescapably; use, uses, used, using, usable, useful – f is not a vowel,
keep final e. % Remember ce can only change to ci: trace, tracing, traceable; ge can
only change to gi: change, changing, changeable ©Maisner Name

____________________________ Date ________________________
$Practice adding suffixes to words that end with y:
I can name all of the vowels: Aa, Ee, Ii, Oo, Uu, Yy
I can make the changes to the root word and write it on the line:
1) obey (s) __obeys______________ 4) buy (s) ________________________
2) obey (ed) __________________ 5) buy (er) _______________________
3) obey (ing) ___________________ 6) buy (ing) ______________________
What rule applies? _____________________________________________________________
Rule: When a word ends with a vowel + y, add any ending.

J The small pictures have no significance; merely make it easier to find your place.
1) stay (s) _____________________ 4) annoy (s) _____________________
2) stay (ed) ___________________ 5) annoy (ed) ____________________
3) stay (ing) ___________________ 6) annoy (ing) ____________________
What rule applies? ____________________________________________________________
1) enjoy (ing) __________________ 4) lay (er) _______________________
2) pay (s) _____________________ 5) delay (ing) ____________________
3) play (ed) ____________________ 6) replay (ed) ____________________
1) pray (ed) ____________________ 4) display (ed) ____________________
2) survey (s) ___________________ 5) array (ing) _____________________
Survey: make a study or to look closely. Array: to arrange or to be dressed in a special way.
3) convey (ed) __________________ 6) stray (ed) ______________________
Convey: carry, to transport in order to deliver, communicate: The word stop conveys the
meaning: do not
move. A bus can convey more passengers than a car.
Please ask the student to write the full word and the rule. Ans: Rule: When a word ends with
vowel +
y, add any ending, just do it. Top set: obeys, obeyed, obeying, buys, buyer, buying; 2nd set: stays,
stayed, staying, annoys, annoyed, annoying; 3rd set: enjoying, pays, played, layer, delaying,
replayed; 4th:
prayed, surveys, conveyed, displayed, arraying, strayed. ©Mary Maisner Name
____________________________ Date ________________________
$Practice adding suffixes to words that end with y:
I know all of the vowels: _______________________________
Watch me make the changes to the root word and write it on the line:
1) buy (s) _____________________ 4) pay (s) _________________________
2) say (s) _____________________ 5) play(s) _________________________
3) stay (s) _____________________ 6) delay (s) _______________________
1) pray (s) _____________________ 4) annoy (s) ______________________
2) stay (ed) ___________________ 5) destroy (ed) ____________________
3) stray (ing) ___________________ 6) destroy (ing) ____________________
1) joy (s) ______________________ 4) tray (s) _________________________
2) toy (s) _____________________ 5) betray (ed) _____________________
Betray: reveal to an enemy, violate a trust.
3) boy (s) _____________________ 6) betray (ing) _____________________


1) prey (ed) ____________________ 4) display (ing) ____________________
Prey: to hunt; a lion is a predator that preys on hyenas.
2) prey (s) ____________________ 5) array (ed) _____________________
The child arrayed the building blocks in a circle.
3) prey (ing) ____________________ 6) say (ing) _______________________
What rule applies? ____________________________________________________________
Ans: Rule: When a vowel comes before y, add any ending, just do it. Top set: buys, says, stays,
pays, plays, delays; 2nd: prays, stayed, straying, annoys, destroyed, destroying; 3rd: joys, toys,
boys,
trays, betrayed, betraying; 4th: preyed, preys, preying, displaying, arrayed, saying.
I will read the entire sentence before I decide how to adjust the root word.
1) Three _________ were _______________ their trip to Australia.
boy enjoy
2) The boys were lucky to see a lionfish that was hunting in the coral reef.
The lionfish was __________________ upon tiny fish. prey
3) The lionfish was _________________ its long venomous spikes to
corner its victims but it was not stinging its prey. employ
4) The lionfish was __________________ when its smaller cousin, called a
fuzzy dwarf, darted across its path. annoy

5) The boys ____________ a few feet away as the fuzzy dwarf and the
twelve-inch lionfish battled over a tiny captured shrimp. stay
6) Luckily, the tiny cornered shrimp escaped into a nearby water cave
while the lionfish was _____________ by the battle. delay
7) One of the boys said, “My dad warned me not to pick up a lionfish
feather if we see one on the beach. The venom is not_____________
even after the feather falls off the fish.” destroy
Answers: 1) boys & enjoying, 2) preying, 3) employing, 4) annoyed, 5) stayed, 6) delayed, 7)

destroyed.
Name __________________
Date ___________________
The vowels are
_______________________
I know how to add suffixes to
words that end in vowel + y;
just do it.
English spelling rules

Workbooks and games for the first six of the nine categories of English spelling rules
below are currently available. The others are in preparation.
English Spelling Rules Section 1 Word endings
• No English word ends in ’v’ except spiv. Use ve instead.
• No English word ends in ’j’. Use ge or dge instead.
• No English word ends in ‘i’. Use y instead. Exceptions: macaroni, spaghetti, vermicelli
(Italian) and taxi (short for taxicab)
• The word endings ‘dge’, ‘tch’, may only be used after a short vowel e.g. badge, hedge,
lodge, fetch, Dutch, catch. Exceptions to this rule are: much, such, rich, which.
• We double ‘l’, ‘f’, ‘s’ and ‘z’, after a single vowel at the end of a short word.e.g. call,
tell, toss, miss, stiff, stuff, fizz, jazz.Exceptions to this spelling rule: us, bus, gas, if, of,
this, yes, plus, nil, pal.
Two-syllable words that end with s.
Many words that end with s have the stress on the first syllable, e.g, crisis, bonus, crocus,
circus, litmus and fungus .... These follow the rule - only use one s at the end of the word.
If the stress is on the final syllable of a disyllabic word, the final s IS doubled, e.g.
address, redress, discuss, unless, dismiss, undress, remiss, amiss, recall, rebuff. Also, the
letters re, dis and un in the examples above are prefixes, and the rule when adding these
prefixes is to keep the base word the same and just add the prefix.
Two-syllable words that end with l.
With regard to final l, and final f, the rule concerning prefixes applies, e.g. refill, recall,
rebuff.
In words where there is no prefix, the question of where the stress lies does not apply.
Fulfil and until have the stress on the final syllable and many words, e.g. pistol, petrol,
petal, metal, lintel, lentil and pencil have the stress on the first syllable.
The letters ‘ck’ are used at the end of one-syllable base words that have a single short
vowel, e.g, sack, stick, clock.
Use only a single letter c at the end of words like picnic, cubic, metric and arithmetic.
English Spelling Rules Section 2 Making plurals

• Regular plurals are made by adding ‘s’. e.g. dogs, horses, monkeys, cliffs.
• To form plurals of words with a hissing ending, add ‘es’. Use suffix ‘es’ after s, x, z, sh,
ch, ss in words like bonuses, boxes, fizzes, wishes, churches and misses.
• To make nouns ending in a single ‘f’ plural change the ‘f’ to ‘v’ before adding ‘es’ to
form the plural. e. g. loaf, loaves; wolf, wolves, shelf, shelves. Exceptions to this rule:
dwarfs, roofs, chiefs.
• Words ending in an ‘o’ preceded by a consonant usually end in suffix ‘es’ to form the
plural e.g. potato-es, volcano-es, torpedo-es.Some exceptions: pianos, solos, Eskimos.
English Spelling Rules Section 3 Adding suffixes

• Short words ending in both a single vowel and a single consonant always double the last
consonant before adding a suffix (ending) beginning with a vowel. e.g. hop, hopped,
hopping; flat, flatter, flatten; win, winner, winning; bit, bitty, bitten . We sometimes refer
to these base words as 1,1,1 words because they have ONE vowel, ONE consonant after
the vowel, and ONE syllable.Examples of vowel suffixes are: ed, es, ing, en, y, al, able
and ible.
• Do NOT double the final consonant when the base word has two vowels or two final
consonants, e.g. leaf, leafy; shout, shouting; fool, foolish; self, selfish; mend, mending.
• Drop the final ’e’ from a root word before adding a suffix beginning with a vowel, but
keep it before a consonant suffix.• e.g. love, loving, lovely; taste, tasting, tasty; ride,
bubble, bubbling, bubbly: drive, driving, driver; rattle, rattled, rattling.
• ‘Ful’ is a suffix added onto the end of a root (or base) word. It has only one ‘l’. e.g.
hopeful, useful, cheerful. Because this suffix begins with a consonant, just add it to the
base (root) word, without changing the root word. Notice that we keep the silent e in
‘hopeful’ and ‘useful’ above.
• Other consonant suffixes follow the same rule as above. They include ‘ment’, ‘ly’, ty,
‘ness’, ‘less’. They are used to make words like statement, lonely, cruelty, lateness and
homeless. Remember to keep the final e of thee base word in word spellings like this.
• If a word ends in a consonant plus ‘y’, change the ‘y’ to ‘i’ before adding any suffix
except ‘ing’.• e.g. lady, ladies; party, parties; heavy, heavier, heaviest; marry, married;
funny, funnily; but there are some exceptions, e.g. cry, crying; hurry, hurrying.
• If a base word ends with the letters oy, ay, or ey, DO NOT change the final y to i when
adding any vowel suffix, e.g. annoying, played, displayed, surveyed, boyish. Exceptions
to this are the words said, paid and laid.
English Spelling Rules Section 4 Adding prefixes

• The letters ‘al’ are a prefix, followed by another syllable, in words like also, already,
always, although. Although the word ‘all’ has two lls, the prefix ‘al’ has only one l.
• Other prefixes are: re, pre, de, in, im, un, en, under, over, dis, and mis, as in rethink,
preset, deactivate, incapable, impossible, undecided, enslave, underachieve, overcook,
discontinue and misdeed.
English Spelling Rules Section 5 Using ‘soft’ c and ‘soft’ g

• When ‘c’ is followed by ‘e’, ‘i’, or ‘y’, it says ‘s’. Otherwise it says ‘k’. e.g. city, centre,
ceiling, circle, cycle, receive, access.
• When ‘g’ is followed by ‘e’, ‘i’, or ‘y’ it says ‘j’. Otherwise it says ‘g’ as in gold e.g.
gentle, giant, gymnastic, gyroscope.Exceptions: get, begin, girl, give, gear, geese, gift,
girth.
English Spelling Rules Section 6 Rules for using w and qu

