Luận văn an investigation into teaching grammar in context for first year non english major students at chu van an university

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Design of the study Distribution of the sample Distribution of the dependent and independent variables Distribution of the grammar achievement tests Schedule o

Saw

NGUYÊN THỊ PHƯƠNG HÔN

AN INVESTIGATION INTO TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT

FOR FIRST-YEAR NON-ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS

AT CHU VAN AN UNIVERSITY

(ĐÈ tải: Nghiên cứu việc dạy ngữ pháp theo ngữ cảnh cho đối tượng sinh viên năm thứ nhất không chuyên Tiếng Anh

trường DH Chu Văn An)

MINOR PROGRAM THESIS

Field: ENGLISH TEACTHRG METIIODOLOGVY Code: 601410

Hanoi, 2012

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES

Saw

NGUYÊN THỊ PHƯƠNG HÔN

AN INVESTIGATION INTO TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT

FOR FIRST-YEAR NON-ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS

AT CHU VAN AN UNIVERSITY

(Đề tải: Nghiên cứu việc dạy ngữ pháp theo ngữ cảnh

cho đối tượng sinh viên năm thứ nhất không chuyên Tiếng Anh

trường DH Chu Văn An)

MINOR PROGRAM THESIS

Field: ENGLISH TEACTHRG METIIODOLOGVY Code: 601410

Supervisor: NGUYEN TII HUYỄN MINH, M.A

Hanni, 2012

English as a Second Language

English as a Foreign Language

Focus on Form

Focus on Forms

‘The first hypothesis The sccond hypothesis The tirst minor hypothesis

‘The second minor hypothesis The third minor hypothesis The tirst minor nuil hypothesis The second minor mull hypothesis The third minor null hypothesis

Proscntation — Practice - Production

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Design of the study Distribution of the sample Distribution of the dependent and independent variables Distribution of the grammar achievement tests

Schedule of grammar course Teaching procedures for traditional grammar and in-contexl grammar class The descriptive statistics on pretest scores of control and experimental groups

The infsrontial statistics ou pretesl searcs af control and experimental group The desciiptive statistics on pretest and posttest scores of control and experimental group

The inferential statistics on pretest and posttest scores of control and experimental group

‘The descriptive statistics on posttest scores of control and experimental group

The inferential statistics on posttest scores of control and experimental group

Descriptive statistics on students’ on-task behavior af contrel group Descriptive slafisties on students’ on-task behavior af experimental group

‘The descriptive statistics on students’ on-task behavior of control and experimental group

The inferential statistics on stureris’ on-task behavior of contral and experimemlal group

‘Three dimensions of grammar teaching Students’ on-task behavior of control group Students’ on-task behavior of experimental group

‘The research questions

The research hypotheses Method of the study Design of the study

PART IL: DEVELOPMENT

111 Grammar and grammar teaching:

11.11 Definitions of grammar cee

1.1.1.2 ‘The place of grammar in second and foreign language teaching

1.1.1.3 Dimensions of grammar teaching

1.1.4 Levels in grammar teaching

LLLS Approaches to grammar teaching

1.1.2.2 The need for grammar teaching in context

1.1.2.3 Types of context in grammar teaching

12 Related studies on teaching grammar in context

`

vii

CHAPTER 2: THE METHODOLOGY

2.1 Design of the study

12 Population of the study

23 Sample of the study

23.1 Sample of the students

23.2 Sample of the teachers

2.4 Variables of the study

241 Dependent and independent variables

2.4.2 Controlicd and uncontrolled variables

15 instruments of the study

2.5.1 The aims of the grammar achievement test

2.5.12 The sources of designing the grammar achievement tests

2.5.13 The dzseripHion ofthe grammnar achizvement tesfs

2.5.14 The content validily of the tests

2.5.5 Thereliability of the tests

The lesson plans

Procedure of the study

Administration of grammar achievement tests

722, Application of classroom observation method

3.141, Results from the analyses of the grammar achievement tests

3.1.1.1, The test of the first minor hypothesis

3.1.1.2 The test of the second minor hypothesis

3.1.13 — The test of the third minor hypothesis

3.12 Results from the analyses of the classroom observ ration

32

3443

344

second hypothesis Discussions

Findings Summary

Prolest nnđ poallest scores

Classroom observation sheet Data from observation sheets

Sample lesson plan for experimental group

39

42 42

is problematic because most of English teachers at ray school still keep their traditional

views on grammar and grammar instruction To bs more spacifie, thay held the belief that

grammar is a set of static nies, Accordingly, they teach grammar by focusing on accuracy

of form and neglecting its meaningfulness and appropriateness of use Moreover, the grammar lessons are performed in deductive manner, thus students are provided no opportunities for rule discovery Onc more problem is that our students arc obsessed by tightly controlled mechanical practice like transformational drills and substitutions The final problem lies in the fact that FFI teachers al my universily do nol take the most advantages of the context provided in the cowse book used for fixst-year non-major

students (New-Headway Elementary and Pre-Intermediate by Liz and John Soars) when

leaching grammar section; thus, our shxden's have uo or litle opportunity to explore and

4, disaifacted students who can produce correct fooms on disconnected sentences, but consistently make errors when trying to use the language in context such as shart

an idea of how the new tanguage is usod by native speakers and the host way of doing this

is to present language in context” These factors drive me to an idea of using context to

teach grammar for my students in the hope that such teaching model will help make

2 Scope of the study

‘The study focuses on Ihe Leaching of English grammar for non-English major freshmen at Chu Van An University, thus, its results are not directly applied for those whe are in other academic years and those of other universities In addition, the context employed for

ieaching grammar in this study is restricted to text, i.c., spoken and written discourses

taken from the couse book and fiom a variety of authentic sources, therefore, other types

of context are not used as the input for the study What is more, the purpose of this study is

to cxamine whether contsxt-based approach lakes effect im grammar leaching Other approaches to grammar instruction are referred as the theoretical background for the study

