Luận văn teachers’ and students’ views on grammar presentation in the course book english for chemical engineering at sao do university

This study was conducted to seek answers to the question of what teachers’ and students’ view toward grammar presentation in the couse book “English for Chemical engineering” at Sao Do U

Secondly, 1 aim grateful to all my colleagues for their kindnass and assistance to me in the data collection process T would like fo express my thanks lo all the leachors and students of the classes [ have visited in order to gather information for my class observation

‘Thanks to my husband, who has given me so nwch love, patience and encouragement, who

spent hours working with the computer to help me with computer data entry and processing in the dark midnight hours

‘These people deserve all the credit 1 alone am responsible for any failings

Lventually, the study has been completed to the best of my knowledge; however, mistakes and shorteorrings arc unavoidable, Theroforc, T am looking forward to receiving comments and

suggestions from any rcaders for the perfection of the course work,

Hanoi, August

‘Trin Hoàng Yên

ABSTRACT

It is clear that the development of language teaching, especially grammar teaching has trough! about great challongcs in Leaching English in all Vietnamese schoots in gonoral and al Sao Do University in particular However, the way teachers teach grammar and the way students learn grammar are not similar

This study was conducted to seek answers to the question of what teachers’ and students’ view toward grammar presentation in the couse book “English for Chemical engineering” at Sao Do University, the finding from the study indicated that a balanced

belwson explicit instruction in which a larga! form is prosonlod formally logather with information about how it is used, followed by practice and implicit instruction in which students’ attention may be drawn to a target form and they may he have to induce the rule or

w

LIST OF THE TABLES

Chart 1: What do you think of the role of grammar in earning English?

Chart 2: How do you find grammar presentation inthe course book “English

for Chemical enginccring” at Sao Do University?

Chart 3: [low difficnit do you find grammar points in the course book “English

for Chemical enginccring” at Sao Do University?

Table 1: How do you think about these grammar points in the course book

“English for Chemical engineering” at Sao Do University?

Table 2: Students’ siyle preference

for grartinar Ezarning Chart 4: What do you think of the role of grammar in teaching English?

Chart 5: [low do you find grammar teaching?

Chart 6: Do you spend much time on teaching grammar?

Table 3: Teachers’ style profereness for grammar teaching

Scope of the study

x The setting and background

„ Design of the study

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1 What is grammar?

1.2 How is erammar viewed?

1.3 What is the role of granunar in English language lcaching?

1.4, Two approaches io grammar teaching

1.5 The importance of understanding teachars" and students’ views to grammar teaching and learning

fey w

26.11, Suidents’ awareness of the importance of grammar learning

2.6.1.2 Students’ evaluation of current grammar presentation in the

course book “English for Chemical engineering” at Sao Do university

2.6.2 Teachers’ views

2621 Teachers’ awareness of the importance of grammar learning

2.6.2.2 Teachers’ evaluation of current grammar presentation in the

course book “English for Chemical engineering” at Sao Do university

2.7, Summary

PART C: RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

1 Summary of the findings

2 Suggestions for grammar presentation in the course book “English for chemical

engineering” and grammar teaching at Sao Do University

3 Limitations of the study

4, Reconunendations for further research

PART A: INTRODUCTION

In this part, I would like to present the rationale, the aims and objective, the research and methodology adopted fir this study, the scope, the setting and background of the study and the design af the study

1 Rationale

Grammar teaching has been has been a focal point of foreign language teaching and it has aroused a great deal of controversy and even debate among educational researchers, linguists, methodologists and teachers Cuxrently, there are several points of view on grammar teaching issues

In Vietnam, forcign languags in goncral und Engtish tcaching in particular is said Lo bs grammar-focused, and for many English language teachers, teaching English means teaching grammar ‘here are good reasons for this This can be traced back to the national examinations which measured eamdidates" linguistic or grarommr competence in written form Therefore, the teaching of English is still dirceted towards preparing stadents for such sort of

examinations In this process, students are supposed to learn whatever teachers “give” ‘That’s

why nol only knowledge but also Tearing styles arc imposed on students by toachors, Unfortunately, research findings have proved that students come to a language class with particular profiles of interests, intelligence, learning habits, purposes and so on All these learner factors may affect their learning styles and learning process