• When ‘w’ or ‘qu’ comes before ‘a’ it often says (wo) or (kwa) as in wash, want, wander,
wallet, quarrel and quads.
• When ‘w’ comes before ‘or’ it often says (wer) as in worm, word, work, worth, worship.
Exceptions include worry, worried, wore, worn.
• When ‘w’ or ‘qu’ come before ‘ar’, it often says (wor) or (quor) as in war, ward, warden,
quarter, quart,
• The sound (kw) is written as ‘qu’. It never stands by itself. The letter u is a “silent”
partner. It is not a “sounded vowel” when used after the letter q.
English Spelling Rules Section 7 Using i and e together to

make one sound
• ‘i’ comes before ‘e’ when it is pronounced ‘ee’, except when it follows ’c’, e.g. brief,
field, priest, receive, deceive, ceiling.
• ‘e’ comes before ‘i’ when sounded like (ay) as in neighbour and weigh.
The letters i and e are sometimes used together and sounded as separate vowels, e.g. in
diet, quiet and client. Further information on teaching syllable division will be added
soon.
English Spelling Rules Section 8 Using ti, ci or si to make the

sound (sh)
• ‘ti’, ‘ci’, ‘si’, are three spellings most frequently used to say ‘sh’ at the beginning of all
syllables except the first.• e.g. nation, patient, torrential, infectious, spacious, ancient,
optician, financial, tension, session, admission, pension, division.
English Spelling Rules Section 9 Doubling l and t in

multisyllabic words before suffixes
• In words ending in a single ‘l’ after a single vowel, double the ‘l’ before adding a suffix
regardless of accent.• e.g. cancelled, levelling, travelled, signalling, metallic.
• If a word of more than one syllable ends in a ‘t’, preceded by a single vowel, and has the
accent (stress) on the last syllable, double the final consonant.• e.g. permit, permitted;
admit, admitted; regret, regretted; but do not double the final t in words like visit, visited;
benefit, benefited because the stress is on the first syllable of the root or base word.
English spelling rules are incorporated in the phonic progression on this site. They vary
from American spelling rules, especially in the use of double consonants in multisyllabic
words.
Guide to Spelling: Hooked on Phonics

Attaching Prefixes and Suffixes: Bits and Pieces
Guide to Spelling: Hooked on Phonics
Introduction
If U Cn Reed This …
Quick and Dirty Tricks of the Trade
Attaching Prefixes and Suffixes: Bits and Pieces
Contractions: Suck It In
Follow the Rules! Spelling Rules
See and Say
Spelling Demons
Prefixes are word parts you add to the beginning of a word to change its meaning;suffixes are word parts you add to the e
Because many useful words are created by adding prefixes and suffixes to root words, you can save a lot of time wonderi
knowing how to add prefixes and suffixes. Let's take a look at the guidelines.
Attaching Prefixes: Front-End Collision
The rule here is simple: Don't add or omit a letter when you attach a prefix. Keep all the letters—every one of th
Prefix Word New Word
dis + satisfied = dissatisfied
mis + spell = misspell

un + acceptable = unacceptable
re + election = reelection
inter + related = interrelated
You Could Look It Up

Prefixes are word parts you add to the beginning of a word to change its meaning; suffixesare word parts you add to the end of a word
Attaching Suffixes: Rear-End Collision
Keep all the letters when you add a suffix … unless the word ends in a y or a silent e. We'll talk about them later. The fol
how to master the suffix situation.
Word Suffix New Word
accidental + ly = accidentally
drunken + ness = drunkenness
ski + ing = skiing
foresee + able = foreseeable
1. If the letter before the final y is a consonant, change the y to i and add the suffix. Study these examples.
hurry + ed = hurried
greedy + ly = greedily
o Hurry doesn't follow the rule: hurry + ing = hurrying. Here are some other exceptions: dryly, dryness, shyly
2. If the letter before the final y is a vowel, do not change the y before attaching a suffix.
play + ing = playing
destroy + ed = destroyed
o Here are some exceptions: laid, paid, said, mislaid, underpaid, unsaid.
3. If the suffix begins with a vowel, drop the silent e. Here are some examples.
write + ing = writing
love + able = lovable
use + age = usage
o When the word ends in ce or ge, keep the e if the suffix begins with a or o: noticeable, manageable, adva
exceptions: acreage, mileage, singeing, canoeing, hoeing.
1. If the suffix begins with a consonant, keep the silent e. Here are some examples.
excite + ment = excitement
care + ful = careful
fierce + ly = fiercely
o Of course there are some exceptions: argument, duly, truly, wholly, and ninth.
2. If the word ends in ie, drop the e and change the i to y. Check out these examples.
lie + ing = lying
die + ing = dying
tie + ing = tying
3. Add ly to change an adjective to an adverb. Here are some examples.
brave + ly = bravely
calm + ly = calmly
o If the adjective ends in ic, add al before ly.

Word Al Suffix New Word
drastic + al + ly = drastically
scientific + al + ly = scientifically
o If the adjective ends in ble, change ble to bly.
Word New Word
able ably
noble nobly
4. In a one-syllable word, double the final consonant before a suffix beginning with a vowel.
plan + er = planner
big + est = biggest
o Don't double the final consonant if it comes after two vowels or another consonant. For example: failed, s
5. In a word of two or more syllables, double the final consonant only if it is in an accented syllable before a suffix b
examples:
defer + ed = deferred
resubmit + ing = resubmitting
o Don't double the final consonant if it comes after two vowels or another consonant. For example: obtained
6. If a words ends in ic, insert a k after the c.
mimic + ing = mimicking
traffic + ing = trafficking
7. There's only one hint for adding able or ible: an adjective usually ends in -able if you can trace it back to a noun e
Noun Adjective
adaptation adaptable
commendation commendable
o But there are many words that don't fit this rule, so this isn't the rule to have tattooed on your palm.
Go for the Gusto
In the space provided, spell each misspelled word correctly.

1. dissorganized ___________
2. diservice ___________
3. disagreable ___________
4. lazyness ___________
5. acrage ___________
6. unatural ___________
7. suddeness ___________
8. costlyness ___________
9. mislayd ___________
10. truely ___________
Answers
1.disorganized 6. unnatural
2. disservice 7. suddenness
3. disagreeable 8. costliness
4. laziness 9. mislaid
5. acreage 10. truly

Native- and Non-Native Speaking English Teachers in
the Benefits
December 2012–Volume 16, Number 3
Ian Walkinshaw
Griffith University, Australia
<i.walkinshaw griffith.edu.au>
Oanh Thi Hoang Duong

Vietnam National University, Viet Nam
<dthoanh vnuhcm.edu.vn>
Abstract
This paper examines a common belief that learners of English as a foreign language prefer to learn English
than non-native speakers of English. 50 Vietnamese learners of English evaluated the importance of native
qualities valued in an English language teacher: teaching experience, qualifications, friendliness, enthusias
and informative classes, understanding of students’ local culture, and advanced English communicative co
respondents placed more value on all but one of these qualities than on native-speakerness. The only outli
and respondents selected innate native-speakerness over this quality because they believed that native-spe
model. These findings build on a growing body of research that challenges the notion that native speakers
teachers.
Introduction
Although the notion that native speakers of a language are innately better teachers of that language than n
challenged (Canagarajah, 1999a, 1999b; Phillipson, 1992), many English as a Second/Foreign Language (E
their students place greater value on learning from a native English-speaking teacher (NEST) than from a
(non-NEST). Holliday (2008) aptly summarises this notion:
I have heard influential employers [in the English language teaching industry] in Britain say that while
differentiation between ‘native speakers’ and ‘non-native speakers’ tomorrow, they can’t because their ‘cu
The presumptive nature of this belief raises questions about its legitimacy, particularly since there is relati
this gap, this study investigates the value ascribed to native and non-native English speaking teachers by le
Language at two universities in Vietnam. Specifically, we explore the degree of importance these students
compared to other characteristics valued by language educators. We stress that a very high degree of comp
for language educators (Medgyes, 1992), and provides the foundation of a non-NEST’s professional confid
competence is also a a predictor of likely classroom success (Medgyes, 1999). In this study, we focus on En
professionals with advanced competence in all aspects of their second language.
Native and non-native speakers: theory and research

This section will define the terms “native” and “non-native”, outline the implications of this dichotomy for
summarize the primary advantages which research has attributed to each type of teacher.
Defining “native” and “non-native”
Although the innate characteristics of a native speaker of a language are difficult to define (Davies, 2004; R
attempted to shed light on these complex notions. For example, Chomsky makes the universalist assertion
the particular [language system] that that person has ‘grown’ in his/her mind/brain” (Chomsky, cited in P
Chomsky’s standpoint is purely linguistic and does not consider social factors or contextual constraints, an
contextualized investigation of the issue.
Medgyes (1992) also attempts to differentiate between native speakers (NSs) and non-native speakers (NN
can never achieve a native speaker’s competence” because they “can never be as creative and original as th
(pp. 342- 343). Similarly, Cook (1999) asserts that only a small percentage of second language (L2) users m
comparing the feat with becoming an Olympian athlete or an opera singer. However, the sheer number of
speakers in the ELT profession and in the academic field of applied linguistics refutes this notion. We cont
what Cook (1999) calls the “final” stage of language acquisition (which Cook notes is very difficult to define
competence and advanced non-native competence is negligible.
Davies (2003, 2004) offers a more appropriate stance and argues that “nativeness” is characterized by cert
1. Acquiring the language during childhood
2. Ability to understand and accurately produce idiomatic forms of the language
3. Understanding how standard forms of the language differ from the variant that they themselves spe
4. Competent production and comprehension of fluent, spontaneous discourse.
According to this conceptualisation, all these elements but the first can theoretically be learned after childh
sufficient aptitude, motivation, opportunities to practice and exposure to high-level language input (Davie
although it is difficult (Birdsong, 1992), it is possible for a learner to reach the same degree of syntactic, dis
proficiency in a second language as someone who acquired the language in childhood. The sole immutable
between a native speaker and a non-native speaker of a language is childhood acquisition of the language,
between the two groups.
The native/non-native schism in ELT