‘but they are not the focuses Finally, only four grammatical categories (Tense, Modal, Conditional sentences and Passive voice) which are divided into eight grammatical items (Past simple, Present Perfect, Can, Must, First conditional, Second conditional, Passive voice in present tense and Passive vaice in past tense) are taught and tested during the experiment Other grammatical categories or items lie oulside the scope of this study

3 Aims of the stuily

‘the study aims at investigating the effect of teaching grammar in context in comparison with the traditional method of granmnar insbuction for non-English major students al Chu Van An University More specifically, the study is a randomized experiment which is designed to achieve two following aims:

1 It tests whether in-context teaching of grammar has any effects on students’ academic achicvernent in grammar

2 It examines whether teaching grammar in context can increase students’ participation in grammar lessons

4 Significance of the study

‘This study may bring four benefits to both English language teachers and their students as follows:

1 Tinay help change EFL/ESL teachers’ viows on grammar and graminar instruction in a way that grammar incorporates form, meaning and function; thus, teaching grammar is not

merely presenting and explaining grammar features but teaching students how to

appropriately use structures lo zxpress meaning

2 It may stimulate English language teachers to employ in-context model to teach gramenar for their students as an altemative to the traditional method

3 Thay change ths classroom atmosphere in grammar lessons in a positive way Students amay no longer find grammar lessons dry and boring They may be more involved and feel more interested during grammar learning hours

4 Tk may improve students’ eritical thinking, cspeciatly when they are working with authentic discourses

5 The rescarch questions

As slalzd in the part of Rationale, grarmnar (caching for non-major students al Chu Van

‘An University has so many problems The first problem is that students find it easy to deal with grammar in single sentences but make a lot of grammatical mistakes when working with longer discourses This results in the second problem, i., the dull classroom atmosphere because students do not participate in the grammar lessons From these defined problems, two research questions are raised as follows

QI: What ae the effects of in-conlext grammar ieaching ơn grammar academic achievement of first year non-English major students at Chu Van An University?

Q2: What are the effects of in-context grammar teaching on the classroom participation of

first year none-Rngtish major students al, Chu Van An University?

6 The research hypotheses

The following hypotheses were derived tom the two research questions raised above:

411: ‘Teaching grammar in coniext has more positive effects on the grammar academic

achievement of first year nor-English major students at Cha Van An University than teaching grammar in traditional method

312: Teaching grammar in context can increase students’ level of participation in grammar Jessons

In order to test the first hypothesis, three minor hypotheses were postulated as follows:

HLA: There is statistically significant difference between the mean scores of the control group and the experimental group in the pretest

H1L2: There is statistically significant ditferance between students’ mean scores on pretest and posttest of ths experimental group in favor of the posttest

“The second hypothesis is paraphrased for the convenience of statistical testing and analysis

as follows:

Hid: There is statistically sigmficant difference between the control and experimental group

in the mean score of on-task students in favor of the experimental group (On-task students are those who lake active parlicipation in the Iask)

In summary, there are four hypotheses altogether (H1.1, HI.2, HI.3, and H2) that need

testing in order to answer the research question of the study

7 Method of the study

In order to answer the research question raised above, the researcher has conducted a zandomized experiment which includes three basic components: the sample (students in the control and experimental classes), the treatment (in-context grammar teaching), and the

aicasutcment of the treatment (the pretest, posttest and observation shects) The

quantitative data were gathered from the analysis of pretest and posttest scores while the

qualitalive dala were derived front the analysis of the classroom observation sheels

8 Design of the study

‘Che study is organized into three parts which are described as follows:

Part one, Introduction, is an overview of the stdy in which Ihe rationale, the scope, the

aims and research questions, the methods and significance of the study are prosented

Part two, Development, is the heart of the study which is subdivided into three chapters Chapter one provides a literature review of grammar, grammar teaching and context in

grammar leaching This chapler serves as the Iheorclical hackground of the thesis Chapter

nwo, the experimental study, provides the methodology and the data analysis process

Chapter three presents the results fom the data analyses, the discussions and findings of

‘the research

Part three, Conclusion, summarizes the main points discussed earlier in the study In this

part, some pedagogical implications, the limitations and recommendations for further study

are also mentioned,

PART I: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter is divided into two sections Section 1.1 provides some theoretical background for the study, including clanfication of grammar and grammar teaching, context and the teaching of grammar in context Section 1.2 is a brief review of sume existing studies on in-context grammar instruction which are beneficial for the present research,

1.1 Theoretical Rackgraund

1.1} Grammar and grammar teaching

LILI Definitions of grammar

Grammar is a linguistic term that has bocore popular among those who are working in the field of language teaching in general and second/foreign language teaching in particular However, the question of what grammar is has yielded so many different answers from Hinguists and grammarians

According Lo Marmer (1983.1), grammar of (he language is the description of “the ways 1m which words change themselves and group together to make sentences” Two examples are

also given to illustrate for this definitian: the case of “walk” changes into “walked” to

indicate the past tense and the case of “not many” combines with the plural noun

“oranges” to make a full sentences like “There are not many oranges on the shelf” Such

view on grammar is agreed by Ur (1988:4), Thornbury (1999:1), Crystal (1995) and Nunan (2003:143) It can be seen that all these linguists describe grammar as a set of rules that

govern a language; however, they fail le work oul whal the “rules” arz

To mks up for this, Fromkin of al (1990) proposes a definition of grammar which states that "the sounds and sound patterns, the basic units of meaning such as words and the mles

to combine them to form new sentences constitute the grammar of a language” His

definition is a

involvement of many aspects of lingnistic knowledge such as phonology (the sound and the sound pattems), lexicology and semantics (words and meaning), morphology (the rules of ward formation) and syntax (the rules of sentence formation) Although this definition looks into the underlying structure of grammar, it is similar to

Harmer`s in a way that it is restricted to the issuz of grammatical forms.