Because of' learner variables, the departure of this study is the claim that fanction and presentation of the grammar explanation is a complex issue and a single approach will be far from being satisfactory in all teaching situatio igation into teachars’ and students”

views towards grammar presentation in the course book “English for chemical engineering” is

an attempt to deal with this under-researched area

Another rzasơn is relalođ tơ my persenal profs

"

experiences as a five year English teacher at Sao Do University, I have realized that how to make grammar teaching, satisfactory to students is really a great challenge fheing every English teacher For several years, | have been haunted by the question of how to deal with grammar tore effectively al our universily The answer Lo this question would be good help to

me as well as to my colleagues,

2 Aims of the study

With the above-presented rationale, the specific aims of the study are:

+ To investigate into teachers’ views towards grammar presentation in the course book

“English for chemical enginccring” al S40 Do University

+ To investigate into students’ views towards grammar presentation in the course book

“English for chemical engineering” at Sao Do University

+ To find out in what ways the leacher can inake their grammar leaching more suitable to students’ expectations and Icarning stylcs

It is hoped that the findings from this study will help English teachers in Vietnam, especially those wha are engaged in granmiar Loachinyg The sludy can highlight the oxtoul to which current grammar teaching at our university meets the students’ expectations and style preferences ‘Ihe findings of the study will also contribute to our understanding of how grammar should be Ircatzd in the comlext of Visknamese schools or training œcnlers where English is taught as a foreign language

2) What are the students’ views on grammar presentation in the course book “English for

chemical cngincering” at Sao Do University?

3) Tn what ways can the teachers make their grammar teaching more suitable ta students”

expectations and learning styles?

Dala collected from the quostionmaircs and interviows wore analyved qualilatively (lor themes and recommendation using Hatch's (2002) “interpretive model”) and quantitatively

(for descriptive statistics)

5, Scope of the study

As it has been stated above, the study is designed to explore teachers’ and students’ view towards grammar presentalion in (he course book “English for Chemical engineering” in order to make some methodological recommendations for grammar teaching The study is, therefore, explorative by nature

Gi

nthe aims of the study, T limiled myself lo focus on Ihe first year students of Chemical engineering and Food science at Sao Do University

6 The setting and backround

Sao Do University is a famous universily in Hai Duong province localed in Chỉ Tinh town The school is over 40 years of foundation, It has more than 500 teachers and 15,000 students It is known all over country with electrical and mechanical field Chemical engineering and Fond science F

ully is students is only about 300 students, The students related to this study are 50 students of the rst year The program of Linglish for Chemical engineering consists of 45 periods

a yonng one- only 5 years ald, The number of

The program composes of 4 parts: Reading is to provide studenis with general knowledge of chemistry Vocabulary is to provide students with new words that occur in the reading parts, Practice is to give students some kinds of exercise to help students understand the lext (reading part) well, Grarmmar is to provide students with some main structures, forms and grammatical points tba happen in the text

7 The design of the study

The thesis contains thice parts

Part ong, the introduction, provides an overview of the study with specific reference to the rationale, the aims, and the methods, the background of ths sludy and the significance of the study

In part two, there are two chapters Chapter one is aimed at exploring the theoretical background for the thesis This chapler will focus on three mit poinls: types af granumar, approaches to grammar, and learners’ style preferences The chapter first examines the notion

of grammar, different types of grammar such as prescriptive grammar, descriptive grammar,

and pedagogical grammar In this chaptar, I would like to discuss various porspeclives on grammar as well as two major approaches to grammar: explicit and implicit, Finally, the

chapter discusses the necessity to take into consideration the learners’ style preferences to

narrow the gap between tcaching and learning and to make the elassroom lessons more learner-centered Chapter two is devoted to a detailed description of data analysis and a thorough discussion of ths findings of the study In this chapter, some explanations and

inlerprolations of the findings are explored

Patt three, the conclusion of the thesis, presents the summary of findings and some pedagogical suggestions, which ate proposed for the teachers teaching grammar at Sao Do

