An ethnographic study of the role of grammar in teaching and learning writing

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES AN ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE ROLE OF GRAMMAR IN TEACHING AND LEARNING WRITING A thesis submit

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES

AN ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE ROLE OF GRAMMAR

IN TEACHING AND LEARNING WRITING

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment

of the requirement for the degree

of Master of Arts (TESOL)

Submitted by HANH THI LE

Supervisor

Dr TUNG THANH NGUYEN

Ho Chi Minh City, January 2011

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY

I certify my authorship of the thesis submitted today entitled:

AN ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE ROLE OF GRAMMAR

IN TEACHING AND LEARNING WRITING

in terms of the statement of Requirements for Theses in Master’s Programmes issued

by the Higher Degree Committee The thesis has not previously been submitted for a degree

Ho Chi Minh City, January 2011

HANH THI LE

RETENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS

I hereby state that I, HANH THI LE, being the candidate for the degree of Master of TESOL, accept the requirements of the University of Social Sciences and Humanities relating to the retention and use of Master’s Thesis deposited in the Library

In terms of these conditions, I agree that the original of my thesis deposited in the Library should be accessible for the purposes of study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the Library for care, loan, or reproduction

of theses

Ho Chi Minh City, January 2011

HANH THI LE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Writing a thesis, an intensely lonely and challenging experience, can only be done with many people’s help and co-operation These people deserve a special mention First and foremost, the mention must go to Dr Tung Thanh Nguyen, my supervisor Luckily, I have known him and been accepted as one of his supervisees in this M.A programme I would like to express my deepest gratitude to him He was deeply patient to read my manuscript with extremely great care and devotion, gave me very thoughtful and insightful comments, and provided me with valuable support in the preparation and completion of this thesis I would not have finished it without his constantly enthusiastic guidance and constructively critical questions which helped

me think through the problems

Next, I wish to thank Dr Kieuthu Thi Nguyen, Dean of the Department of English Linguistics and Literature at Ho Chi Minh City University of Social Sciences and Humanities, who has created favourable conditions for the fulfilment of this thesis In addition, I am greatly grateful to all the lecturers who have assisted me during the post-graduate course

Then, my thanks must go to the director of HUFLIT Centre of Foreign Languages, who let me observe B-level classes It was in these classes that I got a lot of data which partly contributed to the success of this study It was impossible not to refer to the four teachers and the 120 students who gave me their work and were responsive to

my questionnaires and interviews enthusiastically Besides, I did not forget to send

my thanks to Ms Huonggiang Nguyen Le, one of my classmates of TESOL 06, who gave me many valuable ideas

Last but not least, I would like to dedicate this thesis to my mother, Mrs Dao Thi Le, and my cousin, Ms Mylinh Thi Pham, who are the most important in my life As always, they have been wholeheartedly supportive and taken care of everything so that I could devote all my time to finish my study I am greatly indebted to them

This thesis studied the role of grammar in teaching and learning writing Specifically,

it tried to reveal teachers’ and students’ behaviours and attitudes toward it

Theoretically, the study took grammar not only as an autonomous system but also as a social phenomenon into full account As such, it was operationally examined at both the levels – sentential and suprasentential – in language pedagogy

The study involved 120 students and four teachers of four B-level classes at the Foreign Language Centre of Ho Chi Minh City University of Foreign Languages and Information Technology (HUFLIT) Collected from a three-week teaching programme on April 4th–24th, 2009, data were of three types: observation, questionnaire, and interview The last type of a writing test was taken on June 20th,

2009

With regard to the analysis, the classroom observation data and writing test scores were analysed according to Chi-square and t-test respectively The questionnaire data were converted into mean values for central tendencies while the interview data were expressed in the form of text

The findings indicated that there was consistency in the way both teachers and students felt, thought, and behaved with respect to the role of grammar in a writing lesson Generally speaking, instead of focusing on writing skill, they only paid their attention to grammar especially at the sentential level although they were well aware

of the importance of grammar at the suprasentential level as witnessed in the test results

In the light of the findings some suggestions for educational practice and further research were offered to help improve the quality of teaching and learning writing

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Certificate of originality i