[Grama is] “a device for indicaling the most common aud recumrent uspeels of 1ncaning”™ [which] “formalizes the most widely applicable concepts, the highest common factors of

experience: it provides for commmnicative economy”

This definition shows a renovation in the view of grammar: grammar can indicate meaning and grammar cau communicate Larson-Freeman (2003) shares her view on three dimensions of grammar teaching in which she insists that grammar is not simply about accuracy of fonn but it relates to meaningfulness and appropriatensss as well She also proposes # new definition of gratunar thal “grammurfing) is one of the dynamic linguistic processes of pattem formation in language, which can be used by humans for making meaning in context-appropriate ways” (Larsen-lireeman, 2003:142) Fellowing this definition, grammar is ne longer a set of stutic Tules but a dynamic process of pattern formation which is best explored in appropriate contexts

‘the present study, with the purpose of helping leamers internalize grammatical forms,

(1999), there are several arguments behind the advocates of for and against prammar

teaching which can be summeatized as follows The for-grammar position argucs that

language leaming is a cognitive process, thus the goal of language leaming is to master the Tinguistic knowledge (knowledge-what), and this type of knowledge is teamed through formal instruction, This view is reflected in Grammar Translation Method and Cognitive Code Learning in which grammar instruction is given explicitly, Nevertheless, the against-

gtammar position supposes thal learning is an experiential process, therefore, the goat af language Jeaming is to develop linguistic skills (knowledge-how), and this type of knowledge is acquired through natural exposure Such opinion is applied in Natural Approach and strong varsion of Communicative Language Teaching in which oxplicil grammar instruction is vigorously rejected

As said above, grammar has cxpericnced many ups and downs during the history of sccond and foreign language teaching, Fortunately, the teaching of grammar began to receive renewed interest in the academic discomrse in the late 1980s or early 1990s, when the naturelist movement was no longcr in its heyday Sinec then, the true valuc of grammar has been reevaluated and acknowledged, The ñrst value of grammar lies in the fact that grammar is the “skeleton” of a kanguage, withoul which language does nol exist This is agreed by Batstone (1994) when he asserts that “language without grammar would be chaotic, countless words without the indispensable guidelines for how they can be ordered and modified” Second, grammar is considered as one of the standards fox mastering a tamguags As addressed by Woods (1988), when we say somconc understands # limgwage,

we mean the person has obtained the ability to produce the target language that ean be accepted in grammar Ur (1998) also holds that “a knowledge — implicit or explicit — of grammatical rules is essential for the maslery of @ language: you cannol usc words unless

‘you know how they should be put together” The third factor enhancing the position of grammar in language teaching is that “communicative approach” which is widely adopted

in crmrent language leaching corlsxt still determines [he need for grammar teachmg The goal of communicative approach is to build learners’ communicative competence which is defined by Canale (1983) as a combination of grammatical, strategic, sociolinguistic and discourse competonce Hones, il is implied thal grammar leaching is an inevitable part of communicative language teaching From all three reasons listed above, it can be concluded

‘that grammar is too important to be ignored in the teaching of second/foreign language

teach grammar Thombury (1999) says that the issue now is focused on questions such as

which grammar items learners need more or how teachers can most effectively teach

grammar Also, in regard to current issues in the teaching of grammar, Ellis (2006)

proposes eight questions that address whether grammar should be taught, and if so what

grammar, when and how This creates the need for second/foreign language teachers to

consider these questions and try to find the answers for themselves before conducting any

grammar lessons

1.1.1.3 Dimensions of grammar teaching

When we think of grammar, we often think of rules and forms, however, grammar covers

much more than forms Thornbury (1999) argues that “grammar communicates meanings”

and it would be useful to “match forms with their functions” Celce-Murcia and Larsen-

Freeman (1999) do not use the term “function”, they refer to it as “use” and “pragmatics”

No matter what it is called, all these linguists agree that grammar is not merely a set of mules and forms but rather involves the three dimensions of form, meaning and use Celce- Murcia and Larsen-Freeman (1999) also add that there exists an interrelationship among

these dimensions, and thus, a change in one dimension will affect the others The pie chart

below shows this interconnectedness

FORM

How isit

MEANING What does

Figure 1: Three dimensions of grammar teaching

(Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman, 1999:4)

Form

Grammatical form, as defined by Cele

description of “how a particular grammar structure is constructed”, Put another way, the

-Murvia and Larsen-Freeman (1999) is the

form of a grarmar deals with its morphology (rules of word formation) and its syntax Gules of sentence formation), For instance, the forms of phrasal verbs, as described in the article entitled “Teaching, Grammar” written by Larsen-Freeman (2001254), are “two-part

‘verbs comprising a verb and a particle” or “three parts in that a preposition can follow the

Meaning

‘The meaning of a grammatical form, as coined by Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman (1999), is what a grammar structure means or about its semantic content Thombury (1999) Proposes two kinds of meaning conveyed by a grammatical form: representational and interpersonal meaning The former rellecis the way we perceive the world while the laler shows how grammatical means can “ease the task of getting things done” For example, tense represents the concept of time while modality like “can” and “may” commmnicates juterpersonal meaning of soflening the force in commands, Thombuy (1999) also

suggests that the teaching of form docs not Hic outside the loaching of moaning bocausc

ameaning and form are like two sides of a coin: form expresses meaning and meaning is encoded in form As such teaching semantic aspect of grammar is of vital necessity

express a wide range of functions ‘The former is illustrated in his book as the case of

“warning” funclion which is expressed by five different forms:

You'd better not do that

Dowouldn't do that, if Iwere you

Mind you don’t do that

Ifyou do that, you'll be in rouble

Do that and you'll be in trouble

In the same way, the form “Zf will ° can express a numerous functions which are

listed as follows:

4ƒ you do that, you'll be in trouble (warning)

Ifyou lie down, you'll feel better (advice)

Uf it rains, we'll take a taxi (plan)

Ifyou pass your driving test, Pll buy you a car (promise)

Prom these examples, it can be concluded that the relation between form and function is

not a kind of one-to-one matching, Hence, the teaching of pragmatic aspect of grammar hefps leamers make a right choice when using one form rather than another