Univ

ity in gencral and at other schools in particular Those suggestions ase telatzd 1 teaching techniques and prammar tasks that are thought to be relevant and applicable to the teaching of grammar at my university The limitations of the study and some recommendations for further rescarch are also discussed in this chapter

‘The appendices are the last part of the study, following the references

PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW

‘Trailionally, grammar has becn concerned almost axclusively with analysis al the level

of the sentence, Thus @ grarumar is a description of the mifes thal govern how a language’s sentences are formed The study of grammar consists, accordingly, of looking at the way words are arranged or patterned to make sentences By contrast, recent views of grammar are expanded to cover both texts and words arc organized according to rules This chapter provides a review of various perspectives on grammar and grammar teaching ‘the chapter hogins with a discussion af dilferenl ways in which grammar defined Sineo most language teaching textbook and grammars are still firmly grounded in the sentence grammar tradition, for the purpose of this study, 1 will assume grammar to mean grammar at the sentence level The definitions of grammar arc followed by a presentation of different viow of granunar, which include presctiptive, descriptive and pedagogic views of grammar Again, grammar mentioned in this study is pedagogic grammar ‘Ihe chapter ends with a review of various approaches lo gratmnar in the Jangnage classroom as well as factors affecting ths methodological choice for grammar teaching

1.1 What Is granwnar?

‘The first challenge with which I am encountered is how to detine the term “grammar” This is because different linguistic schools define grammar in different ways depending on their particular eld of inlcrest

eA traditional grammarian might see grammar as the “pads of speech” together with a set of rules governing how they be combined, often accompanied by pointers as to what is considered “correct” and “incorrect” usage

A structural Linguist might see grammar as the sum total of sentence patterns in

which the words of # particular langnage are arranged

eA philosophical’ cognitive linguist might soc grammar ax our imale knowledge of the strnchure of mguage,

eA functional linguist might see grammar as a resource used to accomplish

communicative purpose in specific contexts

Defining grammar, then, is not a straightforward matter and it is important to clarify how the term is being used in any particular contexts For my purpose in this study, 1

will look al the five definitions which T Uhtink might be more relevant to this study,

‘The Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (quoted in Llarmer: 1987-1) defines

grammar as “the study and practice of the rules by which words change their form and are combined into sentences”

Its obvions that there are two basic elements to which attention should be paid to: the rules of gramunar, and the study and practice of the rale

According to Eromkin et al, (1990:12): “the sounds and sound patterns, the basic units of

meaning such as words and the rales to combine them to form new sentences constitute the grommar of a language These rules are internalized and subconsciously learned by native speakers,”

From this definition, grammar is the name given to the knowledge of how words are arranged to form sentences, The definition also clarifics that grammatical rulcs is lamed ina natural way by native speakers, but how mor-native speakers learn the grammar constitutes tales lơ combine words 1a make sentences, whal are the sentences used for? These are the questions that need to be elaborated

Another scholar, Bastone, (1994) divides grammar into product: the component parts or rules that make up the language, and process: the ways in which grammar is deployed ftom moment to moment in communication Bastonc (ibid) purport that while of no doubt the rules are important to the learner, simply knowing them 1s by no means a guarantee of being able to formulate or itderprel complicated ollerances in the rush of real-time communication, Obviously, Bastone takes a more sociolinguistic view of grammar, which views grammar is not just rules, but more importantly, rules of nse ‘This means that “there are rules of use withont which the rules of grammar would be uscless."(Hymes: 1972-45)

Richards, Platt and Platt (1992: 161) in their Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied Lingastics, define grammar as

“a description of the structure of a language and the way in which linguistic units such as woeds and fhrases are combined to produce sentences in the language It usually takes into account the meaning and functions thesc sontances have in the overall system of the language It may or may not include the description of the sounds of # language”