In the field of ELT, non-NESTs are inevitably compared unfavourably with NESTs (Borg, 2006; Butler, 20
or pedagogical basis for making this distinction (Canagarajah, 1999a), this perception plays a crucial gate-
empowers educators, language institutes and publishing companies in the English-speaking Centre countr
benefit from higher salaries, greater prestige, textbook sales and management and academic positions. Ho
“British English”, with an attendant “British culture”, as it appears in textbooks, in language classes, and in
teachers, is not so much a standard language code as a marketable product which Centre ELT and applied
claimed as theirs by birthright (Canagarajah, 1999a). Conversely, those in Periphery communities, where E
foreign language, tend to be disempowered because of their dependence on Centre educators, institutions,
are perceived to ‘own’ the language. Consequently, non-NESTs often have difficulty finding jobs (Canagara
salaries are considerably lower (Celik, 2006; Le, 2011; Ngo, 2008) and they receive fewer benefits than nat
considered second-rate educators (Braine, 2004; Celik, 2006; Medgyes, 1994), have their competence que
to outperform their NS counterparts to feel accepted (Thomas, 1999).
Although other less polarising terms have been suggested such as “expert user” (Rampton, 1990) and “com
native/non-native label remains firmly embedded in ELT ideology (Arva & Medgyes, 2000; Cook, 1999; M
benefits one group and excludes the other (Canagarajah, 1999a). This study will employ the terms “native
because the distinction between them is the primary focus of this research. However, use of these terms is
the distinction, which is framed in this article as an artificial and disempowering construct (Brutt-Griffler
Perceptions of NESTs and non-NESTs by learners and educators
Learners in Cheung’s (2002) Hong Kong study (n=420) reported that NESTs had better oral skills, greater
“Western” (presumably British, Australasian and North American) culture. On the other hand, their lexico
and they struggled to explain complex constructions. In addition, some teachers lacked understanding of l
Similar findings emerged from Mahboob’s (2003) study of 32 L2 learners in an intensive English program
NESTs in these two studies were valued for their own experience as language learners, their use of strict m
however, they were perceived as having weaker oral skills and less cultural insight than their native-speake
Benke and Medgyes’ (2005) study of 422 Hungarian learners of English revealed that native-speaker teach
imitation; however, their speech could be difficult for L2 learners to comprehend. 76 learners in Lasagabas
university in the Basque Autonomous Community in Spain preferred NESTs for learning pronunciation, sp
studying lexico-grammatical aspects of the language. Pacek’s (2005) study of 89 L2 learners at a British un
teachers’ engagement, preparation, qualifications, and professional background than for their linguistic ba
Having learned the target language through conscious study rather than childhood acquisition, non-NEST
grammar and even be more effective…than the so-called native speakers” (Canagarajah, 1999a, p. 80) in te
metacognitive skills (Mahboob, 2004; Seidlhofer, 1999). And if explanations about grammar are ineffectiv
their students’ L1 may use the shared L1 to facilitate understanding (Cook, 2005). Non-NESTs are also val
learners (Lee, 2000; Medgyes, 1994, 1999) who can anticipate and empathize with their students’ learning
Celik, 2006; Kelch & Santana-Williamson, 2002; Seidlhofer, 1999).
One issue identified in studies by Luk (1998) and Moussu (2002) is non-NESTs’ English pronunciation, w
model for their own L2 pronunciation. However, there is evidence that some language learners struggle to
native English pronunciation. Kelch and Santana-Williamson (2002) tested L2 learners’ ability to distingu
playing them recordings of both native- and non-native speakers reading from the same text and asking th
background. The learners identified this correctly only 45% of the time. In a similar study, Chiba, Matsuur
Japanese university students a short English passage spoken by nine English speakers from Hong Kong, J
Britain, and the United States and asked them to identify the different varieties of English. Only one third
place the British and American accents, and roughly half of the respondents misidentified the Japanese En
elsewhere in Asia. These findings raise questions about the validity of learner perceptions about pronuncia
return.
Methodology
Data collection instruments
A framework that includes the attributes desirable in an English language teacher was constructed to prov
creating data-collection instruments. The framework is based on Brown’s (2001) discussion of these attrib
studies in education literature. This framework, which wwe call the Language Teacher Characteristic fram
Professional characteristics:
i) Experience of teaching (Brown, 2001)
ii) Teaching qualifications relevant to EFL (Brown, 2001)
Personal characteristics:
iii) Friendly personality (Brown, 2001; Prodromou, 1991)
iv) Enthusiasm for teaching (Borg, 2006; Brown, 2001; Lee, 2010)
Pedagogical characteristics:
v) Able to teach interesting, informative classes (Brown, 2001; McBer, 2000; Miller, 2012; Walls, Nardi,
Cultural characteristics:
vi) Understanding of/familiarity with the students’ local culture (Brown, 2001; cf. Kirkpatrick, 2010)
Linguistic characteristics:
vii) Advanced communicative competence in the L2 (Brosh, 1996; Brown, 2001)
Some items appearing in this framework also reflect the characteristics of good teachers generally (i.e., not
language teachers perform similar roles as other teachers and therefore embody the same characteristics (
Characteristic framework is not linked to a language education policy at the two institutions where the rese
given its foundation in the literature, it is likely to broadly reflect the qualities that these institutions dema
Data were collected using two instruments, which were constructed around the above-mentioned framewo
was a rating survey that employed bipolar semantic differential scales (see Figure 1), which elicited a gradu
participants placed on native-speakerness compared with the seven characteristics listed in the Language T
Selecting options one or two signified greater value on the characteristic being investigated, while selecting
value on native-speakerness. Option three indicated neutrality.
i) Which is more important: that a teacher is experienced at teaching, or that s/he is a native English speake
1 2 3 4 5
Experienced at teaching Native En
Figure 1. Sample questionnaire item
The second data collection instrument was an open-ended self-report questionnaire. The questionnaire elicited a
advantages and disadvantages of learning English from each type of teacher (see Figure 2). This instrument soli
complemented the one-dimensional data from the close-ended items in the rating survey instrument (Dörnyei, 2
with the topic was increased because they had the opportunity to express their ideas in a written format.
In your opinion, are there any advantages to learning English with a non-native speaker teacher? If so, what are they?
Figure 2. Sample self-report questionnaire item
To maximize validity, both instruments were piloted with nine Vietnamese learners of English who were n
modified according to their responses and feedback.
Participants
The two instruments were distributed consecutively to 50 students at two public universities in Vietnam: 3
respondents were third year English majors between the ages of 20 and 24, with upper intermediate Engli
by their level of English language class).
Collection and analysis of data
Participants gave their consent to participate prior to completing the rating survey and the self-report ques
period. The two instruments took a total of 15-20 minutes to complete.
The collected rating survey data were organized into a grouped frequency distribution (Denscombe, 2007)
in each semantic differential scale was most commonly selected. Mean responses were also calculated for e
standard deviations were calculated to measure the spread of data relative to the arithmetic mean for each
data were coded according to the items in the Language Teacher Characteristic framework. These data pro
patterns in data from the rating survey, which is based on the same framework.
Findings and discussion

Table 1 presents the proportion of respondents who selected each option in the seven semantic differential
standard deviations for each item. This section will analyse responses to each item and present the key pat
Table 1. Vietnamese learners of English (n=50): Survey responses
Selected Selected Selected

Quality 1-2 / % 3/% 4-5 / % Mean SD
27 15 6
Experienced at teaching (26.3%) (31.3%) (12.5%) 2.16 1.19
30 10 9
Good qualifications (61.2%) (20.4%) (18.4%) 2.23 1.45
25 9 14
Friendly personality (52.1%) (18.7%) (29.2%) 2.62 1.54
30 12 7
Enthusiastic (61.2%) (24.5%) (14.3%) 2.26 1.22
36 8 6
Interesting classes (72%) (16%) (12%) 1.98 1.33
32 8 8
Understands students’ culture (66.6%) (16.7%) (16.7%) 2.16 1.28
Understands / speaks English fluently 19 14 17 2.9 1.52