The discussion of form, meaning and use above once again confirms the inseparable relationship among these dimensions: a form conveys several meanings and a form performs different functions Thus, it is suggested that ESL/EFL teachers should incorporate all three aspects into their grammar lessons so that their leamers can learn to

‘use grammar strucmures accurately, meaningfully and appropriately

LLL Levels in grammar teaching

Ta “The Grammar Book”, Celec-Mureia and Larsen-Freerman (1999) desenbes dhe

operation of grammar at three levels: the subsentential or morphological level, the

sentential or syntactic level, and the suprasentential or discourse level ‘Thornbury (2006),

int his book entifled “Grarmmnas”, also classifies grammar into three levels which arc called

“word grammar”, “sentence grammax” and “text grammar” Although the three levels arz termed with different names, the authors of the two books strongly suggest that grammar should bs faughi in context, (discourse) rather thant in single, deconlextualizad sentences TH this study, the author prefers the terminologiss given by Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman (1999), ‘Phen, the three levels of grammar are described as follows

Subsentential level

11

According to Celce-Murcia and Larsenireeman (1999), subsentential level or

morphotogical Ievel is “the level below that of th snlenec” For illustration, an example

of past progressive tense in English is given in which such tense is described as the combination of the past fense form of the auxiliary verb be and —ing added to the base form

of the main verb Accordingly, the siructiwe of past prograssive tense should be: wasrwere verb ing (e.g, was walking), Teaching grammar at this level is limited to the teaching of morphology ar grammar structures ‘This is the lowest levet of grammar teaching and it sets the base for a higher levct of grammar instruction: sontontial tevel

Seniential level

At this syntactic level, the focus is on the describing syntax of the sentence or the way words arc arranged inlo a grammatically well-formed sentence (Celec-Murcia and Larsen Freeman, 1999) In regard to the case of past progressive tense in English, at sentential level, such tense is incorporated with difterent rules like word order (for example, subject verb - adverb) or putting “not” before the auxiliary “be” to form a negative sentence or inwerting “be” with the subject to make a yes/ne question Thice examples below arc taken

from Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman’s book (1999)

She — was walking home from school that dav (SVA patierni

She wasn't walking home from school that day (Negative sentence)

Was she walking home from school that day? (Yesino question}

‘The distinction betwoon subscutzntial Level and sontential level arz obvious: subsontontial Jevel is lower than sentential one, One more difference is that whereas subsentential level deals with grammar structures or morphological rules, sentential one stresses on grammar atlems or syntax of the sentence, Celac-Muncia and Larscr-Freeman (1999) together with

‘Thombury (2006) indicate that traditional methods of grammar instruction like Grammar

‘Translation or Cognitive Code Leaming usnaily stop at the level of sentence and ignore the Jevel above it: suprascntential level

Suprasentential level

Suprasentential level ar discourse level is the level above the sentence At this level, Etanwnar is nol mercy laught in lorms of morphotogy and syntax bul it is “an analysis of how the mozphology and syntax are deployed to effect certain discourse purposes” (Celee-

Mureia and Larsen-l'reeman, 1999: 3) An illustration about how grammar operates at its

lwo co-authors as follows:

highest teaching level is provided by th

She has never been so lucky as she was one day last May She was walking home from

school that day when she ran into a friend

past

It can be seen that the two sentences in the example above are the beginning part of a

nant (1999), is that the present perfect tense used in the first sentence as a “scene setter”, then followed by

narralive The “discourse rule”, as called by Cclec-Murcia and Tarson-Fi

the past and past progress tenses indicating specific actions that happened in the story

‘Teaching grammar at suprasontential lovel is of great importanec beoase il aims al helping Jeamers make right grammatical choices to suit different discourses or contexts, thus, determining successful communication Unfortunately, this level is often “overlooked” by many second/foreign language teachers

This study investigates the cffcct of teaching grammar in context which makes the relationships between grammatical forms and its functions transparent; therefore, it focuses

on the highest fevel of grarmmar instruction: suprasentential or discourse level

LLL

Approaches to granmar teaching

A number of approaches to presenting new grammatical information have heen developed

so far, ftom the traditional method Hike senlence-based ta a more modem one like

discourse-based approach Wilh no aflemmpl to revicw all these approaches, the rescareber

only discusses six major ones that are related to her own study The approaches are

presented in pairs with special reference to their definitions, advantages and disadvantages

Deductive vs Inductive approach

‘The deductive approach represents a more traditional teaching style which “starts with the

presentation of a mile and is followed by examples in which the rule is applied”

(Thornbury, 1999:29) By adopting such approach, an English language teachcr would start

his grammar lesson by saying: “Today we are going to learn the comparative adiectives”

‘Then the rules of comparative adjectives are given and students are asked to complete Gxoreisos lo practice using the structure The chief advantage of (his approach, according to

Thombury (1999), is time-saving because it gets straight to the grammatical point that

13

needs to be presented Llowever, this approach is teacher-centered and rule-driven, winch

Tesulls in boring and demotivating tzssons

The inductive approach, conversely, represents are more modem teaching style where the

Tiew grammatical rules are presented to students in a real language context In an inductive

approach, as explained by Thombury (1999-49), the grammatical rules are discovered and understood by students themselves through examples Therefore, the same gramazar lesson about comparative adjectives would begin by drawings of two pencils on the board with

a more meaningtill way Although such type of approach is time- and energy-consuming, it makes the rules “more meaningful, memorable and serviceable” (Thornbury, 1999:54) Moreover, duc to its Icamer-centeredness and rule discovery, inductive approach is believed to promote language students’ motivation and autonomy

Focus on Forms vs Focus on Form approach

Focus on forms (FonFs), according to Long (1991), is a traditional teaching approach which is limited to instruction on discrete paints of grammar in isolation, with no apparent focus on meaning Focas on form (FonF), on the ofher umd, is au attempt that, “overtly draws students’ atlsution 1o linguistic clemonts as they arise incidentally in tessons whosa overriding, focus is on meaning or communication” (Long, 1991:45-46)