Retention and use of the thesis ii

Acknowledgements iii

Abstract iv

Table of contents……… v

List of abbreviations……… xi

List of tables, figures, and charts……… xii

CHAPTER 1: THE CONTEXT OF TEACHING AND LEARNING GRAMMAR IN WRITING 1

1.1 Context of the study 1

1.2 Aim of the study 3

1.3 Research questions of the study 3

1.4 Significance of the study 4

1.5 Organisation of the study 4

CHAPTER 2: GRAMMAR IN WRITING-BASED LESSONS: A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 5

2.1 Introduction 5

2.2 Nature of the language study 5

2.2.1 Language as an autonomous system 5

2.2.1.1 Language in general 6

2.2.1.2 Grammar in particular 7

2.2.2 Language as a social phenomenon 8

2.2.2.1 Language in general 8

2.2.2.2 Grammar in particular 9

2.3 Grammar in language pedagogy 12

2.3.1 Grammar at the sentential level: Form 12

2.3.1.1 Grammar-translation method 12

2.3.1.2 Direct method 14

2.3.1.3 Audio-lingual method 15

2.3.2 Grammar at the suprasentential level: Function 16

Communicative language teaching 16

2.3.3 Summary of the methods of teaching grammar 19

2.4 Implications for grammar teaching and learning 20

2.4.1 Developing students’ comprehension about grammar in writing 20

2.4.1.1 At the sentential level: Focus on accuracy 20

Types of grammatical practices of accuracy 21

2.4.1.2 At the suprasentential level: Focus on fluency (text) 21

Types of grammatical practices of fluency 22

2.4.2 Developing students’ communication about grammar in writing 22

2.4.2.1 Communicative purpose 22

2.4.2.2 Communicative context-writer 22

2.4.2.3 Communicative context-reader 22

2.5 Summary 23

CHAPTER 3: DESIGN AND METHOD OF INVESTIGATION 24

3.1 Introduction 24

3.2 Research design 24

3.2.1 Overall approach: Ethnography 24

3.2.2 Methodology 26

3.2.2.1 Research site 26

3.2.2.2 Participants of the study 27

3.2.2.2.1 Students 27

3.2.2.2.2 Teachers 29

3.2.2.3 Data types and methods of data collection 29

3.2.2.3.1 Observation 29

3.2.2.3.2 Questionnaire 32

3.2.2.3.3 Student interview 33

3.2.2.3.4 Students’ writing test 34

3.2.2.3.5 Summary 34

3.2.2.4 Analytical framework 35

3.2.2.4.1 Classroom observation data 35

3.2.2.4.2 Writing test data 37

3.2.2.4.3 Questionnaire data 38

3.2.2.4.4 Interview data 39

3.3 Summary 39

CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS 40

4.1 Introduction 40

4.2 Data analysis 40

4.2.1 Classroom observation data 40

4.2.1.1 Teacher-work oriented 41

4.2.1.1.1 Class B3 teacher 41

4.2.1.1.2 Class B4 teacher 48

4.2.1.1.3 Comparison of the teaching style in classes B3 and B4 54

4.2.1.1.4 Summary 56

4.2.1.2 Student-work oriented 57

4.2.1.2.1 Class B1 teacher 57

4.2.1.2.2 Class B2 teacher 63

4.2.1.2.3 Comparison of the teaching style in classes B1 and B2 69

4.2.1.2.4 Summary 72

4.2.1.3 Comparison of the teaching style in classes B3 and B4 to that in classes B1 and B2……… 72

4.2.1.4 Summary 73

4.2.2 Results of the writing test 75

4.2.2.1 Mark distribution 75

4.2.2.2 Score means 75

4.2.2.3 t-test 76

4.2.3 Questionnaire data 77

4.2.3.1 Student questionnaire data 77

4.2.3.1.1 Importance of grammar beside other factors for the quality of writing 77

4.2.3.1.2 Trouble in learning grammar at the sentential level 78

4.2.3.1.3 Trouble in learning grammar at the suprasentential level 79

4.2.3.1.4 Benefits from the ways to correct the grammatical mistakes 79

4.2.3.2 Teacher questionnaire data 80

4.2.3.2.1 Importance of grammar beside other factors for the quality of writing ……….80

4.2.3.2.2 Trouble in teaching grammar at the sentential level 81

4.2.3.2.3 Trouble in teaching grammar at the suprasentential level 82

4.2.3.2.4 Benefits from the ways to correct the grammatical mistakes 83

4.2.3.3 Summary 84

4.2.4 Student interview data 84

4.2.4.1 Importance of grammar beside other factors for the quality of writing 84

4.2.4.2 Benefits from the ways to correct the grammatical mistakes 84

4.2.5 Summary 84

4.3 Discussion of findings 85

4.3.1 General findings 85

4.3.2 Specific findings 86

4.3.2.1 Behaviours 86

4.3.2.1.1 Writing 86

4.3.2.1.2 Teaching 87

4.3.2.1.3 Results 87

4.3.2.2 Attitudes 88

4.4 Summary 89

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 90

5.1 Introduction 90

5.2 Main conclusions 90

5.3 Evaluation for the overall methodology 92

5.4 Recommendations for the educational practice 93

5.4.1 For teachers 93

5.4.2 For students 94

5.5 Suggestions for further research 95

5.6 Summary 95

REFERENCES 96

APPENDICES Appendix 1: Questionnaire for students (in Vietnamese) 99

Appendix 2: Questionnaire for teachers (in English) 103

Appendix 3: Outline of the topics 107

Appendix 4: Critical values of 2  111