(38%) (28%) (34%)
Experience
The mean rating of 2.16 (SD=1.19) indicates that the participants placed greater importance on teaching ex
background. 27 (56.3%) respondents valued teaching experience the most, while only six (12.5%) placed gr
(Table 1). This finding may be connected to the ELT context in Vietnam. According to Pham (2001), some
universities lack experience (cf. Le, 2011; Ngo, 2008), having been hired as soon as they graduated from un
extremely high teaching load, allowing them little time for professional development (Brogan, 2007; Broga
As for the teaching experience of expatriate native-speaker teachers, data on this topic are scarce due to lim
Vietnam ELT context (Brogan, 2007; Le, 2011; Pham, 2006). However, Respondent 4 comments that NES
they are lack of experience in teaching,” suggesting that the NEST employment situation is similar to Jeon
China, where “many [native-speaker teacher] recruits are young without prior teaching experience, and co
first-year contract” (p. 54). Although foreign teachers are officially required to have some prior teaching ex
makes this difficult to enforce and leads to “problems in terms of the quality of those recruited” (Jeon & Le
experience is an issue among both native- and non-native teachers in Vietnam, it is logical that Vietnamese
importance to this factor.
Qualifications
Table 1 shows that the mean rating for the teacher qualifications item was 2.23 (SD=1.45), suggesting that
weight in the Vietnam EFL context than native-speakerness. Importance was ascribed to qualifications by
nine (18.4%) attached more value to native-speakerness. Self-report data supported this finding:
I think that if an English teacher is…well qualified…, student can learn so much from s/he. (Respondent 9
As with experience, qualifications are an issue among both NESTs and non-NESTs in Vietnamese universi
NESTs have teaching qualifications and/or degrees in a relevant field, a considerable number do not. Resp
subjects, [NESTs] do not have degrees,” while Respondent 7 says that “Some native speak[ers] don’t specia
“Again the situation bears comparison with China, where “in many circumstances native English speakers
degree or as little as a US high school diploma” (Jeon & Lee, 2006, p. 54). Due to the great demand for Eng
“open-door” policy was initiated in 1986, Vietnamese non-NESTs are often recruited to work in universitie
they finish their undergraduate studies, and “become teachers overnight without adequate preparation in
30). In many cases, even experienced Vietnamese non-NESTs have few qualifications or training in metho
situation is changing as more universities require masters- or doctorate-level qualifications, more teacher-
more teachers have the opportunity to study abroad. In sum, the relative deficit of qualifications among bo
may explain the importance that Vietnamese learners of English ascribe to this factor.
Friendly personality
The mean rating for this item was 2.62 (SD=1.54). Higher value was placed on a friendly personality than o
respondents, while 14 (29.2%) placed greater emphasis on native-speakerness. Respondent 14 said that tea
interesting” while Respondent 15 bemoaned teachers that were “strict [and] haughty.” This result is perhap
friendliness is related to “affect”, that is, whether teachers are liked by their students. Learners whose affec
are more inclined to take risks when attempting to produce language. The reduced classroom tension also
(Krashen, 1991). The participants in the present study placed greater value on affect than on native-speake
Enthusiasm for teaching
In line with Borg’s (2006) finding that enthusiasm is a key trait of language teachers, the mean rating for t
Thirty (61.2%) respondents ascribed greater value to enthusiasm for teaching than to native-speakerness.
native-speakerness. The respondents’ overall viewpoint is embodied by a quote from Respondent 8:
A native or non-native speaker is not important. The [crucial element] is that they…LOVE what they do a
into the love of studying language. [emphasis in original]
The respondent’s explicit link between enthusiastic teachers and motivated students is echoed by Respond
encourage us to study.”
Two possible reasons emerge for the importance of this characteristic in Vietnam ELT. First, although mos
profession are enthusiastic about their work, this enthusiasm may be gradually diminished by excessive wo
common issue among non-NESTs in Vietnam (Brogan, 2007). Similarly, teachers may have to teach at sev
teachers can be found teaching in several universities at the same time, teaching the same commercial text
teaching methods again and again” (Ngo, 2008, p. 90). Low salaries (Ngo, 2008) may also lead to job dissa
Secondly, some NESTs and non-NESTs may lack commitment to their work if their training and qualificat
not plan to stay in the country after finishing their contract (Griffith, 2011). These factors can negatively im
Although measuring the enthusiasm or otherwise of language teachers in Vietnam is beyond the scope of t
explain why Vietnamese learners of English valued enthusiasm more than linguistic origin in their languag
Interesting, informative classes
The mean rating for this item is 1.98 (SD=1.33), the most robust finding among the seven qualities measur
and informative classes were valued by 36 (72%) respondents. Only six respondents (12%) valued linguisti
students appreciate teachers who can employ a range of interactive activities, organize, explain and clarify
interest and motivation among students (Brosh, 1996). Interesting and informative classroom practices ca
Patten, 1990) and encourage “pushed output”, or attempts to use newly-learned, complex language rather
internalized language (Batstone, 2002). The sample group in this study placed more importance on this qu
background.
Understanding students’ culture
The mean score for this item was 2.16 (SD=1.28). Greater importance was ascribed to familiarity with the l
by 32 respondents (66.6%), while eight respondents (16.7%) valued native-speakerness more highly. The s
one respondents wrote comments foregrounding the issue of cultural awareness in Vietnam language class
mentioned that “Due to difference between cultures…sometimes, learning with native speaker teachers ma
Other respondents framed the issue in terms of differing norms of appropriateness:
[NESTs] don’t understand our culture as well as Vietnamese student’s habit. It causes some misundersto
(Respondent 35)
My American teacher surprised so much when she saw same sexual student in my class holding [hands]
Respondent 25 highlighted the different expectations of classroom interaction:
They have some cultural shock when teaching us like students in Vietnam is not active as student in their
Similar to Jeon and Lee’s (2006) study in China, NESTs teaching in Vietnam may have only limited experi
pedagogical context since they are often hired on short-term teaching contracts. This unfamiliarity with lo
could potentially generate classroom tension, although this tension may be mitigated by factors such as a t
teaching experience. Conversely, a key advantage of learning from non-NESTs (provided they share the stu
norms of teacher-student interaction such as turn-taking, topic selection and politeness strategies are clea
miscommunication. Non-NESTs may also empathise with their students’ language learning difficulties (Ar
guidance relating to their own pedagogical and linguistic context. For Vietnamese learners of English, all o
background.
Fluency in speaking and understanding English
Linguistic fluency (defined as advanced communicative competence in the L2) is the only item in the Lang
that is not rated more highly than native-speakerness by a clear majority of respondents. The mean rating
(SD=1.52), signaling a marked inclination within the sample for native-speakerness over L2 communicativ
proportion (19 respondents or 38%) valued linguistic fluency, a similar number (17 respondents or 34%) v
highly (Table 1). Fourteen participants (28%) selected the neutral option three.
The self-report data strongly suggests that pronunciation is the key issue. 30 of the 50 respondents wrote c
pronunciation was an advantage of NESTs and a handicap of non-NESTs. Unfortunately, it is difficult to g
issue since respondents’ comments were invariably non-specific:
The pronunciation of teachers may not be quite good, this can cause bad effects on students. (Responden
I don’t know whether [non-NESTs’] pronunciation is right or wrong. (Respondent 8)
Although small numbers of respondents raised concerns about general fluency (n=5) and lexico-grammati
clearly the crux of the issue. When considering pronunciation, we should reiterate that language learners m
native and non-native English pronunciation (Chiba et al., 1995; Kelch & Santana-Williamson, 2002). Also
pronunciation can vary considerably: 24 respondents in Pacek’s (2005) investigation of the most importan
listed intelligible pronunciation as crucial, but not native-speaker pronunciation. In fact, seven responden
as the least important feature.
Furthermore, some scholars (e.g., Kirkpatrick, 2010; Modiano, 1999) argue that phonologically proficient
and better models for L2 learners than a native English speaker who speaks a local variety of English with
(2010) argues that phonological proficiency of L2 learners in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (i
measured against native-speaker standards at all. Rather, phonological proficiency should be measured ag
lingua franca to communicate with other Asian nations where there is considerable mutual intelligibility am
Kirkpatrick, 2006).
In sum, while respondents in the current study noted pronunciation as an advantage of learning from a NE
L2 learners can accurately identify native accents and indeed whether native-like pronunciation is an appr
Southeast Asia who will most often use English with other L2 users.
Limitations of the study

The first limitation of this study is that the data were collected from tertiary institutions only. Research con
such as high schools or private language institutions may increase the findings’ generalisability. A second l
gender imbalance in the sample group. Of the 50 respondents, only 12 (24%) were male. However, the dive
global data is minimal. The average mean rating for males across the seven items was 2.26, which is only 0
2.33. The average standard deviation for male ratings was 1.21, which is only 0.15 lower than the global ave
investigation into gender comparability is warranted, our rudimentary analysis predicts only a minor diffe
Conclusion
This study investigated the relative value ascribed by Vietnamese EFL students to native- and non-native s
professional, personal, pedagogical, cultural and linguistic qualities that are the hallmark of a competent la
group ascribed greater value to these qualities than to native-speakerness. Respondents valued qualified a
coupled with the ability to teach interesting and informative classes, and familiarity with the local culture.
linguistic competence in English, as one section of the sample valued native-speaker teachers more highly
models of accurate pronunciation.
Findings from this study contribute to a growing number of studies that highlight the strengths of non-nat
Medgyes, 2000; Barratt & Kontra, 2000; Benke & Medgyes, 2005; Cheung & Braine, 2007; Lasagabaster &
2004; Moussu, 2006), and illuminate the false premise of employing native-speaker teaching staff simply
(Holliday, 2008). An understanding of the local culture and pedagogy, as well as first-hand experience of s
Contents
weight for Vietnamese learners of English.
About the Authors

Ian Walkinshaw is a lecturer in English in the School of Languages and Linguistics at Griffith University
Duong Thi Hoang Oanh is associate director of the Department of External Relations, Vietnam Nationa
lecturer at the International University, Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh City.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Andy Kirkpatrick, Claire Kennedy, Ana Lobo and the anonymous reviewer
versions of this article. This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, com
References
Arva, V., & Medgyes, P. (2000). Native and non-native teachers in the classroom. System, 28, 355–372.
Barratt, L., & Kontra, E. (2000). Native English speaking teachers in cultures other than their own. TESOL
Batstone, R. (2002). Contexts of engagement: A discourse perspective on ‘intake’ and ‘pushed output’. Sys
Benke, E. & Medgyes, P. (2005). Differences in teaching behaviour between native and non-native speaker
E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-Native Language Teachers: Perceptions, Challenges, and Contributions to the Profe
Springer.
Birdsong, D. (1992). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language, 68, 706–755.
Borg, S. (2006). The distinctive characteristics of foreign language teachers. Language Teaching Research
Braine, G. (2004). The non-native English-speaking professionals’ movement and its research foundations
and teaching from experience: Perspectives on nonnative English-speaking professionals (pp. 9–24). An
Press.
Brogan, M. (2007). Maintaining the learning: EFL teacher education in Vietnam. In A. Burns & H. de Silva
creatively within a required curriculum for adult learners (pp. 59–92). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
Brogan, M., & Nguyen, T. H. (1999). The 3 Rs of teacher training in Vietnam: Revising, reviving and resear
international conference on language and development. Retrieved 18 September, 2012, from
http://www.languages.ait.ac.th/hanoi_proceedings/ntha.htm.
Brosh, H. (1996). Perceived characteristics of the effective language teacher. Foreign Language Annals, 29
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson.
Brutt-Griffler, J., & Samimy, K. K. (2002). Transcending the nativeness paradigm. World Englishes, 20 (1
Butler, Y. G. (2007). Factors associated with the notion that native speakers are the ideal language teacher
school teachers in Japan. JALT Journal, 29 (1), 7–40.
Canagarajah, A. S. (1999a). Interrogating the ‘native speaker fallacy’: Non-linguistic roots, non-pedagogica
native educators in English language teaching (pp. 77–92). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Canagarajah, A. S. (1999b). Resisting linguistic imperialism in English teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ
Canagarajah, A. S. (2005). Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Celik, S. (2006). A concise examination of the artificial battle between native and non-native speaker teach
Education Journal, 14 (2), 371–376.
Cheung, Y. L. (2002). The attitude of university students in Hong Kong towards native and nonnative tea
Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong).
Cheung, Y. L., & Braine, G. (2007). The attitudes of university students towards non-native speaker Englis
Journal, 38 (3), 257–277.
Chiba, R., Matsuura, H., & Yamamoto, A. (1995). Japanese attitudes towards English accents. World Engl
Cook, V. (1999). Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 33 (2), 185–20
Cook, V. (2005). Basing teaching on the L2 user. In E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers: Perce
the profession (pp. 47–61). New York, NY: Springer.
Davies, A. (2003). The native speaker: Myth and reality. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Davies, A. (2004). The native speaker in applied linguistics. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook
Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Denscombe, M. (2007). The good research guide for small scale social research projects (3rd ed.). New Y
Deterding, D., & Kirkpatrick, A. (2006). Emerging South-East Asian Englishes and intelligibility. World E
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Griffith, S. (2011). Teaching English abroad: Your expert guide to teaching English around the world (11
Publishing.
Holliday, A. (2008). Standards of English and politics of inclusion. Language Teaching, 41 (1), 119–130.
Jeon, M., & Lee, J. (2006). Hiring native-speaking English teachers in East Asian countries. English Toda
Kelch, K., & Santana-Williamson, E. (2002). ESL students’ attitudes toward native- and non-native-speaki
Journal, 14 (1), 57–72.
Kirkpatrick, A. (2010). English as a lingua franca in ASEAN: A multilingual model. Hong Kong: Hong Ko
Krashen, S. D. (1987). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-
Krashen, S. (1991). The input hypothesis: An update. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University round ta
1991: Linguistics and language pedagogy: The state of the art (pp. 409–431). Washington, D. C: Georget
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2005). What do students think about the pros and cons of having a nativ
(Ed.), Non-Native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges, and contributions to the profession (pp. 2
Le, S. T. (2011). Teaching English in Vietnam: Improving the provision in the private sector (PhD thesis,
Australia).
Lee, I. (2000). Can a non-native English speaker be a good English teacher? TESOL Matters, 10 (1), 19.
Lee, J. J. (2010). The uniqueness of EFL teachers: Perceptions of Japanese learners. TESOL Journal, 1 (1)
Llurda, E. (Ed.) (2005). Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges, and contributions to the
Luk, J. (1998). Hong Kong students’ awareness of and reactions to accent differences. Multilingua, 17, 93–
Mahboob, A. (2003). Status of nonnative English-speaking teachers in the United States (PhD thesis, Ind
Mahboob, A. (2004). Native or non-native? What do students enrolled in an Intensive English Program th
and teaching from experience: Perspectives on nonnative English-speaking professionals (pp. 121–148).
Press.
McBer, H. (2000). A model of teacher effectiveness. Department for Education and Emloyment, UK.
Medgyes, P. (1992). Native or non-native: Who’s worth more? ELT Journal, 46 (4), 340–349.
Medgyes, P. (1994). The non-native teacher. London, UK: Macmillan.
Medgyes, P. (1999). Language training: A neglected area in teacher education. In G. Braine (Ed.), Non-nat
teaching (pp. 177–195). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Miller, P. (2012). Ten characteristics of a good teacher. English Teaching Forum, 50 (1), 36–38.
Modiano, M. (1999). International English in the global village. English Today, 15 (2), 22–28.
Moussu, L. (2002). English as a second language students’ reactions to non-native English speaking teac
University, Provo). Retrieved from ERIC Document Reproduction Service (No. ED 468879).
Moussu, L. (2006). Native and non-native English-speaking English as a second language teachers: Stud
perceptions, and intensive English program administrator beliefs and practices (PhD thesis, Purdue Uni
Document Reproduction Service (No. ED 492599).
Moussu, L., & Llurda, E. (2008): Non-native English-speaking English language teachers: History and res
315–348.
Murdoch, G. (1994). Language development in teacher training curricula. ELT Journal, 48, 253–259.
Ngo, M. T. (2008). Management of a university-based English language program in Asia’s non-native cont
Vietnam. CamTESOL conference on English language teaching: Selected papers, 4, 87–97.
Pacek, D. (2005). ‘Personality not nationality’: Foreign students’ perceptions of a non-native speaker lectu
E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges, and contributions to the professi
Springer.
Paikeday, T. M. (1985). May I kill the native speaker? TESOL Quarterly, 19 (2), 390–395.
Pham, H. H. (2001). Teacher development: A real need for English departments in Vietnam. Forum, 39 (4
Pham, H. H. (2006). Researching the research culture in English language education in Vietnam. TESL-EJ
http://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume10/ej38/ej38a10/.
Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Prodromou, L. (1991). The good language teacher. English Teaching Forum, 29, 2–7.
Rajagopalan, K. (1999). Of EFL teachers, conscience and cowardice. ELT Journal, 53 (3), 200–206.
Rampton, M. B. H. (1990). Displacing the ‘native speaker’: Expertise, affiliation and inheritance. ELT Jour
Seidlhofer, B. (1999). Double standards: Teacher education in the expanding circle. World Englishes, 18 (2
Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Thomas, J. (1999). Voices from the periphery: Non-native teachers and issues of credibility. In G. Braine (
language teaching (pp. 5–13). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Van Patten, B. (1990). Attending to form and content in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studie
287–301.
Walls, R. T., Nardi, A. H., von Minden, A. N., & Hoffman, N. (2002). The characteristics of effective and in
Quarterly, 29, 37–48.
© Copyright rests with authors. Please cite TESL-EJ appropriately.
Editor’s Note: The HTML version contains no page numbers. Please use the PDF version of this article for citatio
Copyright © 1994 - 2014 TESL-EJ, ISSN 1072-4303