For Richards and his colleagues, grammar is descriptive, rathar than prescriptive and it implics both moanings and fimetions Their view of grammar reflecis, firstly, the dynamties of language, and secondly, the social and personal nature of language, Grammar is the way people of the particular language community use to get meanings across, not the way people arc prescribed to use the language

All the three definitions view grammar as meaning, but they share a common drawback, which confine grammar to just sentences Widdowson (1990-81) claimed that “Grammar is not just a collection of scntences pullerns signifying nonsense, somwthing for the tearucr’s brain to puzzle over.” For Widdowson, grammar means the relationship between three things: grammar, words and context In other words grammar should be viewed as linguistic rules functioning in alliance with words and context for the achicvement of meaning

Hughes and MeCarthy (1998) view grammar as discourse not as sentence and coined the

ten discourse grammar They argued that “grammatical stalernents thal do not take account

of such contextual features are inadequate and umable 19 supporl grammar tcaching effectively” (p.265)

Low grammar is defined is very important since it will influence the way grammar is to

be taught For the purpose of the study, I usc the definition of grammar proposed above by Richards, Platt and Platt (1992:161) in their Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching &

Applied Lingnistics

1.2 How is grammar viewed?

The evolution in language pedagogy from Audiclingualism towards a more

communicative approach has also brought with it a great change in the way grammar is

viewed and tanght Traditionally, grammar was considered solsly as prescriptive aspects as well In this section, a presentation of major views on grammar will be made,

by Cook (1991) The job of the former is to describe what the rules of language arc just as the job of the latter is to say what the Jaws of physics are Also according to Cook (ibid.)

“prescriptive grammar is all bul irrelevant to tho language tcaching classroom Since the 1960s, people have believed that you shouild teach the language as it is, not as it ought to be”

(original emphasis)

Descriptive gramunar

Descriptive grammar simply reports the language as it exists Descriptive grammarians acknowledge that language is living and as every living thing, subject to change To put it another way, law if is used is constantly changing “not im major way, bul slowly and abnost imperceptibly L1 users of the language are making utterances or writing sentences which a

generation before would have been considered incorrect” (Woods: 1995: 5) Kor example “1t is

T? my be defended and “It is we rejected by preseriplive grammur purists but so countless people have said the latter for such a long time that it becomes correct The former seems to sound unnatural and stillsd thongh it cannot be said that it is plainly wrong Woods (ibid

gocs on to point oul (hat the problem which Ieamers of English as a forcign language are conttonted when using descriptive grammar books is that it is a long time fiom being aware of the occurrence of such changes in the language to accepting these changes as ths proper use of the language This is alsa ths case wilh mative speakers, Not all of them favor the changes thal are occurring in the language, Moreover, there 1s often a “time-lag” between when something

is accepted in the spoken language and when it is acceptable in the written language However, the acceptance period for native speakers is mmch shorter because they are surrounded by the media and they have to difficulty knowing when stich changes have general

acceptance while 1.2 speakers do not have this benefit and have ta tely an the rules written in the grammar books In this way even desctiptive grammar books can become prescriptive Pedagogical grammar

Unlike prascriptive and descriptive grammars the tarm “pedagogical grammar” docs

nol refer Lo any particular lype or schoot of grammar, Rather il refers to the kind of knowledge about grammar needed by the teacher and the way this is made available to the students in the form of Isssons or materials In other words it is grammar to bs used in teaching, Nunan (1991:153) states “pedagogical grammars arc intended to provide those involved in language teaching (including learners) with information on the language for the purposes of teaching and learning, syllabus construction, matcrials dovctopment and so on Whils they may reflzel current theories of grammatical description and analysis, pedagogical grammars do not necessarily follow a particular grammatical theory or school of thoughts”

To swim up, prescriptive grammar is what we should say, descriptive granunar is what

we do say and pedagogical grammar is what we — teachers of a foreign language — teach Pedagogical grarmrar differs from prescriplive and descriplive grammars in Lerms of (a) the

degree of technicality, (b) the scope, selection, sequencing and presentation of material, and