Several key differences between Font and Fonl's are described as follows First, Koni, as mentioned by Fotos (1998), is a context-hascdl proscntation of grammatical forms whit: FonFs focuses on the elements of grammar, in isolation from context or communicative activity Second unlike Fonl's which pays much attention to grammatical form only, FonF integrates form, meaning and usc in its syllabus (Doughty & Williams, 1998), Finally, Fonk assumes a task-based approach whereas Font's fits better with a PPP model

From these distinguishing features between the two approaches, some conclusions were made, i.c., “a focus on forms producss many nore false boginuers than Gnishers” while focus on form speeds up the rate of leaming, affects acquisition processes in ways possibly

beneficial to long-term accuracy and appears to raise the ultimate level of attainment (Long, 1991)

Sentence-based vs Discourse-based approach

As stated by Larsen-Freeman (1997), grammar does operate at the sentence level to govem

s thal iLis a mistake

such things as the syntax or the word orders, Tlowever, she ermpiasi

to teach students grammar only at the sentence level because sentenes-based grammar instruction only work in two dimensions (form and meaning) and does not give leamers a clear picture of how things work from different angles (usc) For instance, nol every choice

‘between the use of the simple present and the present continuous teuse can be explained at the sentence level In the following example provided by Thombury (1999-71), leamers find i hard to decide on the best answer because both arc grammatically corrocl in such a

decontextualized sentence

“What do vou eatare you eating?” “Cake”

In response to the limitations that sentence-based approach has encountered, a discourse-

‘based has becom introduccd as an alternative method, The underlying philosophy of discourse-based approach lies in a way that language must be taught at the discourse level

in order to produce learners who can communicale effectively in the target language Celes-Murcia and Olshtain (2000: 190) specifies that a discourse-based cuxiculum will necessary include “a focus on authentic texts and interactional communicative events mn language use” The anthenlic texls can be either wrilisn (a newspaper arlicts, z leller or an extract from a book, cle.) or spoken (real recorded conversation, a phone call, an interview,

or a speech, ete) For example, teachers can use an e-mail message to present the fact that future scenarios are often initiated with the “be going to” and subsequently elaborated with

“will”, After discussion and analysis of these fisture forms, learners can write their own future scenarios and e-mail it the classmates with a copy to the teacher This email, which

is taken from “The Grammar book” by Celce-Mureia and Larsen-Freeman (1999), can serve as a good illustration:

Hi Sue!

How are you? £ hope you're fine Guess what? I'm going to sing in the mixed chorus this

year Pil have practice sessions on Wednesday evenings, and we'll prepare pieces for

several concerts and dermg the year, We'll even travel io Washington for choral

canipetition It'll be fun What's new with you?

Best,

Sally

In reference to the three levels of grammar teaching, sentenced-based approach stops at the Jevel of sentence while discourse-based approach reaches the highest: discourse level

Approach ta teaching grammar in context

With an attempt to halp students explore, practice and develop English grammar in context, the researcher of the present study employs a kind of elective “context-based approach” Such approach is considered as a now pedagogical trend in leaching grammar and is suggested by Larsen-Freeman (2000b) and Celce-Murcia (2007)

Contextualizing grammar instruction is formulated on two basic principles in language leaching proposed by Brown (2001) Tho first is the principle of cormunicalive competence which states that “communicative goals are best achieved by giving due

attention to language use and not just usages, to fluency and not just accuracy, to authentic

Janguags and contexts, and to students’ eventual need to apply classroom leaming to horctofore unchcarsed contexts in the real wold” (Brown, 2001: 69) Following this principle, the language teaching should be embedded in context, with a focus on language use and serve a chief! purpose of preparing slustenls for real-tife conmmusication Teaching grammar is not excluded from the teaching of language; tls, gramunar teaching should be attached to context and fulfill the purpose of commmnnication ‘The second principle is the principle of automaticity This principle comes from the way children acquire a language, 1.e„ they loam a language through memingfal

without paying much allention lo form

Brown (2001:56) emphasizes that “overanalyzing language, thinking too much about its forms, and consciously lingeting on rules of language all tend to impede this graduation to automaticily” The focus af (caching grammar, therefore, should shifl from teaching grammatical form to teaching its use, In summary, the underlying principle of context-

‘based approach is communicative goals, authentic language and a focus on language use Basing on these principles, context-based is described as an integration of inductive, focus

on form and discourse-bascd approaches, Tl is inductive because il employs “inductive seasoning” or “discovery teclmique”, ie., leamars are provided the opportunities to discover and generalize grammatical rules or pattems from examples in authentic

materials Th is a kind of focus-on-form instruction because context-based approach

encompasses three primary aspects of grammar (form, meaning and use/funetion) with a

chicf purpose of improving Ieamers’ commnanicative com

because it draws leamers’ attention to a series of authentic discourses ftom which gramenatical rules are discovered, grammatical meanings are clarified and grammatical

functions are realized

To take context-bascd approach morc oxplicit and teachable, Numan (1998:10-)

suggested tive methods for ESL/EFL teachers as follows:

1 ‘Teaching language as a set of choices;

2 Providing opportunities for leamers to explore grammatical and discoursal

relationships in authentic data,

3, Teaching language in ways that make form/timetion relationships transparent,

4, Encouraging learners to become active explorers of langnage;

5, Encouraging learners to explore relationships betwen grammar and discourse

Likewise, Celce-Murcia (2007), in her article entitled “Towards more context and discourse in grammar instruction”, listed four characlsristics of gramunar exercises following such approach:

1 If some manipulative work is needed as a warm-up, at least make it meaningful, contextuatized, and reasonably authentic in terms of use

2 If use of @ grammatical form depends on prior context as il docs when asing pronouns to refer back to antecedents, be sure to provide enough context so that this

is clear to ths leamer

3, Find authentic texts thal provide salicnt token of the grammatical form thal you

want to present to learner (in preparation for subsequent practice)