Copyright rests with the authors.
Sep
Volume 1
Contents
Grammar-Based Teaching: A Practitioner's Perspect

Betty Azar
<bazar whidbey.com>
Abstract
This article addresses the role of grammar in second language instruction from the point o
It outlines the basic methods and assumptions underlying Grammar-Based Teaching (GBT
effective, ever-evolving, and widespread pedagogical practice. The article discusses the imp
understandings of grammar concepts to effective language use by native and non-native sp
GBT engenders conceptual awareness of language structures even as it focuses on morphol
are made between GBT and other ways of including a grammar component in L2 curricula
movement in language teaching, the author sees a blending of GBT with Communicative L
accord among academics and practitioners in terms of the positive role grammar teaching
second language instruction.
Through the Eyes of a Practitioner
Do both. Those are the two words I write most often in margins when I read academic artic
grammar in second-language instruction. Focus on fluency or accuracy? Do both, in prope
needs and goals. Have students work with grammar structures inductively or deductively?
any particular student's "Aha!" is going to come from. Use authentic or adapted language?
sentence-level vs. connected-discourse material? Both can have good pedagogical purpose
ended communicative interaction or controlled response exercises? Both are beneficial for
communicative exposure? Both. "[F]ocus on awareness rather than performance" in teachi
29). My handwritten note in the margin: Do both.
These "do-both notes" I write to myself in margins reflect, I believe, a fundamental differen
what I will call "academics" and "practitioners." By academics, I mean those whose focus is
practitioners, I mean teachers and materials writers. By academics, I mean those who stud
language. By practitioners, I mean those who actually teach language. The academic focuse
research that one has to divide the subject of study into component parts so that they can b
practitioner focuses on synthesis: The real classroom is a complex arena where teachers ten
pragmatism in blending various practices and principles. Many in our field, of course, are b
But by my definition, I am not.
I say all this by way of introduction to explain that I am solely a practitioner and that my go
practitioner's view of the role of grammar in second language instruction. I am not a resear
related to the use of my materials. Since I published my first textbook in 1981, several milli
have used the grammar-based materials that I have written. I do not know why. To my kno
researched why students and teachers use my textbooks in such large numbers and what th
considerable anecdotal input from users and have my theories, of course, but, rather than r
and skills go into materials development.
From my practitioner's perspective, I will outline in this article the basic methods and assu
widespread practice in our field: Grammar-Based Teaching (GBT). In my reading of academ
that many academics now agree that those in the naturalist movement (most prominently
in advocating zero grammar. As just one example, I would cite a recent Ellis article inTESO
there "is ample evidence to demonstrate the teaching of grammar works" (2006, p. 102). A
grammar in L2 curricula does, at last, seem to have solidly formed, and to me that means t
become more in line with the practitioner community vis-à-vis the teaching of grammar. T
practitioners, grammar teaching is vibrantly alive and well (and has been throughout our c
innovative ways, and an integral component of effective second-language instruction for m
The Nature of Language and Concepts of Grammar

One important aspect of grammar teaching is that it helps learners discover the nature of l
consists of predictable patterns that make what we say, read, hear and write intelligible. W
only individual words or sounds, pictures, and body expressions to communicate meaning
creates the fabric. One of the reasons I begin my upper-level textbook, Understanding and
the entire English verb tense/aspect system is to demonstrate that language has grand and
convey that grammar is not just "rules." (Indeed, "rules" is a word I, as a grammar-materia
with spelling. I do not see teaching grammar as teaching "rules.")
Along with an understanding of the nature of language, one of the principal benefits of GBT
understanding of grammar concepts: concepts such as subordination and coordination; co
relationships through the use of verb forms; concepts of nouns and adjectives, subjects and
Students can understand grammar concepts with simplified terminology, with a minimum
grammatical analysis, and even without definition of key terms such as noun or verb. In m
example, I use but do not define the terms noun and verb; I just show students how these g
patterns of English to convey meaning.
The conceptual nature of teaching grammar is a fundamental element of GBT; however, it

overlooked in the discussions of the values of grammar teaching. One place it is not overloo
Against Grammar (2003). Mulroy analyzes how the lack of grammar instruction in U.S. sc
naturalist movement heyday adversely affected native-speaker students' ability to use Engl
principally, he argues, because of students' lack of an understanding of what language is an
concepts) of grammar.
In my teaching experience, almost nothing is more difficult than trying to explain to a stud
where to put a period or why a certain verb form is needed. I am referring to some Generat
encountered in my university classrooms, students with four or eight or more years of scho
high school diploma) whose written English does not meet the academic expectations of a
and listening could be described as fluent and communicative (but with fossilized ungramm
students have profound difficulties in producing university-level academic writing. For the
happen," not even after many years in the U.S. school system.
I observed that many of my Generation 1.5 students with no concept of grammar also foun
rhetoric. Students who cannot understand how a sentence is structured also cannot readily
another or how the sentences in a paragraph relate. So in addition to writing problems, the
academic reading. In short, they have difficulty seeing beneath the surface of the words to
expressed in complex, interrelated language structures. Mulroy (2003) forwards some exce
of grammar to anyone who uses language—which is, of course, everyone.
Sentences always have and always will consist of clauses with subjects and predicates and o
fairly well described as verbs, nouns, adjectives, adverbs, pronouns, prepositions, conjunct
Individuals who understand these concepts have a distinct advantage over others where th
and that means everywhere. (p. 118)
I agree with him.[2] Those who wish to use a language to the best of their ability, and espec
language well in academic discourse, are helped by fundamental understandings of its gram
native speaker alike.
Grammar-Based Teaching (GBT) vs. Focus on Form (FonF)

Grammar teaching has received renewed attention in academic circles since the late 1980s
naturalist movement began to fade. This attention has generally taken on the nomenclatur
though a focus on grammar includes a great deal more than simply a focus on form. Form
especially in any worthwhile L2 grammar instruction. Basically, FonF, in my understandin
grammar instruction into Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), which is often conten
Both GBT and FonF blend grammar and communicative teaching, but approach the integr
curriculum differently. Generally speaking, FonF seeks to integrate a grammar component
seeks to integrate CLT into a structural syllabus, usually in one class (often called a gramm
curriculum. Simply stated, the issue facing practitioners today is whether (1) to teach gram
with CLT methods and materials as one component out of many in a well-balanced program
or (2) to integrate grammar into a content- and/or task-focused approach, either incidenta
(reactively) or by a predetermined grammar syllabus (proactively).
Though I have limited experience with FonF, I have taught variations of it, most notably in
composition classes. For reactive teaching of grammar in composition classes, I would exce
students' writing and use them for a grammar-teaching segment within the composition sy
difficult to notice that semester after semester students made the same errors, so I decided
effective to prepare a grammar syllabus to integrate into the writing syllabus in a systemati
teaching, but I found it more effective when combined with proactive FonF teaching. For e
covered subject-verb agreement in proactive FonF, I found reactive FonF teaching of that g
efficient in that students just needed a quick reminder or recast.
I observed that students in my writing class who had experienced grammar instruction had
students who had not. Students with a good grounding in grammar needed only to be remi
were trying to say "I was really bored" not "I was really boring." Those without that ground
more teaching time in order to understand, just as one example, the difference between â€
Students with numerous problems in structure usage but without grounding in grammar c
heartbreakingly, often unable to reach the level of academic language skill they needed to c
In sum, I observed that FonF worked well for students with a good grounding in grammar.
experience, sufficient for students lacking basic concepts of how English works, and especi
without an understanding of the nature of language itself, as is the case with certain Gener
My experience tells me that placing specific grammar structures within their larger concep
students than a random, piecemeal approach to explicit grammar teaching. Let's continue
adjectives. If students already understand that -ing can signify the active meaning of a tran
signify a passive meaning (whether they know the terminology or not), the difference betw
less difficult for the teacher to demonstrate or the student to grasp than if the student had
passive meanings.
Indeed, Williams and Evans (1998, p. 152) suggest that participial adjectives can be "easily
and imply that one explicit "straightforward explanation" can suffice. However, from my ex
that Williams and Evans would find participial adjectives "easily sorted out" only when stu
passive meaning conveyed by â€“ed verbs, and even then, in my experience, "one straightf
participial adjectives is not easily accomplished by a teacher or textbook and is rarely suffic
confusion on this point. The success of a FonF lesson on participial adjectives would depen
already having a good foundation in the concept of the passive in English.
To me, the passive is a good example of how GBT allows students the necessary exposure, e
grammar concept, while FonF does not allow the same learning opportunities. As Williams
complex teaching task, not quickly nor easily done in a FonF approach. They acknowledge
grasped by virtue of one straightforward explanation" (1998, p. 152). When, as a teacher, I
passive in my GBT classes (perhaps five or six hours of teaching time), I felt the students h
one that would help them interpret what they read and help them better say what they mea
facility in English grew over time.
FonF certainly has a place in second language teaching. And so does GBT. The variables ar
best suited to the students: teachers need to take into consideration the course purposes an
teaching time. They need to consider the students' learning preferences, educational and g
and academic or work goals, among other things. In intensive university-level ESL program
aside time to focus on grammar seemed to me effective and efficient, as well as a good supp
students' many other language learning experiences, both in and out of class. Feedback fro
appreciated having that time to look at how English works, to find answers to their many q
experimenting with newly understood structures through varied practice in an accepting cl
Varieties of Grammar Materials