(c) the relevance to teaching and learning ‘The grammar, which is defined as the knowledge aboul grarmmar needed by (he teacher and the way fis is trade available to the students im the form of lesson or material Since pedagogical grammar is the result of a process of filtering

and interpretation at different levels, pedagogical grammar teaching invalves the form, the

meaning and the use

1.3 What Is the role of grammar in English language teaching?

10

twentieth century These different views about language and language ]zarning process helaw,

I will examine several arguments for and against grammar

Pro-grammar perspectives:

Many linguists and rescarchers have advocated grammar instruction in ESI snd RFI language Lcaching and fcarning For instance, the commumicalive competence modct af Canale and Swain (1980) clearly illustrates the significance of grammar, In this model grammar is seen as one component of communicative competence Without grammar learners can communicate cffectively only in limited number of situations, Referring to the importance of

grammar teaching, Smith (2001) warries that if we do not pay attention to grammar nor create

opportunities for lemnors to improve their grammar, thay are likely to stand the risk of fossilization “or reach a point where they can cope with level of communication that is demanded of them by making use of their existing grammatical resources and communication strategies and probably with sufficiont nol a see the need to develop their Tinguistic abilities any further”

What is more, Rutherford and Smith (1988) report that grammar teaching can be

beneficial ta learners in the sot

The list of supporters of grammar is still ongoing Hannan (1989) argues that grammar

is highly valuable as an important part of the study of language, af ideas and of writing Also,

he poinls on thal grammar reflec

helps us to understand the diversity of human culture Like Hannan, Lewis (1986), Garner (1989) gives strong support to grammar teaching Gamer believes that grammar gives us a

the power and order of he hurnan mind and, besick

means lo analyve and describe aur language Te sum up, the rationale for leaching grammar i multifaceted and grammar is acknowledged to be of importance in language study in general and in language teaching and learning in particular

Anti-grarmmar perspectives.

11

One of the biggest challenges to the necessity of grammar teaching comes primarily fiom Krashen, whose insistence on the primacy of acquisition has tended to downplay the value of deliberate grammar teaching In Krashen and Tarrel’s influential Natural Approach it

is claitned that learmers neod lo be exposed to a lol of comprehensive and meaningful input at

a level just above their own for acquisition Io take place The study of grammar has orily a secondary role in the language program with the goal to produce optimal monitor-user, programmers who can use grammar as a supplement to acquisition when they have time, when the focus is on form, and when they know the rules (the Monitor Hypothesis) (Krashon and

Tarrel:1983)

Eansliss of Natural Approach argue thal rotiance on grammatical syllabus, no mailer how contextualized it is, eannot be sufficient, that a grammatical focus may interfere with any

attempt to communicate It thus appears to be the case that “we not only don’t have to use a

grammalical syllabus in encomaging acquisition, il is belter not to sven try” Gbid 72) Pub another way, grammar can be acquired naturally from meaningful inpet and opportunitics to interact in the classroom and grammatical competence can develop in a fluency-oriented snviroument without, consetous focus on language forms,

Admittedly, some learners acquire second language grammar naturally without being

taught Immigrants to the United States (especially young ones) who aitain proficiency in

English on their own can be # good example of nativalistic acquisition (Lightbowen and Spada 60) But this is not true for all learners Among the same immigrant group are leamers who may achieve a degree of proficiency, but whose English is far ftom acenrate

of acquiring through leaming, opposed to Krashen’s claim that learning need not precede

acqmsition Furthermore, studies of learners in immersion classrooms (¢.g Swain 1985) show even after ample exposure to the target language learners continme to make a lot of grammatical errors With regard to the value of form-focus teaching two important questions may arise, The first is whethar il is possible with toaching to assist Iearmers who cannot achicve accuracy in English by thernselves and the sceond is it possible to speed up students’ natural learning of grammar through instruction, A number of researeh findings (see Larsen

Treeman: 1997 and Schwabe: 1989) prove that teaching assists to improve learners’ accuracy

which is normally absent when these is no focus on form As far as the second concems