Appendix 5: Distribution of frequencies of marks for Group 1 ……… 112

Appendix 6: Distribution of frequencies of marks for Group 2 ……….113

Appendix 7: Critical values of t 114

Appendix 8: A summary of the questionnaire data 115

Appendix 9: Writing test ……… 119

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ALM: Audio-lingual Method

BA: Bachelor of Arts

CLT: Communicative Language Teaching

d.f.: Degree(s) of freedom

DM: Direct Method

HCMC: Ho Chi Minh City

HUFLIT: Ho Chi Minh City University of Foreign Languages and Information

Technology

MA: Master of Arts

MBA: Master of Business Administration

p: Probability

SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

TESOL: Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages

LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES, AND CHARTS

FIGURES

Figure 3.2.2.2.1a: Participants’ age 28

Figure 3.2.2.2.1b: Participants’ gender 28

Figure 3.2.2.2.1c: Participants’ residence 28

TABLES Table 2.3.3: Summary of methods of grammar and writing teaching 19

Table 3.2.2.3.1: The time framework of the fours classes 31

Table 3.2.2.3.5: Summary of data types and methods of data collection 35

Table 4.2.1.1.1a: Summary of the observation in class B3 42

Table 4.2.1.1.1b: A one-way analysis of Chi-square for grammar at both the levels in class B3 48

Table 4.2.1.1.2a: Summary of the observation in class B4 49

Table 4.2.1.1.2b: A one-way analysis of Chi-square for grammar at both the levels in class B4 53

Table 4.2.1.1.3a: A two-way analysis of Chi-square for grammar at both the levels in classes B3 and B4 54

Table 4.2.1.1.3b: Overall factors identified by classes B3 and B4 55

Table 4.2.1.2.1a: Summary of the observation in class B1 58

Table 4.2.1.2.1b: A one-way analysis of Chi-square for grammar at both the levels in class B1 63

Table 4.2.1.2.2a: Summary of the observation in class B2 64

Table 4.2.1.2.2b: A one-way analysis of Chi-square for grammar at both the levels in

class B2 69

Table 4.2.1.2.3a: A two-way analysis of Chi-square for grammar at both the levels in

classes B1 and B2 70

Table 4.2.1.2.3b: Overall factors identified in classes B1 and B2 71

Table 4.2.1.3a: A two-way analysis of Chi-square for grammar at both the levels in

classes B3 and B4 and classes B1and B2 73

Table 4.2.1.3b: Overall factors identified by classes B3 and B4 and classes B1 and

B2 74

Table 4.2.2.2: Mark means of Group 1 and Group 2 76

Table 4.2.2.3: The result of t-test 76

CHARTS

Chart 4.2.2.1: Mark type distribution of Group 1 and Group 2 75

Chart 4.2.3.1.1: Students’ responses to the importance of the factors for the quality

of writing 77

Chart 4.2.3.1.2: Students’ responses to the trouble of sentential level grammar 78

Chart 4.2.3.1.3: Students’ responses to the trouble of suprasentential level

grammar 79

Chart 4.2.3.1.4: Students’ awareness of the benefits from the ways to correct the

grammatical mistakes……… ……… 80 Chart 4.2.3.2.1: Teachers’ responses to the importance of the factors for the quality

of writing 81

Chart 4.2.3.2.2: Teachers’ responses to the trouble of sentential level grammar 82

Chart 4.2.3.2.3: Teachers’ responses to the trouble of suprasentential level

grammar……… 82

Chart 4.2.3.2.4: Teachers’ awareness of the benefits from the ways to correct the grammatical mistakes 83

CHAPTER 1 THE CONTEXT OF TEACHING AND LEARNING

GRAMMAR IN WRITING

1.1 Context of the study

Traditionally an agricultural country, Vietnam has been in economic development for nearly two and a half decades since the reform initiatives, or “open-door” policy, promulgated by the 6th National Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam on December 15th-18th, 1986 The policy has helped the country with international

integration in which beside other competence and necessary skills to serve work, the mastery of a foreign language is considered as an indispensable means for the young (Nguyen, 2007, para 1) The role and status of English rose quickly and before the end of the 1980s it had become the first foreign language in the country (Nguyen,

2005, p 1)

Actually, English has played a dominant role in Vietnam for the last ten years This is because it is one of the obligatory subjects for students in general Additionally, it not only helps them be able to approach their professional materials in English, but also provides them with a key leading to success in life when it becomes globalised (Huynh, 2006, p 1) Although their motivation to learn English is various, they generally learn it either for their study and examinations or for social aspects such as a good job or communication in English