Not all grammar teaching or grammar-teaching materials are the same. I see wide variatio
GBT is not to be confused with Grammar Translation. There is no translation nor rule-mem
not conducted in the L1 (even though the L1 may be included in the teaching, depending up
focuses on spoken as well as written language, and has a listening and speaking componen
Grammar Translation.
Other varieties in grammar materials (e.g., some grammar handbook-workbook combinati

a focus on form, providing information accompanied by a small sampling of manipulative e
attention paid to the development of speaking, listening, writing, and reading skills. Such t
but little practice and almost no communicative methods are employed. Essentially, they fu
grammar information and their lessons could be excerpted or used as supplements in a con
approach. Materials such as these do not come under the umbrella of GBT as I define it.
By comparison, GBT materials go beyond the goals of providing grammar information and
proactively seeking to develop communicative competence in all skill areas through widely
and the inclusion of communicative methods. GBT materials have many subtle shades of d
divide into two types.
1. There are those GBT materials that are complete courses organized around areas of g
basal series with a grammar syllabus. These materials use a four-skill approach (i.e.,
composition instruction in addition to listening and speaking practice) and, like basa
material, including ancillaries, that other texts are presumably not required for a lan
2. Then there are GBT materials such as mine, which do not attempt to be all-in-one te
focus on providing a grammar component directed at skills development and are inte
approaches and materials within a balanced program of second-language instruction
A Description of Grammar-Based Teaching

The following is my description of GBT, with some of the methodological considerations, a
those of us who use this approach.
The Basic Approach
As its name implies, GBT uses grammar as the base, the starting point and foundation, for
skills--speaking, listening, writing, and reading. GBT provides information about English g
numerous and varied practice opportunities.
Explicit Information about How English Works
GBT makes available explicit linguistic information about the structure of the English lang
otherwise facilitate the development of the students' interlanguage. GBT does not "teach ru
works. Grammar is not taught as subject matter to be memorized; grammar is never taugh
Practice
Practice ranges from simple manipulation of form to open communicative interaction. GBT
types to encourage and accommodate a variety of student language-learning strategies. Th
multifaceted, but all lead toward the goal of creating successful communication experience
Blending Approaches
GBT blends a grammar syllabus and explicit grammar teaching with communicative metho
springboard for interactive, communicative practice opportunities.
Communicative Methods
GBT seeks to engage students in communicative practice that ideally provides ample oppor
structures (which may or may not occur). Communicative practice is usually centered on th
opinions, experiences and real-life situations, including the fact that they are in a classroom
often uses the classroom as context, building language practice around the people and obje
and-now classroom. In GBT, communicative practice means that real people are communi
things in a real place for a real purpose.
Usage Ability Goals
The immediate goal is to help students develop an interlanguage sufficient to their needs a
proficiency may be a long-term goal, but is not an immediate one. "Mastery" of structures i
students were learning geometry formulas. A GBT approach does not presume to know wh
internalized by any particular student.
Structure Awareness
GBT seeks to create awareness and understanding of English structures, i.e., awareness of
appropriate use of structures. This awareness is seen as one of the first steps many student
creating their interlanguage. Understanding how a structure works helps many students fo
mean and helps lead to successful communication experiences, the building blocks of secon
Building Familiarity and Comfort Level
To assist the development of the students' interlanguage, GBT seeks to build familiarity thr
practice modes and promote the students' comfort level in using their new language. Risk-
gain confidence from the solid footing GBT provides.
Error Correction
In GBT, mistakes are viewed as opportunities for learning. Corrective feedback is a natural
based class. Students are encouraged to make their own corrections and at times to give co
classmates during interactive activities. During independent communicative activities amo
ignored.
Grammar Concepts
GBT teaches grammar conceptually even as the focus is on particular morphology. In other
concept of number, that is, how English expresses singular and plural, or the concept of ho
Students are taught the concepts of subordination and coordination, even though that term
Students are taught the concepts underlying such basic grammar terms as noun, verb, sen
ever defining those terms. Parsing or student use of metalanguage to complete language-le
only for specific, pragmatic purposes in particular circumstances.
By teaching grammar conceptually, GBT helps students gain a better conception of languag
consists of intricate patterns that combine through sound or writing to create meaning. Stu
language is not random and is not something that flows willy-nilly out of one's mouth. It ha
and without that structure and predictability the sounds humans make and the scribbles th
of meaning.
Use of Cognitive Skills
GBT assumes that students naturally and beneficially utilize their cognitive skills in pursui
Many students find it helpful to understand how English works, and GBT supplies informa
of practice in a comfortable environment that encourages cognitive exploration of both the
and the underlying organizational principles of English.
Inductive vs. Deductive
Inductive and deductive approaches intermingle. Students are encouraged to figure gramm
and are also given explicit information about grammar. Both approaches are helpful for stu
Examples vs. Explanations
In optimal GBT, explanations of grammar are keyed to examples, not vice-versa. It has bee
learn from understanding what is happening in examples of usage, not from knowing "rule
series, the grammar charts are set up so that students look at examples first—then at an ex
other way around. Explanations are there on an "as needed" basis only. Many students can
simply from studying the vertically aligned examples on the left-hand side of a chart. The e
part of a chart; the examples are. The teacher's job as well as the text's job is to clarify the g
can discover from examples. Simple form-and-meaning exercises are essentially examples
their cognitive awareness of a structure increases.
Descriptive vs. Prescriptive
GBT provides descriptive information about how English works. It does not take a prescrip
teaching, but it does give usage guidance, especially as to register, e.g., informal vs. formal
Terminology
GBT uses grammar terminology as a temporary tool to facilitate teacher-student communi

those students who choose to use reference texts such as dictionaries and grammar handbo
Students are very rarely asked to supply grammar terms in exercises—and only for very we
they are not asked to use metalanguage, and terminology is not taught as an end in itself. T
help along the way as students begin to grasp grammar concepts and understandings of ho
Syllabus Construction
 In GBT, the syllabus and sequence of presentation are principally based on:
 the grammar information needs of second language learners
 the pragmatics of organizing a complex subject for pedagogical purposes

 frequency vs. nonfrequency of usage
 simplicity vs. complexity of structure
 usefulness to students' interlanguage
 areas of difficulty for students
 appropriate spiraling, adjusting depth and breadth according to level
Recycling and Spiraling
GBT gives repeated exposure to and practice with structures throughout a unit and a series
concepts are explored more deeply and expanded upon; tasks require more complex langu
more variety in the linguistic contexts and collocations associated with a structure.
Contexts
GBT uses both sentence-level and extended contexts. Even single-sentence items can have
though some single-sentence items are directed purely at manipulation of form. Sentence-
form and meaning, expose students to a variety of typical usages of the target structure, an
grammar in uncomplicated contexts. GBT also employs short contextualized passages. It is
access to lengthy extended discourse contexts from other sources.
Spontaneous Communicative Interaction
Much of GBT exercise content is selected for the purpose of sparking communicative intera
between students and teacher. Spontaneous give-and-take generated by interesting and inf
peripheral, to the intended use of GBT materials and is a prime language-teaching opportu
exploit.
Authentic vs. Adapted Language
The exercise content in most GBT materials is often based on authentic sources that have b
purposes. Adapted material allows for a streamlined focus in the classroom at times that au
digressions from the main teaching points or confusion about unfamiliar names, reference
students will have ample exposure to authentic language materials from other sources. Stu
authentic and adapted materials; the use of one does not exclude the use of the other. Inde
within a curriculum.
Vocabulary
New vocabulary is not introduced at the same time a new structure is introduced. Unfamili
students' understanding the meaning of a grammar form. After the structure is well unders
vocabulary is brought in, especially in contextualized exercises. When structures have com
passive with get, e.g., get tired or get excited), students are made aware of these collocatio
contexts.
Grammar as Content
Those of us who engage in GBT often notice that students enjoy talking about grammar; th
in the content. And as Ellis points out, "For some learners at least, talking about grammar
talking about kinds of general topics often found in communicative language courses" (200
interaction with grammar as the topic is seen as a valuable language-learning experience in
talking about any other academic subject that requires negotiation of meaning and cognitiv
and ideas.
Laying Foundations
As is clearly observable, significant second-language acquisition demands a relatively lengt

practitioners understand that they are laying the foundation for future growth in language
realize that despite explicit teaching, learners may continue to make errors in structure usa
their interlanguage stages, but perceive that with appropriate instruction those errors are l
and more likely to be replaced by accurate language use over time. Longitudinal GBT studi
through longitudinal studies are we going to find unequivocal, replicable, data-supported e
effectiveness of GBT in terms of learner outcomes.
Conclusion
Grammar teaching has held a dominant place in English language teaching for the entire fo
the field, and during this time, it has developed considerably and eclectically in its method
only to look at the evolution of my own published materials as well as those of other gramm
steady progression toward a blending of methodologies within grammar syllabi, resulting i
Based Teaching (GBT). Today, GBT is an effective, widespread and robust pedagogical pra
a second or foreign language.
The old-fashioned notion that teaching grammar is a matter of teaching "rules" has given w
grammar is, as Pennington says, "nothing more or less than the organizing principles of a l
communicational system, without which, there is no system" (2002, p. 78). The teaching o
English works through helping students to understand grammar concepts (i.e., the organiz
communicational system) as well as particulars. Pennington calls for the field to bring gram
and into the heart of language and the language teaching profession where it belongs" (200
maintain that for legions of teachers and students, grammar never receded into the margin
became a strong pedagogical force. Many practitioners embraced both GBT and CLT, altho
in a great deal of academic thought and literature.
Fotos says of this dichotomy: "[I]t is time to take the position that a combination of gramm
communicative activities provide an optimum situation for effective L2 learning" (2005, p.
addresses what is actually happening in our field: large numbers of practitioners and acade
in accord that a focus on grammar plays a positive role in second language instruction and
supportive, not mutually exclusive. To return to my starting point in this article, when it co
communicative teaching, my answer is simply, "Do both."
Notes
[1] The following is a sample of writing from an immigrant student who arrived in the Unit
from a U.S. high school, and was enrolled in a U.S. college at the time this was written: "W
they are staring to live, they have a lot of confuse, they can't control there impulses and the
or video games. Also if the court sente a kid in adult presons will get worse not better, or th
need to build a new jail for the juveniles that have doing crimes and the court should treate
court." (Elaine M. McCollom, "'But I Was Born Here—I Can't Be ESL!' Generation 1.5 Stud
Unpublished presentation at CATESOL 2006, San Francisco, CA.)
[2] I might note, however, that for second language students I do not choose to use the term
my materials, but I do use all the other traditional terms listed by Mulroy. Choice of termin
separate topic beyond the scope of this article.
About the Author