Pienemann (1984) demonstrates that subjects who received grammar instruction progressed to

the next slags aller two- wack potiod while iL took unlitarsd studenls scveral months to do that This provides evidence of the effect of teaching over learning acquisition to run its natural course

1 find it

ial to leach grammar in our university, at leasl in Victnamese schools

‘Those arc rcasons for this position Firstly, Vietnamese students are not learning English just for basic oral communication Motivated students will contime fo learning English in the universities bocause they nocd it to road and writs in (his language for acudernie purposes, For these students, grammar is more crucial, Secondly, the English language examinations that the students have to take (and to pass) contain a lot of grammatical elements although these exams have been improved » graat deal

In order to decide whether the focus on grammatical forms becomes more or less important, various learner factors such as age, learning styles, proficiency level, purpose of

learning, exposure lo the largel language, clc should be ikon in (o consideration, Celeo Murcia (quoted in Shram and Glisan: 1994) points out that students are already literate and therefore have established expectations concerning language instruction After all, we need to romind ourselves why studen's come school, The answer lies in gotting “right knowledge” Instead of letting them swim in the ocean of knowledge we should provide them with a

“swimming jacket”-formal instruction to facilitate their learning Why should we refuse

teaching them grammar?

13

Next, it is worth mentioning that Krashen’s view that the effect of grammar learning is peripheral and fragile and that conscious knowledge of grammar is available only as a monitor, or editor may be true to ESL context where immigrant leamers are extensively

exposed to the targel language but il is not applicable te Ihe EST comtexi Al our universily,

students learn English as a forsign lmguage outside the natural linguistic environment, grammar teaching must still have an important place in the classroom We can not expect our students who fearn English for probably not more than three Isssons a week to acquire the target grammar naturally although some students might have access to various sources of authentic English at home | stand for Celce-Mureia’s (1992:406-407) point of view that

“Generally, onty young, prepubescent learners, and then only those with good access to native-speaking:

peers and suificicatly rich and varied native speaker input, can- in the abscnec of formal grammar instruction- Lea a foreign or second anguage-with ralive- like proficiency and accuracy”

1.4, Two approaches to grammar teaching

As it is mentioned above one of the key issues in foreign language teaching which has mel with Hillle agreement is how lo teach grammar, Whether the learner should be taught to approach the leaming task consciously as an intellectual exercise, or whether he should be encowraged to avoid thinking about the language and absorb it intuitively? Stem (1992) proposes to call the former teaching strategy “explicit” and the later “implicit” These approaches arc often contrasted with cach other when questions about grammar arise When

we talk about an explicit approach to grammar we are talking about stating directly, usually at the beginning of a particular activity, whal the granmur is For example, “Today we are looking at the third conditional,” On the other hand, an implicit approach to grammar is one where the students are “led” to the granmmar through a series of steps — this is what is meant by the ‘discovery technique’ In othar words, the “discovery 1echmiqus? øùng lo ead students towards a generalized grammar rule or pattern,

Explicit Grammar Teaching:

Proponents of explicit grammar teaching argue hat second language learning is, for many people, a cognitive process leading to and explicit knowledge of the language (knowledge about rammar,- understanding the nue) According to Ellis and Gaies (1088)

14

explicit knowledge is important in a number of respects First, it enables leamners to be more grammatically accurate by monitoring what they speak or write Second, explicit knowledge can help learners to acquire implicit knowledge (knowledge of grammar-knowing the rules in

an intuitive way which cnables thom io be accessed quickly and casily for purposes of communication) I learners understand how grammatical feature fimetions, they will be more likely to notice it when they are listening or reading, In brief, explicit grammar teaching has the advantage that learners are in control during practice and they do not stand the rich of drawing an incourect conclusion in terms of how the tarect language is working