In the globalisation, each individual must do his or her best to be able to keep pace with the growth of the era Therefore, it is very necessary to learn a foreign language, especially English as the world’s favourite language Due to this demand, in the last decade, the movement as well as the need to learn English in big cities is in an increase More and more foreign language centres have been founded throughout the country

However, the recent boom of English learning has not met the demands in reality yet One of the reasons for the problem is the defect of teaching and learning practice On the whole, the current English teaching and learning process is grammar-oriented whereas other linguistic aspects and language skills, such as pronunciation, speaking, and writing are not much taken into account

Grammar is a rule that language users must obey to be able to communicate with one another It is an indispensable part in the four skills of language learning As such, what draws much more of teachers’ and students’ attention at foreign language centres, schools, and even universities is grammar In most of the classes, just at the beginning, teachers only emphasise grammar at the sentential level: sentence patterns, verb conjugation, active form, etc They are not concerned about communicative skills, for example, writing skills This method results in long grammar lessons together with exhausting practice exercises in order to help students pass their examinations or do well in the grammar tests Such English learning soon becomes a big rock on their shoulders (Nguyen, 1999, p 1) However, after the examinations there is a little of the English knowledge left in their mind

This phenomenon occurs in writing courses even though the requirement of the syllabus is toward communication Writing is the “form of social communication” and

it permits us to understand not only the world, but also the self (Lindemann, 1995, p 4) Despite this, teachers usually equip their students with a little or even no grammar

at the suprasentential level – grammar in writing-based lessons which can be considered as the ground of a piece of writing They go on to draw their students’ attention to grammar in sentences isolated from their context, which is writing in our case This does not support the students much in overcoming any difficulties when writing a paragraph, an essay, and a composition Consequently, most learners of English are bored with their very slow progress in writing and they are not often self-confident enough to do any pieces of writing even though they reach an intermediate level of English grammar (Le, 2009, p 25)

Thus this current method of teaching hardly helps students with any progress in a piece of writing It is clear that they can make grammatically correct sentences at the sentential level However, when it comes to the construction of writing for a particular purpose in general and the treatment at the suprasentential level in particular, they find it hard to cope with

In short, although grammar, especially that at the sentential level, cannot be neglected

in the teaching and learning process, its role should be revisited in the context of writing teaching This issue captures the researcher’s curiosity and interest and, thus, deserves to be properly studied in this study

1.2 Aim of the study

The study aims to examine how grammar is treated in the process of teaching and learning writing To achieve this, it is necessary to reveal how teachers and students

behave, feel, and think with respect to its role in a writing-based lesson

1.3 Research questions of the study

To achieve the aim established above, this study addresses the following main research question:

What is the role of grammar in teaching and learning writing?

This main research question entails two sub-questions about teachers’ and students’ behaviours, feelings, and thoughts as far as the role of grammar in a writing lesson is concerned As one goes beyond the sentential level, the suprasententical level should

be taken into account whether one likes it or not Therefore, the study seeks the answers to the following two sub-questions:

1 What are teachers’ and students’ behaviours in a writing lesson with respect to grammar

1.1 at the sentential level?

1.2 at the suprasentential level?

2 What are their underlying thoughts and feelings toward the actions explicitly

observed in (1) above?

1.4 Significance of the study

The study makes a considerable contribution in the following aspect By examining the role of grammar in teaching and learning writing in both theory and practice, it confirms that grammar at the sentential level can help create correct English sentences albeit only in isolation Meanwhile, grammar at the suprasentential level supplies support in making these isolated grammatically-correct sentences become coherent, cohesive, and well-organised This should be an ultimate goal in the process of writing teaching and learning

1.5 Organisation of the study

The study consists of 5 chapters Chapter 1 provides a problem of teaching and learning grammar in writing for the study by stating its context, aim, research

questions, significance, and structure Chapter 2 aims to review relevant theories of

grammar which are organised along three main categories of the nature of the

language study, grammar in language pedagogy, and implications for grammar

teaching and learning Chapter 3 deals with the design and the method of investigation

by taking the following four features in account: research site, participants, data types and methods of data collection, and analytical framework Chapter 4 presents the data

analysis and interpretation for the four types of data collected from class observation,

questionnaire, interview, and a writing test In addition, this chapter discusses the

findings in the light of the data analysed and interpreted earlier Chapter 5 draws

conclusions by explicitly answering the research questions, evaluates the strengths and weaknesses in the research methodology, gives some recommendations for

English language practitioners and students, and proposes topics for further research.