4, Grammar instruction can be integrated with tasks designed to prepare leamers to

tead and wrile acaderme discourse

With ali the features described above, contexldbascd approach is supposed lo ml grammar instruction mote effective because in this approach, grammar is situated in meaningful context, embedded in authentic (or semi-authentic) discourse, and motivated

by getting leamers to achieve a goal or complete an interesting task (Celcs-Murcia, 2007)

‘The purpose of the present siudy is to examine the effect of leaching grammar in context

on the students’ grammar academic achievement and students’ level of classroom

participation in comparison with the traditional method Llence, it adopts the context-based

approach as the treatment in (caching English grammar for the experimental group while

‘the traditional method of grammar instruction - the combination of deductive, focus on

forms and sentence-based approach- is employed for the control group

1.1.2 Context and context in grammar teaching

1.1.2.1 Definitions of context

‘here are numerous definitions of context found in the dictionaries and from different

viewpoints of scholars Tn Tongman Diclionary of Language leaching & Applied

linguistics (the 3rd edition), context, is defined as “that which ocours before and/or after a

word, a phrase or even a longer utterance or a text; the context offen helps in understanding the particular meaning of the word, phrase, cle.” A similar definition is found in Oxford

advanced learner's dictionary (the 7th edition) that context is “the words that come just etore and after a word, phrase or statement and help you to understand its meaning”

From these two explanations, it is apparent that the notion of context, in its simple form, is

the minimal stretch of language that hiclps to understand what is written or spoken According to Halliday (1985), context in this case should be termed as co-text An

example taken by Brown and Yule (1983:47) is a good Hustation of co-tex

The same evening Iwent ashore The first landing in any new couniry is very interesting

In this example, the meaning of the word “landing” is determined by the previous

discourse, i-2., the person went ashore

However

- iLis a mistake if contoxt is merdiy ví:

có as cortex, That is why scholars have

‘broader viewpoints on context as they approach context fiom a social perspective Halliday (1991:5) describes context as “the events that are going on around when people speak (and

a, tenor and mode” To be more specific, field is about the subject matter or content being

write)” “The events” that he mentions in this definition refers to wheal he tater calls

discussed, tenor is connected with the interpersonal relations between the participants; and anode refers to the channel (such as writing, or video-conferenec) of the communication In

other words, the context that is coined by Halliday (1991) is a kind of situational context or

context of situation Another kind of context is context of eniture which is termed by

Fowler (1986:19) as “the community’s slors of established knowledge” or the background

‘knowledge shared by participants in speech events Obviously, each definition sees context

from one aspect, therefore, all is needed is a definition that involves all three aspects of

context: co-text, context of situation and context of culture Sperber and Wilson’s view on

context would meet that need as

not only the co-text of an utterance but also the contextual factors such as the immediate physical environment, the participants’ background knowledge like all the known facts,

coin cơnlext as “a psychological construct, including

assumplions, beliefs and cognitive abilities” (Sperber and Wilson, 198619) This

definition shows a more thorough view on context, therefore, it is of the researcher’s

preference

1.1.2.2 The need for teaching granmar in context

‘The necessity of teaching grammar in context originates from the idea that students need to

amaster all three dimensions of grammar: form, meaning and use As Celce-Murcia and

Larsen-Frooman (1999) slaled, ESL/EFT students need to know not simply how a stracuurs

is formed and what it means; they need to know why speakers of English choose to use one

form rather than another

Moreover, Thornbury (1999) confirms that the form-meaning and form-function relation is

aot onc-to-anc matching In fact, one form can express a varicty of mcanings/functions and

in the same way one meaning/finetion can be expressed by several different forms In the case of one form a wide range of funclions, Thornbury lakes the example of the form “If,

Will."

Sfyau do that, you'll be in trouble (warning)

Ifyou lie down, you'll feel heuer (advice)

If it rains, we'll take a taxi (plan)

Ifyou pass your driving test, TU buy you a car (promise)

(Thombury, 1999-7)

Fromn the examples above, il can be scon thal the same form has different meaning and functions 1m different contexts, Therefore, “taking individual grammar structures out of context is equally perilous” and “1ead[s] to similar misunderstanding” (Thombury, 1999:7, 7D,

One more reason for the importance of in-context grammar teaching is that context

provides oppertunities for leamers to use the language for commnnication, Nunan

19

context, it will be difficult for them to see how and why alternative forms exist to express differen! communicative mcanings” Such viewpoint is echoed by Krashen (1982) as states that grammatical structures can be internalized if learners are situated in a particular

he

context, in which they use the structure for communication purposes

Finally, students are the ones who gel the best advantages of conlextudlized grammar

teaching Weaver (1996:176), in her synthesis of the early research on the teaching of

grammar summarizes that “students seemed to benefit most ftom the approaches in which the learning of grasmmalical concepts was conlextualized and in which they took a more

active role” By contextualizing grammar instruction, students ae provided the

opportunities to discover the rales for themselves, to encounter grammatical structure in an

authentic contexl, to develop their communicative competence, and thus, la enjoy

sneaningful learning

1.4.2.3 Types of context in grammar teaching

Different scholars in different practical fields have their own ways of classifying context

Malinowski (1935) distinguishes three types of context: context of uttcranec, context of

situation and context of culture Halliday and Hasan (1985) divides context into five

components: text, context of siluafion, conlex! of culture, inter-lextial context and intra-

textual context Duranti and Goodwin (1992) proposes four kinds of context: setting

(physical and interactional), behavioral environment (non-verbal and kimetic), language

(co-text and reflexive use of language), and extrasituational (social, political, cultural and the Tike)

‘The researcher of the present study has no attempt to employ all the components of context

in her teaching of Linglish grammar Mor the purpose of the study, she prefers the classification proposed by Halliday and Hassan (1985) However, only coulext-aslext is

‘used for her experimental study because text is one of the main elements that play a significant role in commmnication For [lalliday and Ilasan (1985: 10), text is

[A] langage that is fimotional [ ] Langnage that is doing some job in some context, as

opposed to isolated words or sentences [ ] So any instance of living language that is playing some parl in a context of siluation, we shall call il a lest Janay be ciller spoken or

waitten, ot indeed in any other medium of expression that we like to think of

Following this definition, texts, spoken or written, will carry with them indications of their contexts In other words, context is embedded in text Such view is echoed by Thornbury