With regard to advantages of explicit grammar teaching it is worth mentioning here

some convincing roscarch finding Seoll (1989) analyzing data from aval and wrilten tests taken by students of French found that in general students who were taught the target structures explicitly performed better than those to whom an implicit method was applied Other evidence centers on a focus om form axe crrar corrcetion and feedback Tomasello and Herron (1989) compared twe methods for carrceting students in the language classroom and found that learners performed better it transfer errors received immediate correction by form- based cognitive comparisons This tesull corresponds lo While’s (1987) claim that specific grammar teaching and correction can in fact be beneficial for acquisition This result is aligned with what Lightbrown and Spada’s (1999) claim as mentioned above

However, a problern with oxpticil grammar tenchmg is that il advocates # direct and overt role on the part of the teacher As a consequence, this practice designates a rather passive role on the part of the students Interaction for them is supposed to take place after the and

Furthermore, explicit grammar teaching which is characterized by direct teacher explanation followed by related manipulative exercises is accused of failing to view language asa whole (Corbett) (many of us have probably expcricneed this kink of grammar teaching, since a number of textbooks tend to present grammar in this faction) Unfortunately,

manipulative drills in most of the textbooks are taken away from the real contexts or put in shallow and artificial ones, so these drills become rather meaningless to students (Walz quoted in Shrum and Glisan: 1994) This is echoed by Samad who claims that teaching and learning grammatical structures have tradilionmlly involved repetitive drills thal have a ropulation for being meaningless amd decortextuilized The reason for this is thal sludenls merely repeat the pattem of certain drills without understanding the meaning of the sentences

It is understandable that such language activities might be boring to a number of students, Itis generally acknowledged that language is context- scnsitive and context is important as it allows students to see how and why different forms and meaning exist Only by presenting grammar in context will aur slulsnis develop a beller understanding of meaning and language functions

Another made for excluding explicit grammer teaching in language teaching is that “it

is umalural sncthod of acqniring or learning a language."(Samad) The scholars oxplicit instruction on grammar to master the grammatical system of the language

In short, explicit method of grammar teaching has some effectiveness such as it gives students systematic explanation of grammatical points and oncourages thom ta look uport learning as an intellectually challenging and worthwhile task But the problem with second language teaching in which explicitness is stressed is that students become passive recipients

of knowledge, over-conseiaus of the rules and Jacks am intuitive native spoaker-tiks

competence

Implicit Grammar teaching

AI the oppasile ond of the axis of grammar teaching stand implicit grarmnar leaching supported by Krashen (1982) and Dulay and Burt (1973) As mentioned above, definders of implicit grammar tsaching believe that students can aoquire language naturally like children acquiring their mother tongue if they are provided wilh sufficient comprehensible inpuL

In fact, proponents of the implicit approach to grammar teaching argue for several advantages over explicit grammar teaching One of these advantages is that students are highly motivated and more involved in Icarning, Motivated learners arc oncs who discover rulers for themselves and by discovering grammer rules they remembers them better than those who are

16

overwhelmed by grammatical explanations since discovering grammatical rules gives the Jearners a highly sense of achievement,

However, Herron and ‘Tomasello (quoted in Shrum and Glisan: 1994) suggest that

implicit approach cammot guaranice thai the learner will discover ihe underlying concepts or thal the induced concepts will actually be correct

Apart ftom this the implicit approach can be fustrating to adolescents or adult learners, many of whom have already become analytical with regard to the rules that govern their native fanguages, “ most adult learners including EFL learners sccm to benefit from

teacher- direct grammar instruction that is presented to corrsspond to their specific

‘yourself rather than standing aside looking the teacher does it Hence, the teacher’s

explanation may serve as shortcut to acquire a new grammar I stand for Garner (1989:2009)

that “the tcachor should he able lo explain, when it is appropriate, » poinl of grammar accurately to non-native learners” Teachers should also be very careful about when and how they should explain grammatical rules, Otherwise, he may make the matter worse in the sense that his Loo fast aru unclear explanation causcs eonfission rather than comprehension In some situations let our student explore or discover grammatical rules tor themselves from our helpful hints such as information guides, examples and diagrams In my own teaching I find combination of the two approaches desirable, For cxample I often present a structure in

context without grammatical explanation (to allow implicit strategy) then bring out the rules

17

through elicitation from student and finally give them a substantial ameunt af time for practice

of the structure (explicit)