CHAPTER 2 GRAMMAR IN WRITING-BASED LESSONS:

A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Introduction

As presented in the previous chapter, grammar is seen to be important in teaching English Thus it is essential to take it into considerable account However, in reality,

to some extent, the teaching of grammar is not effective The reason for this problem

is that in general grammar is usually taught in isolation That is, there exists a lack of context in its teaching Therefore, to teach it successfully, grammar must be instructed

in combination with a context in general and a writing-based lesson in particular Thus this chapter first examines the nature of the language study, then looks into how language teaching researchers and educators have dealt with it in language teaching and learning until now, and finally presents implications for grammar teaching and learning

2.2 Nature of the language study

Up till now there have been two views about the nature of language, leading to two contradictory paradigms in its study: language as an autonomous system and language

as socially-embedded The first view holds that language should be studied without

reference to its context at all, or, in other words, “in and for itself” (Saussure, 1916, as

cited in Baskin, 1959, p xii) The other emphasises the inclusion of socio-cultural information to illuminate the meaning of language in use This section, therefore, presents these two views in turn with respect to language in general and one of its levels – grammar – in particular

2.2.1 Language as an autonomous system

According to McCarthy (2001, p 48), language which is viewed as an abstract system can exist independently of its contexts of use Therefore, this sub-section examines the independence attached first to language and then grammar

2.2.1.1 Language in general

In the early years of the twentieth century, in the discipline of linguistics, language as

an object of investigation was viewed as an autonomous system The scholar who is normally given credit for proposing this idea for the first time is Ferdinand de Saussure, the father of modern linguistics In his 1916 posthumous work, which was

later translated into English as Course in General Linguistics, he stated that human speech (langage) consisted of language (langue) and speech (parole) Langue was regarded as a system or structure and parole as the use of that langue in utterances However, Saussure (trans 1960) defined the object of linguistics as only langue, discarding parole as an impossible object for systematic study:

But what is language? It is not to be confused with human speech, of which it

is only a definite part, though certainly an essential one … Taken as a whole, speech is many-sided and heterogeneous, straddling several areas simultaneously – physical, physiological, and psychological – it belongs to both the individual and society; we cannot put it into any category of human facts, for we cannot discover its unity (as cited in Nguyen, 2005, p 14)

It is obvious from the citation above that Saussure perceives parole as a various object

(i.e many-sided and heterogeneous) which includes a lot of simultaneous aspects (namely physical, physiological, and psychological) Therefore, he came to a conclusion that it cannot be systematically studied, as “we cannot discover its unity” Nearly four decades later, Chomsky (1965) made nearly the same claim about the

nature of linguistic study although he coined two different terms of competence and

performance:

The language user himself must possess intuitively and unconsciously this capacity to abstract from the concrete manifestations of language The task of

linguistics is to study competence, the knowledge of the language or the

underlying system of rules that has been mastered by the speaker-hearer (p 4)

In short, the concepts of langue and competence suffice to represent the view of

language as an independent system Accordingly, language should be studied in isolation in order to discover its systematicity

2.2.1.2 Grammar in particular

In the light of language as an autonomous system, it is necessary to examine one of

the five levels in its study – grammar

According to Harmer (1987, p 1), grammar is the way in which words change themselves and group together to make sentences Our knowledge of it also tells us what to do if we want to put phrases and clauses into sentences As such, it can be implicitly understood as an autonomous system under the form of separated sentences whose components are words, phrases, and clauses Then, the sentences are set up by varying and grouping words, phrases, and clauses In addition, various words create the varieties of sentences, as claimed four years later by him that it is grammar that allows us to make completely different sentences (which nevertheless have the same relationship between subjects and objects) if we use different words (Harmer, 1991, p 13)

Over one decade later in 2002, McDonough made further elaboration on the independence of sentential level grammar from its social context due to the argument that its largest units of analysis are “units of meaning” that can convey “complete thoughts” He put it that

Grammar sets up core units – sentences The sentences have meaning; they are often defined as “completed thoughts” or “units of meaning” This meaning can be apprehended from the sentence alone, without recourse to further information about context: who said it or wrote it

The sentences are simply slabs of language, fenced off from the messiness of context and individual users; they are ideal containers for illustrating rules, patterns, and meanings in a clear, non-distracting way They can be brought

together according to their similarities in structure, regardless of whether their meanings and contexts are coherently related to one another (pp 51-52)

In comparison with each other, Harmer and McDonough make similar contributions Both of them indicate that sentence level grammar can be ideally examined under the form of disconnected sentences with their rules, patterns, and meanings Nevertheless, McDonough took this view to an extreme in saying that in terms of meaning and thought, a sentence can be comprehended without recourse to its social context, one component of which is the participant: Who the speaker or the writer is

Briefly, when language is viewed in isolation as a formal system, grammar should be systematically studied at the sentential level only In this view, sentences, as the largest units in linguistic analysis, contain rules, patterns, and meanings which can exist without reference to any contexts