(1999:71-72) as he proposes that “language use seldom consists of sentences in isolation,

bat group of senten

Thombury (1999) lists four possible sources of texts: the course beok, authentic sources,

such as newspapers, songs, literary texts, the Internet, etc, the teacher, and the students

themselves, fn the exporiment of this study, the resoarchor uso aulhontic sources: fram some recognizable genres as the input for srammar presentation and practice Moreover, students’ own writing is also employed for error analyses and correction,

1.2 Helated studies on teaching grammar in context

It can be said that no linguistic items have been paid as mach attention fiom linguists and researchers as grammar A variety of studies on grammar and grammar teaching have been condeted so far by numerous researchers ftom different educational organizations worldwide, Most of the studies aim at discussing and finding the best mcthod for the teaching different aspects of grammar, many of which are proved to be effective today

such as commmumicative language leaching, focus-on-form, inductive, task-based method and sơ on Context-based method is a new trend in grammar teaching, therefore, not many studies on this issue have been found though much effort has been devoted Here are four researches related to the presen study thal are fond in book and online sources:

The analytical descriptive study

Weaver (1996) argues that when being taught in the context of writing, grammar can enhance and improve student's writing, The study examined reasons commonly given for teaching grammar as a school subject and called these reasons into question by desoribing dcearles of reszarch that showed the Icaching of grammar in isolation to have little, uf any, effect on the writing of most students, The study also considered how preschoolers acquired the basic grammar of a second language, from which a rescarch-based porspcetive on the concept of crrors in students’ writing was developed ‘The study suggested aspects of grammar that might be focused on in sentence writing and editing and addressed the teaching of grammar ftom the perspective of learning theory From the thzoretical background discussed above, sample fossons af teaching grammar in the context of writing were shared and recommended

21

The study by Nur Arnin (2009) is conducted to examine the effectiveness of teaching

grammar is: conlext lo reduce grammatical errors in students’ writing A hypothe

s was formulated that the students taught in in-context approach made less grammatical errors in writing than those who were taught in traditional way ‘Lhe study was designed in form of a Kquasi-experiment which involved 4 sample of 80 teregrade students fiom class X-5 (40) and class X-7 (40) of MAN-Lasem school in the 2008-2009 academic year The control group (class X-7) was taught conventional grammar which was separately given with writing skills while the experimental group (class X-5) recived the treatment of teaching

gramunar in context The instrument for the study was two writing tests: one was served as

the pretest and the other as the posttest ‘The data of grammatical errors were technically collected from students’ wriling products for analysis The results showed thal students who were taught gramunar contextually made less grammatical a1rors in writing than those who were taught in traditional method

The study by Obaid (2010) aims at investigating the effectiveness of three grammar

teaching approaches (the inductive, the deductive, and the contextualized approaches) on

achieving English grammar among the 11" graders in Khan yunis governorate In order to

answer the research question, an experimental study was carried ont with a sample of 158 suale students from Al Montanabi Secondary School for Boys The sample was then divided into four groups: a control group (38 students) and three experimental ones (40

students each), The experiment was conducted dusing the first tem of 2009-2010

‘The study by LI Pel (2010) is a teaching experiment which aims at testing the impact of

comiexl-based approach on teaching unreal conditional sonlertecs for freshmen majoring im English in Adult Education College of Soochow University, China, The study was carried

out from November 4th, 2008 to January 7", 2010 The data were collected via the

questionnaize, the interview, the pretest and the posttest and then they were processed and

ways: it enhances writing ability, it reduces writing errors, it improves students’ awareness

and attitude towards grammar learning and it brings better outcomes in students’ grammar achievement, The prosont study is a randomized exporiment which aims al investigating the effect of in-context gramunar teaching on students’ academic achievement in grammar

as well as their classroom participation, thus, it benefits from those studies in three following ways Fisst, the researcher of the present study can consult the reference for writing the literature review, Second, she can choose the suitable research design and employ the effective instruments for data collection and analyses ‘Lhird, she can compare the resulis of her own sindy with others” and make sore interpretations From those resnlls

In addition, four related studies om applying conlexl-based approach ta teach grammar are

brietly described and discussed.

CHAPTER 2: THE METHODOLOGY This chapter presents the methodology of the study which includes the design of the study,

the sampling techniques and the defining of variables In addition, the instruments used for

data collection and analyses are also described

2.1 Design of the study

The study is an experimental design which aims at testing the effect of teaching grammar

in context for first-year non-English major students at Chu Van An University on their

grammar academic achievement and their level of participation in grammar lessons To be

more precise, it is structured as the pretest-posttest equivalent group design The symbolic representation of the design is displayed as follows:

2.2, Population of the study

‘The study covers a total of 289 first-year non-major students at Chu Van An University in the first semester of the academic year 2011-2012 Those students are majoring in Architecture (115 students), Finance and Banking (164 students) and Civil Engineering (10

students) The population are all from Northern (284 students) and Central parts (5

students) of Vietnam in which 82% live in rural areas Those students have low entrance

exam test results (approximately 13-14 points) as compared with those in state-owned

universities, 84 % of them have been learning English since grade 6 and the remains have been learning English for three years No matter three years or six years of learning English, these students are supposed to be provided with basic knowledge of the language

2.3 Sample of the study

2.3.1 Sample of the students

The sample of the students is selected using probability sampling technique This

technique is described as “listing all the names of the individuals in the population in

separate pieces of paper, and then drawing a number of papers one by one from the

complete collection of names” (Castillo, 2009) Such type of sampling is more costly, more

time-consuming and more difficult than non-probability sampling method; however, it is of

the researcher’s preference because it guarantees that “every individual in the population

have equal chance of being selected as the subject for the research” (Castillo, 2009),