Betty Azar is the author of The Azar Grammar Series,
Azar, B. and Hagen, S. (2006) Basic English grammar, 3e. White Plains, NY: Pearson Lon
Azar, B. (2003) Fundamentals of English grammar, 3e. White Plains, NY: Pearson Longm
Azar, B. (1999). Understanding and using English grammar, 3e. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
References
Ellis, R. (2002). The place of grammar instruction in the second/foreign language curricul
(Eds.), New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp. 17-34
Erlbaum Associates.
Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: an SLA perspective. TESOL Qu
Fotos, S. (2005). Traditional and grammar translation methods for second language teachi
(Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 653-670). Ma
Associates.
Mulroy, D. (2003). The war against grammar. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publisher
Pennington, M. (2002). Grammar and communication: new directions in theory and pract
(Eds.), New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp. 77-98
Erlbaum Associates.
Williams, J. and Evans, J. (1998). What kind of focus and on which forms? In C. Doughty &
form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 139-155). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
Comment/view comments on this article. There are currently comments.

© Copyright rests with authors. Please cite TESL-EJ appropriately
Editor's Note: The HTML version contains no page numbers. Pl

the PDF version of this article for citations.
About this Ad
Trust Rating
65%
tesl-ej.org
Related Searches:
Teaching English As A Second Language
Second Language Learning
English Language Learning
English For Speakers Of Other Languages
English Language
TESOL Certificate Course
Teaching English As A Foreign Language
Learn A Second Language
English As A Second Language
About this Ad
Campuses :
Twin Cities
Crookston
Duluth
Morris
Rochester
Other Locations
myUOneStop
Search Webs
center for writing | teaching with writing | teaching resources | responding & grading | responding to non-native spea
responding to non-native speakers of english

Sheryl Holt
Writing Studies
Most instructors encounter non-native speakers of English or ESL students (students with English as their
one point or another. Although native speakers of English also have problems with writing, non-native spe
and the approach taken by the instructor needs to be different as well. The following list of ideas and sugg
respond to the typical problems for ESL students. Some services are available on campus to help non-nati
improvement will need to come from comments made by the instructor. Although standards for grading m
non-native speakers in a class, the instructor may need to alter the approach of teaching and commenting
overall
Generally, instructors find non-native speakers' papers overwhelming because there are several issues tha
sometimes difficult to determine if the student is simply a weak writer, or if too little time has been spent
stem from a lack of knowledge and experience of U.S. academic writing standards. While their American p
sufficiently directed with a few well-worded comments, most non-native speakers expect and need more e
of the teacher in most countries is to correct everything, so even the comments the American instructor g
the international students. Most ESL-trained teachers say that they take the following approaches with the
suggested approaches:
Put more direct, instructive and extensive comments on papers, for example, "You need a thesis st
paper." The instructor might even find such a statement later in the paper and tell the student w
would expect to find it.
Try to focus on the content and ignore the grammar at first, so you can determine what else needs
If only one draft will be seen, put comments about both the grammar and the organization, but don
exceptions are articles, prepositions, and word choice or idiomatic expressions, which need to be
rules or patterns or, as in the case of articles, they are very complex in English.
Try to put more marginal comments instead of just end or front comments. Even if the paper looks
the student to see comments at the place of concern. Few non-native speakers have ever told m
when they saw all the comments. Many, however, have told me that the comments were too bri
Remember that most non-native speakers have not had years of American-style writing instructi
direction.
Make sure the assignment sheets spell out organizational expectations and guidelines. Non-native s
materials instead of their listening skills.
In class, write more on the board than you might for an all native-speaker class. It will help non-na
and will reinforce what has been said in class discussions. (Often, non-native speakers have a ha
because of the students' poorly organized statements and the ESL students' poor listening skills.
specific approaches to typical problems for non-native speakers

GRAMMAR
The most obvious problem for virtually all ESL writers is grammar.
Recognizing grammar problems is so easy that it tends to mask the more serious problems of the ESL writ
of the paper and cause you to overlook the depth or insights presented in the paper. Writing grammar cor
student to focus only on grammar and not realize that "fixing the grammar" may not significantly improve
cannot focus on both grammar and development of ideas at the same time. They must first write their ide
Possible alternative approaches:
Comment on grammar only after the organization and content of the paper are reviewed, so you w
correcting the grammar and ignoring the content.
Put a lot of written comments about organization and ideas and only circle grammar errors (if they
Ask the student to hand in another draft for grammar comments after the ideas are more organized
If there are some consistent problem areas (ignore article problems, since they are so complex in E
rule for that area and ask the student to correct THAT mistake throughout the paper. An ESL spe
can help with article usage.
Decide what is tolerable WRITING ACCENT—ideas are understandable though the paper still contain
singular/plural agreement problems and article errors.
Suggest that the student use Student Writing Support with a trained ESL specialist.
GAPS
Sometimes for cultural reasons, non-native writers may have fewer written connections between ideas.
There will often be jumps between ideas with fewer written explanations of how the ideas are connected. M
cultures, would not insult the intelligent reader (especially a professor) by stating the obvious connections
the other hand, want all connections of thought and transitions stated in black and white, not between the
more specific than "This is not clear." Another aspect of this problem is the lack of examples or specific ex
cultures, students often say we "beat a dead horse" with explanations, examples and other evidence.
Suggested comments:
Directed comments about what the student needs are usually most helpful. Try comments like, "Yo
another example here."
Provide some examples of connective sentences for ESL writers. Some teachers will revise one or t
transitional words, phrases and sentences for the student so he or she can see good examples o
be a very hard concept for many ESL writers to learn and change because it takes time to chang
especially if the student has been a successful writer in his or her own language.)
Talk to the student about the differences in cultural styles and ask about his or her cultural expecta
will be unaware of these differences, but many are very insightful and will help you understand t
LOGICAL DEVELOPMENT
"Logical development" is very culturally defined.