2.2.2 Language as a social phenomenon

According to McCarthy (2001, p 48), language which is viewed at the other side of the coin exists for social purposes The following two aspects – language in general and grammar as one of its levels in particular – will be in turn elaborated upon in the

two sub-sections of 2.2.2.1 and 2.2.2.2

2.2.2.1 Language in general

Language is used for communication Therefore, it can be examined and explained from another perspective: in relation to its social context For instance, one of the advocates of this paradigm is the sociolinguist Hymes (1967), who conceived the view of language as a social phenomenon He stated his point of view this way:

Broadly speaking, the view is based on the view that language only exists for social purposes, and that, logically, its study must address and encompass those social purposes The forms and meanings of language have evolved in social contexts, and are constantly changing and evolving in response to social and cultural developments (p 52)

The significance of the idea given in the citation above is the social phenomenon makes a great influence on not only the meaning of language in use but also its evolution concurrently with socio-cultural growth Consequently, the form, meaning, development, and obtainment of language cannot be separated from community life Fifteen years later, with his interest in language acquisition in relation to society, Berko-Gleason (1982, as cited in Brown, 2000) made a further confirmation of the connection as follows:

It is clear that in order for successful language acquisition to take place, interaction rather than exposure to language is required; one does not learn language from overhearing the conversation of others or from listening to the radio, and must, instead, acquire it in the context of being spoken to or written

to (p 20)

Berko-Gleason’s basic tenet is that the linguistic achievement cannot be independent

of society in general and of a spoken or written context in particular Therefore, obviously there does not exist any difference between Hymes’s and Berko-Gleason’s

statements Both of them show that such features in relation to language as form, meaning, evolution, community as purposes, realities, experience, and development

are considerably embedded and interactive As such, language attainment should reflect these two aspects of community and development

In summary, the view of language as a social phenomenon presents that linguistic aspect and society must be interdependent Consequently, language should be examined in relation to communication to find the speaker’s or writer’s meaning

2.2.2.2 Grammar in particular

In accordance with the previous section, instead of being studied in isolation, in the form of separated and decontextualised sentences, grammar of language should be seen to work as a socially-embedded system One narrow reflection of this view is that its study is to go beyond the boundary of a sentence To put it another way, it is to

be studied at the suprasentential level in a paragraph, a dialogue, and a text Therefore,

some key components of grammar at this level such as cohesion, coherence, and idea

organisation must be examined

Firstly, the notion of cohesion is defined by Halliday and Hasan (1976, p 8) as a

semantic relation between an element in the text and some other element that is crucial to the interpretation of it Since cohesive relations are concerned with structure, they are found within a sentence and between sentences

Thus these two scholars demonstrate that the internal units of grammar (i.e sentences,

clauses, and groups of words) must cohere This cohesion, as a semantic relation, can happen both in a sentence and between sentences It is the cohesion that sets up the

interpretation of some elements in the text

Specifically, Halliday and Hasan (1976) propose five formal cohesive devices that

help produce the cohesion of the pieces of writing, especially beyond the sentential level They are reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction, and lexical relationship The key concept in the first device – reference – is the retrieval of referential meaning

“In the case of reference the information to be retrieved is the referential meaning, the identity of the particular thing or class of things that is being referred to, and the cohesion lies in continuity of reference” (p 31)

Unlike reference, which expresses a relation in meaning, substitution emphasises that

in wording Specifically, the difference between these two devices is that “substitution

is a relation in the wording rather than in the meaning The distinction between substitution and reference is that substitution is a relation between linguistic items such as words and phrases whereas reference is a relation between meanings” (pp 88-89)

Despite embodying the same fundamental relation between parts of a text, ellipsis is a

kind of structural mechanism different from that of substitution in that “it can be defined as substitution by zero” (p 142)

As the fourth device, conjunctive elements “are not primarily devices for reaching out

into the preceding/following text, but they express certain meanings which presuppose the presence of other components in the discourse” (p 226)

At last, cohesion in a text can be expressed in the continuity by choosing words As

the last device, lexical cohesion is “the choice of the word that is related in some way

to a previous one – either semantically, such that the two are in the broadest sense synonymous, or collocationally, such that the two have a more than ordinary tendency

to co-occur” (p 310)

Unlike cohesion, which pays more attention to formal relationship, coherence focuses

on logical one To make a relation logical, one has to take the arrangement, or, in another word, sequence, of sentences into account This sequence should also be in a

particular order, as, for instance, Byrne (1988) states that

Grammar is a set of rules which allows us to produce a sequence of sentences arranged in a particular order and linked together in certain ways The sequence may be very short – perhaps only two or three sentences – but, because of the way the sentences have been put in order and linked together,

they form a coherent whole called a text (p 1)