In the final analysis while it is advantageous for learners to have access to both ways

of leaching, it should be bons in mind thal some learnors may have a preference for more cxplicil way of leaning whercas other prefer more itnpticil approaches, HartnetL's (1985) findings suggest that deductive strategy is more effective for student with leit-brain dominance and that induetive strategy is as effective or more effective for those with right-brain dominance As a teacher we should be aware of diffrent techniques which provide the opportunity for both implicit and explicit learning and respect the preferences of leams

Obviously, it is hard ta say which approach to grammar: explicit or implicil is better, T have argued that both are of equal value It is the teachers who have to make a choice when to teach grammar explicitly and when implicit taking info account factors affecting the learners

1.5 The importance of understanding teachers’ and students’ views to grammar

teaching and learning

According to Giaa ct al (2004), a forcign language in genoral, and English in particuilar, is a compulsory school subject and one of the national examinations Students have

to take to get the high school certificate Besides that a high profit in Linglish and a good conmund of English is an opportunity for further study, especially for future employment Nevertheless, a majority of Vietnamese students at high school, even at university lack a suficient good knowtedge of grammar to pass the grammar- based and norm: referenced

cxaminalions

Aooording to the traditional grammat- translation method, classes are taken students’ mother tongue with little active use of the target language Grammar rules were explained in their mother tongue and studenis are expected lo learn them by heart and make up sentences according to these rules The teachers are always the controller the students’ activities in the class while the students are only passive listeners and do what the teachers tell them to do This prevents thom ftom producing the language We cannot completely deny the application

of the traditional approach to grammar teaching as Giao et al (2004) remark ‘That means, the

It is common to see in the traditional language classroom that students feel tense, anxious and flusiraled allhough they sem Lo concentrat: on learning Tn addition, the teachers also feel nervous when their students have difficulty answering their questions, partly because

of the teachers’ over expectation, and partly because of difficult questions At the end of the

lessons, they both (oof oxhausted The reasons for this have been pointed out by Canh (2001)

as that of an inexperienced teacher does activities with unclear and complicated instructions or goals about a target prammatical structure Le also pointed out that communicative language icaching will help to solve these problems shove

1.6 The role of course book in language teaching and learning

Course books are an impertanl component in most language programs In some

situations they serve as the basis for much of the language input Jeamers receive and the language practice that occurs in the classroom ‘hey may provide the basis for the content of the lessons, the balance skills taught and the kinds of langnage practice the students take part

in in other situations, the textbook may serve primarily 10 supplement the teacher’s instruction Por learners, the course book may provide ths major source of the contact they have with the language apart from input provided by the tcacher In the casc of incxpcricnccd teachers course hooks may also serve as a form of teacher training- they provide ideas on how

to teaching rather than matetial’s production However, there are also some potential negative effets ftom the course books They may contain inauthentic language, may distort content, may not reflect students? needs, and they may be very expensive

Despite the impact of new technologies, course books will doubtless continue to play

an important role in language teaching and provide a useful resource for both teachers and

learners Good course book:

vo to tum the guidelines in the official goverment syllabus into rich source of the content, texts and activities that would be beyond the capacities of most teachers to develop their own The use of couse books should be seen as reflecting a deficioncy on the part of the teacher, any more than the usc of computer- bascd maicrials would be so regarded Course books should be regarded as one of the many resources teachers can draw upon in creating effective lessons, but teachers need training and experience in adapling and modifying course books as well as using aullwntic mterials and in ercating Uncr

own teaching matezial

1.7 Summary

As a tesult of the commmnicative revolution in language teaching, it has become

increasingly clcar that grammar is a tool or resource to be uscd in the comprehension and

creation of oral and written discourse rather than something to be learned as an end in it

20

In this chapter, I have reviewed the literature related to my research question While the review is by no mean exhaustive, it is on the one hand carefully selected to serve as the theoretical fiamowork for iy sludy, and on the olhar hand, evident varioly of different iss

present my rescarch methodology and data collection procedures.