Possibly the most difficult problem to diagnose relates to the logical and thorough development of ideas as
an American considers logical in an academic paper may not be logical in another culture. Because of cultu
have trouble sticking to a thesis, narrowing a thesis sufficiently, or proving a thesis concretely enough for
that the point is difficult to find or understand because of the difference in presentation. Of course, this is
cultures. Some students have had a lot of practice writing for an American audience, while others have sim
language. Comments on logical development should be abundant in a non-native speaker's papers.
Many ESL students do not recognize that the American style is very direct and very narrow (in comparison
the last paragraph of the last page to find a thesis in many Japanese writers' papers. It is often stated qui
to guess throughout the paper what the student has been trying to say or prove. For another example, ma
language as much as the message. A South American may want to put too many flowery words into an ac
American writing is very boring. They may also appear to be straying from the initial thesis as the paper p
other cultures have never been trained to write in a direct (or, as they say, "blunt and colorless") style.
How another person's cultural style differs from an American's style is new knowledge to many non-native
writers, and it takes practice to recognize and change the style to fit an American academic audience. If yo
American audience often expects a thesis statement to come early in academic writing, and that all other
in a very direct way, it will help the student become a better writer for an American audience. (There is m
change the American audience's expectations or whether to make others change to fit our traditional style
least be aware of the variances in expectations within an American university setting.)
Suggested comments:
Comments about logical development should, as much as possible, be formulated in clear, direct st
place in papers for comments given in the form of questions, when it comes to thesis statements
questions like "Does this belong here?" can be more confusing than "This statement would be cle
the paragraph (for an American audience)."
Help the students come up with an outline before writing the first draft. It is frustrating for student
paper just to find out that they need to start over with a more narrow thesis.
Some instructors will give the opportunity for any student to submit a plan (not a draft) via e-mail
singling out the ESL students. Others approach the weaker students (ESL included) and ask them
EVIDENCE
What constitutes solid evidence in the U.S. is different from some other cultures.
In some cultures, the more passionately a point is argued, the more it is believed. In others, personal exp
evidence. In still others, quoting "the masters" is the most reliable evidence. In the U.S. academic setting,
personal experience or observation, and words of current authorities. Without these types of evidence, pap
Furthermore, logical reasoning is highly valued, but that reasoning is usually from an American perspectiv
counterarguments.
Suggested responses:
Instead of assuming the student has not done enough research, tell the student what type of evide
audience and where to find that type of evidence.
Encourage summarizing or paraphrasing instead of quoting long sections of authorities' ideas, being
important in U.S. writing.
CRITICAL THINKING
Teachers frequently complain about non-native speakers' lack of critical thinking.
Although this is the biggest complaint I hear from university instructors about all students, international st
problem than Americans. Culturally, many non-native speakers have a very high regard for what is written
that using someone else's words in a paper is more important than their own interpretations or opinions. I
asked to (publicly) criticize, evaluate, or think deeply about an authority's written words. Questioning and
culture, but many cultures have been taught to accept, not question—at least in writing. For South East As
schools, the problem may include some cultural conflicts, but there is an added problem as well. Dependin
they may not have had a chance to develop critical thinking skills in American high schools. They were ofte
language in mainstream classrooms at the age when their native-speaker peers were concentrating on dev
However, after some extra help and practice, ESL students often are able to formulate unique and insightf
the world experience for.
Suggested comments:
Ask leading questions like, "Why are they saying this?", or "Why do YOU think....?", thus giving the
about the author's thoughts.
Make it very clear to students that you expect them to form an opinion about a piece instead of sim
Make comments or give examples about how to connect personal opinion/viewpoints and other sou
had a lot of practice with these connections.
ASSIGNMENT INTERPRETATION
Teachers often report that their ESL writer has totally misunderstood the intentions of the assignment.
Although listening and other language skills often enter into the misinterpretation of an assignment, there
may include a lot of cultural or historical information that is beyond the knowledge of the ESL student. For
a certain event in U.S. history will probably be more difficult for a foreign student than for someone who h
Students in first-year writing courses may have special difficulties because so many of the topics are appro
They may also lack knowledge of the audience's needs and expectations surrounding style, tone or backgr
Suggested approaches:
Use the international students in the class as cultural (international) informants. Many American stu
world view of historical events.
Invite the ESL student to your office hours to discuss assignment expectations.
Suggest that ESL students hand in a preliminary draft so the teacher has a chance to discuss any m
the assignment is due.
Describe the audience and the needs of the audience.
PLAGIARISM
Plagiarism is often interpreted culturally.
What and how sources are documented varies widely around the world. What may appear to be blatant pla
of American documentation techniques. Also, because others' words are deemed more important than the
overuse of other sources with little of the student's opinion or ideas established. Furthermore, in many cul
projects, so identical papers could be turned in to you without the student knowing how an American teach
"sharing" of papers from past semesters is commonly practiced in some cultures, so students should be cl
such sharing should be. Explicitly stating expectations early in the semester regardless of all issues of plag
confrontations later.
Define plagiarism clearly and thoroughly in your syllabus. Don't assume all of your students will un
Be a suspicious reader—not with the intention of punishing the student, but with the intention of ad
student writes papers for another class and is reported for scholastic misconduct. (85% of all sch
plagiarism at the U of M are against ESL students.)
Once plagiarism is suspected, have a frank one-to-one discussion of what constitutes plagiarism in
In most cases, give an opportunity to rewrite a paper, unless it has been a thoroughly copied paper
plagiarism.
Student Writing Support is prepared to spend extra time explaining the expectations of documenta
READING COMPREHENSION
Many teachers encounter problems with ESL students' lack of understanding of an assigned reading.
Although it is most often assumed ESL students don't understand readings because of the English vocabul
from some other sources. There may be some cultural assumptions in the reading that most Americans wo
be numerous subtle ideas that would not be easily recognized by the non-native speaker. Because of the d
the US, even picking out the main idea of a piece can be difficult for some students.
Be prepared to spend time individually with students for explanations of the concepts presented in
Possibly, assess the readings more closely for cultural implications before assigning them. Does a r
mainstream cultural knowledge? If so, maybe you can spend time individually with the student e
If the ideas of the readings are discussed in class, try to review what has been said at the end of th
pick up the main ideas from a loose discussion-based class.
TIME CONSTRAINTS
Because of the lack of experience with other ESL issues, non-native speakers will usually need a lot more
When students are faced with in-class, timed writing such as essay questions on a test or first-day writing
always be at a disadvantage.
Some instructors will allow the non-native speaker to take more time.
Other instructors assure the student that they will be focusing on ideas and will mostly ignore gram
Hand out writing assignments early enough in the semester so the non-native speaker has ample p
time.
GRADING STANDARDS
Although many instructors have learned by trial and error how to work with ESL students, grading is still a
the ESL student fairly when the paper still has grammar errors? No one approach is the RIGHT approach, b
work for some instructors.
Possible alternative approaches:
One approach is to categorize what you are grading. Try using a written or mental checklist that ca
organization, critical thought, narrowed thesis, and grammar with the heaviest weight of the gra
organization. Less weight should be given to categories such as grammar and sentence structure
very good organization and ideas, he or she is given credit in those categories, but is graded dow
one area. This helps the student realize that the paper has several aspects that are worth lookin
method will grade down only on areas that interfere with understanding of thoughts. Minor probl
agreement, article usage, etc., are usually overlooked or viewed as tolerable writing accent.
Another method is to grade primarily on content, but to circle types of errors on the final draft and
hand in a clean copy now that the ideas are clear (or at least graded). This ensures that the subj
change the ideas along with the grammar, or if you expect the student to get help at all, that sh
expect the students to have someone else "fix" their drafts before handing them in, then this sho
beginning of the semester. If this type of help is seen as a form of plagiarism (another person do
the student) then this should also be clearly stated, but some consistency should be established
Some instructors prefer another method. Students hand in final drafts for a grade on the due date
penalty from grammar errors), but when the paper is handed back, the student may take the pa
with a tutor. The goal should not be a completely corrected draft, but a reasonably changed draf
clean draft, you are forcing someone else to simply go through the paper and correct it. The tuto
major areas instead of simply correcting the draft with the student. The corrected version does n
simply an additional step the student may take before receiving the grade. In other words, an ad
ESL student, but the student has not been penalized for grammar errors on the final draft. (It als
could be suggested for native speakers with poor grammatical or mechanical skills if you sugges
final advice
The worst possibilities are to correct the draft completely for the student, to ignore the grammar totally, o
for the student to work on. There needs to be a balanced approach when working with the student.
I am available to look over a draft or discuss how to work with a student's grammar errors or other aspect
reasonable, balanced approach to working with your non-native speakers.
Sheryl Holt (612) 624-4524, holtx001@umn.edu
Coordinator, First-Year Writing (Non-Native Speaker Sections), Writing Studies
Address: 10 Nicholson Hall, 216 Pillsbury Dr SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455
Phone: 612.626.7579
Fax: 612.626.7580
 © 2011 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All rights reserved.
 The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer
 Last modified on November 1, 2013
Twin Cities Campus:
Parking & Transportation
Maps & Directions
Directories
Contact U of M
Privacy
About this Ad
Trust Rating
67%
writing.umn.edu
About this Ad
Related Searches:
Learning And Teaching
How To Teach Writing

University Of Minnesota Twin Cities
University Of Minnesota
Writing Instruction
College Teaching
Colleges And Universities In Minnesota
How Students Learn
College Teachers
Popular Areas
 Year-by-Year
 Encyclopedia
 Dictionary
 50 States
 Thesaurus
 Country Profiles
 Atlas
 Homework Center
Infoplease Tools
 Calculator
 Place Finder
 Spelling Checker
 Conversion Tool
 Distance Calculator
 Perpetual Calendar
 Periodic Table
 Cite
The Family Education Network
 K-8 Kids
 Poptropica
 Parenting Advice
 Online Gradebook
 Teacher
Resources
About Infoplease,
Part of Family Education Network
 RSS
 Terms of Use
 Contact
 Privacy*
 Link to Us
 Site Map
 Advertise with
Infoplease

*
Updated 10/2013
© 2000–2014 Pearson Education, publishing as Infoplease
Read more: Guide to Spelling: Hooked on Phonics: Attaching Prefixes and Suffixes: Bits and Pieces |
Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/cig/grammar-style/attaching-prefixes-suffixes-bits-
pieces.html#ixzz2u7ipvy5M

Grammar-Translation Approach of Learning

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Grammar-Translation Approach of Learning

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Grammar-translation approach of learning English as

a Second language: A case study of the Secondary

MEHTORDS OF TEACHING GRAMMAR

To study the grammar translation approach of teaching English.

To study the grammar translation approach of learning English.

To focus on error correction and confidence building in communication

Universe of the study

Tools for collecting data

Traditional: grammar for grammar's sake

Communicative competence: grammar for communication's sake.

Modern methods of teaching English grammar

Inspirational learning environment

Drama to engage and inspire

Rigorous teaching of spelling and phonics

Grammar concepts taught creatively

2. Calkins, L. M. (1980). "When Children Want to Punctuate." Language Arts.

8. Mellon, J. C. (1969). "Transformational Sentence-Combining: A Method for Enhancing the Development of

Grammar Teaching Techniques

Intermediate Level Syllabus

Teaching Grammar in an ESL / EFL Setting

Basic English Curriculum for Teaching

Quick Lessons - Short Grammar Activities

The Role Of Grammar In Improving Student's

Grammar is the sound, structure, and meaning system

However, while students may be effective speakers of

Effective grammar instruction begins with what

WHAT DOES RESEARCH SAY ABOUT GRAMMAR

Research strongly suggests that the most beneficial

As students revise and edit their writing, teachers can

Integrating grammar instruction into the revising and

TO WHAT SPECIFIC ASPECTS OF WRITING DOES

Because writing is a complex and challenging activity

Research conducted since the early 1960s shows that

Weaver (1998) proposes a similar approach to teaching

1. Teaching concepts on subject,

2. Methods of Teaching English• Grammar Translation Method• Direct Method• Bilingual

7. Approaches of Teaching English• Structural Approach• Communicative Approach• Situational

Words ending vowel + y ………. …………………………………………..… p.6-8

Add ing to any word ending in y…………………………………………........ p.9-10

Words ending consonant + y ………………………………………………...p.11-15

Practice with words ending in y ……………………………………………….p.16-29

Double the final consonant of a short vowel word…………………….....p.30-49

Two syllable short vowel words …………………………………………….....p.44-50

Mixed short vowel and words ending in y …………………………………....p.51-52

Practice of mastery with prefix and suffix rules…………...………………….p.80-95

Parting details: capfuls, brothers-in-law, Williams’ play, and panicked……... p.96

Assessment of mastery….97, 98, 100 ©2010 Mary Maisner

How many quills does a porcupine have? _______________________

We see added prefixes more often than we realize.

means to be watchful, to notice what is happening.

Look: astray. A is a prefix hooked to stray: astray means to wander outside

of where one is supposed to be, to wander away.

group of root words? yes no maybe

English is a bit like a porcupine. A porcupine

has many quills but they all trace back to one

small body. English has thousands of words

but they trace back to a much smaller group

of root words. We create the words by

hooking on prefixes and suffixes.

Trees have roots.

Do words have roots?

yes no maybe probably

Is it faster to travel ten miles in a car or to walk? car walk

1) obey (s) obeys 4) buy (s) ____________

2) obey (ed) 5) buy (er) _____

3) obey (ing) _ 6) buy (ing) ____

1) stay (s) _ 4) annoy (s) _

2) stay (ed) _ 5) annoy (ed) __

3) stay (ing) _ 6) annoy (ing) __

1) enjoy (ing) 4) lay (er) _____

2) pay (s) _ 5) delay (ing)

3) play (ed) 6) replay (ed)

1) pray (ed) 4) display (ed)

2) survey (s) _ 5) array (ing) ___

3) convey (ed) 6) stray (ed) ____

1) buy (s) _ 4) pay (s) _____

2) say (s) _ 5) play(s) _____

3) stay (s) _ 6) delay (s) ___

1) pray (s) _ 4) annoy (s) __

2) stay (ed) _ 5) destroy (ed) __

3) stray (ing) _ 6) destroy (ing) __

1) joy (s) 4) tray (s) ___

2) toy (s) _ 5) betray (ed) _

3) boy (s) _ 6) betray (ing) _

1) prey (ed) 4) display (ing)

2) prey (s) 5) array (ed) _

3) prey (ing) 6) say (ing) ___

1) Three _ were _______ their trip to Australia.