Thus coherence can be roughly comprehended as of a sequence of sentences arranged

in a specific order to make a unit larger than sentences in isolation such as a paragraph,

an essay, and a text

This author also proposed a number of ways to create coherence in a piece of writing

Accordingly, to organise a text into a coherent whole, logical devices can be

employed They are words or phrases which indicate meaning relationships between

or within sentences and include those of addition, comparison, contrast, result,

exemplification, and enumeration

Finally, the perception of idea organisation refers to the important correspondences

between structure and function Thus grammar helps put together the patterns of the

language and the things we can do with them and support us to know how to choose structures which accurately express the meanings we want to create (Collins, 1990, pp

1, 3) The basic tenet of this statement is that grammar helps organise thoughts to create a good text This process is carried out by finding appropriate and relevant details and arranging them in the most effective order to convey an intended meaning

In short, in a broad sense, language must be regarded as a social phenomenon, as it normally serves social purposes In a narrow sense, grammar of language is to be observed in a social context in general and in a writing-based one in particular to reflect the nature of language and one of its levels – grammar

2.3 Grammar in language pedagogy

Section 2.2 above explores the nature of the language study theoretically and demonstrates the key characteristics of language in general and one of its levels in particular (i.e grammar) as viewed from two opposite perspectives: socially-bound and socially-free This purely theoretical framework pays the way for this section which focuses on the main principles for grammar pedagogy To do this, it is essential

to trace back the treatment of grammar in writing in the history of teaching methods

2.3.1 Grammar at the sentential level: Form

According to this paradigm, grammar which focuses on the form of language is studied in the grammar-translation method It can also be said to be dealt with in the

direct method and the audio-lingual method for the reasons which will be explained

enjoy literary works, mostly classics Grammar is taught deductively by means

of long and elaborate explanations The writing skill is almost neglected

Thus this method only provides students with the knowledge of deductive grammar, but not that of writing skill because the purpose of learning a foreign language is to help learners read and enjoy literary works

Brown (2000, p 15) gave an explanation why the focus of this method is on grammatical rules, memorisation of vocabulary and of various declensions, conjugations, translations of text, and written exercises It was simply because

languages were being taught primarily to learn for the sake of being scholarly

Likewise, three years later Cook (2003, p 32) gave the following main features of this method: The grammatical rules were explained to students in their own language; vocabulary lists were learnt with translation equivalents; and sentences were laboriously translated in writing into and out of the students’ first language

In comparison with Brown, Cook makes a further contribution to the

grammar-translation method This teaching process is mainly through the students’ mother

tongue The translation in writing is carried out from the first language to the second and vice versa

Prator and Celce-Murcia (1979, p 3) summarised the major characteristics related to

grammar in the grammar-translation method Grammar separated from a

writing-based context was presented mainly in mother tongue to students in detail This teaching way helped the students catch the rules of combining, forming, and inflecting words to produce and translate unrelated sentences Moreover, they had chances of reviewing these rules through the grammatical exercises Therefore, in this method teachers could measure their students’ success in learning language through the accurate use of grammar in isolation rather than in a writing-based context

One of the advantages of the grammar-translation method, according to Rhalmi (2009, para 4) is that it is a labour saving method, as the teachers carry out everything in the

mother tongue and the students have no difficulties in understanding the lessons in their first language Translation is the easiest and shortest way to explain words and

phrases of the second language This method only aims to conduct grammar in

isolated sentences through the grammatical exercises and the translation and very little attention is paid to communication Thus instructors tried to find better ways to remedy this pitfall of the method The direct method was the answer

2.3.1.2 Direct method

The direct method (DM), which originated in the 17th century, was revived in the 1900s as an alternative to the grammar-translation method The notion of this method could be looked at by the dyad Rivers and Temperley (1998, as cited in Huynh, 2006,

p 22) This method did not equip students with enough instruction of structures, vocabulary, and writing performance Instead, it only made them develop their communication in the foreign language through listening to and speaking the language a lot

Later, Brown (2000, p 45) expressed his thoughts about grammar in language pedagogy in his research The basic premise of this method was that the second language learning should be more like the first language learning: a lot of active oral interaction, spontaneous use of the language, no translation between the first and the second language, and little or no analysis of grammatical rules

It can be said that Rivers and Temperley and Brown make similar contributions In teaching a foreign language, teachers should try to create a natural learning environment for the classroom Instead of the explicitly grammatical explanation and the translation from the first language to the second, they should draw their students’ attention to the verbal communication in the target language

The features related to grammar in the direct method were summarised by Richards and Rodgers (1986, pp 9-10) Teachers had to employ the second language to actively set up oral interaction between them and their students More importantly,

they needed to equip them with good grammar through modeling and inductive practice (i.e by having students find out rules through the presentation of adequate linguistic forms in the target language) Therefore, this method focused on grammar neither in isolation nor in a context