At the beginning of the first semester of 2011-2012 academic year, the researcher sent an invitation letter to all 289 non-English major freshmen of Chu Van An University The

letter was a description of a free eight-week English Grammar course and an invitation to

join in The course was scheduled to take place at the weekends, thus, it would have no interference with their timetable at school 289 invitation letters were sent and only 97

60 students were randomly selected, Those 60 students were then divided equally into two classes which served as the experimental group (class A) and the control group (class B)

Table 2: Distribution of the sample

2.3.2 Sample of the teachers

‘There are nine teachers of English at my English department at the moment Two of those teachers who are almost similar in respect of educational qualifications, age, training, teaching experience at tertiary level and their reputation at the school were selected as the sample of the study To be more specific, they both graduated from English Department, Hanoi University with a good degree At the moment, they are taking a postgraduate

course on English teaching methodology at Hanoi University and are going to conduct

their thesis defense at the end of July, 2012 One was born in 1983 and the other was born

in 1985 They both have been working as teachers of English at Chu Van An University

for nearly four years and they both receive good comments on their teaching performance

from their students and colleagues The two teachers were then randomly assigned to the

experimental (Ms Chi, age 27) and control group (Ms Cue, age 29)

2.4 Variables of the study

2.4.1 Dependent and Independent variables

‘The experiment aims at investigating the effect of teaching grammar in context on students’ grammar academic achievement as well as students’ classroom participation in the grammar lessons; therefore it incorporates one independent variable and two dependent

variables The independent variable is defined as the teaching of grammar in context while

the dependent variables are the grammar achievement test scores and the on-task behavior

of first year non-English major students at Chu Van An University Such independent and

dependent variables are indicated in the table below:

Dependent Teaching grammar in context

Grammar achievement test scores Students’ on-task behavior

The controlled variables involve the teachers of the two classes, the time, the content of the

courses and the classroom conditions, The uncontrolled variables include the I.Q of the students, the previous achievement, the anxiety, the interest and attitudes One more thing should be added to uncontrolled variables is the appearance of the observers and the

researcher while we are attending the classes Although both the observers and the

researcher are supposed to sit in unobtrusive places and observe the lessons quietly, their interference in the teaching and learning performance of the two classes is unavoidable

2.5, Instruments of the study

‘The present research applies both qualitative and quantitative approaches Therefore, there are two research instruments: the scores from the achievement tests (pretest and posttest) and the results from the classroom observation sheets

2.5.1 Grammar Achievement Tests

25.1.1 The aim of the grammar achievement tests

The grammar achievement tests are designed to measure students’ achievement on selected

English grammatical items, with respect to grammatical functions or uses

2.5.1.2 The sources of designing the grammar achievement tests

The tests were designed according to the requirements of the grammar teaching syllabus

for first year non-English major students at Chu Van An University as well as the purpose

of the present study The design of the tests was also due to the researcher’s experience in

teaching English grammar and they are evaluated and edited by the supervisor and

experienced teachers in and outside the researcher's school.

Grammar in Context (by Michael Vince), Developing Grammar in Context (by Matk

Nettle and Diana Hopkins) and Exploring grammar in context (by Ronald Carter Rebecca Hughes and Michael McCathy) The others were adapted from authentic sources like literary texts, newspapers, popular journalism, letters and the real speeches

2.5.1.3 The description of the grammar achievement tests

The grammar achievement tests involved a pretest and a posttest (see appendix | and 2)

‘The pretest was administered one week before the application of treatments with an aim to determine that the two groups were equivalent at the time of starting the experiment The

posttest was administered at the end of the experiment with a purpose of measuring the

students’ achievement (with respect to grammatical functions) after the treatment period Both the pretest and posttest were at the same level of difficulty (elementary and pre- intermediate level) Each test involved five questions with 25 items which were scheduled

to finish within 60 minutes The distribution of the grammar achievement tests is described

in the following table:

Table 4: Distribution of the grammar achievement tests

2.5.1.4 The content validity of the test

According to Wainer and Braun (1988), when a test has content validity, the items on the test represent the entire range of possible items the test should cover In other words, the

test has valid content when it examines what it is intended to measure The intention of the achievement tests is to measure first year non-English major students’ achievement on four

selected grammatical items (ie tenses, modals, passive voice and conditionals) with

special reference to their grammatical functions Thus, the tests were designed with an

cnph

on fimetional aspeols of Those four items, In order to judge the content validity af the tests, the researcher sent them to the supervisor and sight experienced teachers of English working in different universities in Hanoi for consultation, Then the test was modified according lo their valuable remarks

25.1.5 The reliability of the test

‘Test reliability refers to the consistency of scores students would receive on alternate forms

of the same (est To mica: the reliability of the posttssl scores gained by the students who formed the sample of the study, the researcher used Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula of which the correlation coefficient was found to be 0.75 Such result implies that the lest is highly consistent amd reliable

2.5.2 The classroom observation

According to Nunan (1992), observation is the most popular tool that helps researchers to have data “collected in genuine classroom” In this study, classroom observational technique is cmployed to asscss students’ Ievcl of participation in gramumar lessons The students’ participation is defined in terms of an-task or off -task behavior in classroom activities Students are ‘on-task? when they are “actively engaged in the pedagogic work of the day” and “off-task” when “doing other things such as talking to fliends, walking about

the room, etc.” (Nunan, 1992/37)

‘Two teachers of English were invited to quietly observe the students’ on-task behaviors in experimental group (Ms IIuong) and control group (Ms Anh) during their performance in class, Before cach granumar lesson, the two observers were given the observation sheets with the instructions included The classroom observation sheet is adapted from Hopkins (1985:95) and is displayed in appendix 4

2.6 Description af the grammar courses

2.6.2, The materials

Different materials are used for traditional grammar course (control group) and in-context Etamnnar course (experimontal group) For the traditional grammar coursc, the materials involve grammar sections in New Headway Elementary Unit 6, Unit 7, Unit 14) and New

dleadway Pre-Intermediate (Unit 8, Unit 11, Unit 12) by John and Liz Soars lor in-

context grarmmar course, the teacher still makes nse of the same course books as for the