In Brown’s view (2000, p 73), neither the grammar-translation nor the direct method

was based on any particular linguistic and psychological theory As such, the

audio-lingual was developed in an attempt to address some of the perceived weaknesses of these two methods

2.3.1.3 Audio-lingual method

The audio-lingual method (ALM) prevailed during the decades of 1940-1970 Brown

(1994, p 57) delved into the details of this method Within the context of the classrooms and language laboratories, teachers did not give their students any explicitly grammatical instructions They presented them the correct model of a sentence and helped them with the habitual formation These students were asked to repeat the model orally Moreover, instead of thinking about their responses, they had

to memorise and practise the particular structures until they could employ them immediately

Later, Rivers and Temperley (1998, as cited in Huynh, 2006, p 22) took an apparent view about this method Teachers do not need to instruct reading and writing They merely support their students in the mastery of listening and speaking If a student can listen and speak English well, he/she will be able to develop reading and writing skills later

The characteristics related to grammar in ALM might be summed up in the following features by Prator and Celce-Murcia (1979, p 25) The process of learning grammar

in the ALM comprised the imitation, memorisation, and drills of the structural patterns in the target language This method ensured the habit-formation models of learning for students Additionally, the grammatical explanation was little or not

emphasised and was inductively taught without any contexts Thus neither grammar nor writing skill was central to this method

Therefore, in general, the three methods above have the same weaknesses Firstly, grammar is mainly instructed in isolation and deduction for the first method but induction for the second and the third Secondly, writing skill is paid little or no attention to and it is only carried out at the sentential level, for example, translation, written exercises, and responses to questions

A conclusion that can be drawn is that it is necessary to gain the principles of teaching and learning a foreign language in a communicative method The communicative language teaching is an answer

2.3.2 Grammar at the suprasentential level: Function

Communicative language teaching

The communicative language teaching (CLT) in which grammar is studied lays an

emphasis on not only the function but also social acceptability of a grammatical form

For instance, Bachman (1990, p 85) articulates that merely knowing how to produce

a grammatically correct sentence is not enough: A communicatively competent person must also know how to produce an appropriate, natural, and socially acceptable utterance in all contexts of communication This statement conveys exactly the same information as what was presented in the introductory paragraph of this section In addition, it emphasises the naturalness in the speech of a language user

Likewise, Cook (2003, p 36) articulates that the essence of CLT is a shift of attention

from the language system as end in itself to the successful use of that system in context, or, to put it another way, an emphasis from on form to on communication As such, in language pedagogy, language is best handled all at once, as it would be in the real world, as this is students’ ultimate goal Accordingly, he states:

Language-learning success is to be assessed neither in terms of accurate grammar and pronunciation, nor in terms of explicit knowledge of the rules,

but by the ability to do things with the language, appropriately, fluently, and effectively Consequently, communicative pedagogy shifted its attention from the teaching and practice of grammar and pronunciation rules and learning of vocabulary lists to communication activities (p 37)

In comparison with each other, Bachman and Cook make similar contributions to CLT The knowledge of a linguistic system or linguistic competence should be relevant to a communicative context This is required to reach a considerable result Whereas the former draws attention to the three features of a communicative act – form, function, and social appropriacy – the latter only talks about communication as

a purpose of language teaching generally

In this method, the goal of language acquisition is communicative competence: the ability to use the language correctly and appropriately to accomplish communication goals According to Canale and Swain (1980, para 4), communicative competence is made up of four components: grammatical competence, discourse competence, sociolinguistic competence, and strategic competence Of the four, discourse

competence consists of cohesion, coherence, and organisation

A piece of effective writing, first, requires cohesion According to Wikipedia (2010,

para 1), cohesion is the grammaticaland lexical relationship within a text or sentence Cohesion can be defined as the links that hold a text together and give its meaning It

is the broader concept of coherence

This definition shows that teachers have to instruct their students how to link grammar and vocabulary within a text or sentence to produce a meaningful whole

Coherence is the second requirement to perform a piece of good writing Daniel

(1995, para 1) stated:

Coherence is product of many different factors, which combine to make every paragraph, every sentence, and every phrase contribute to the meaning of the whole piece Coherence in writing is much more difficult to sustain than

coherent speech simply because writers have no nonverbal clues to inform them if their message is clear or not Therefore, writers must make their patterns of coherence much more explicit and much more carefully planned This author implies that teachers must help their students understand what coherence

in writing is and recognise that coherence in writing is much more difficult than that

in speech due to the lack of nonverbal clues Therefore, they have to teach them how

to make their thoughts clearer in writing

The last requirement is idea organisation which supports readers in understanding

what has been written without its writer’s further clarification and/or illustration Vygotsky (1962, p 98) suggested that effectively written communication requires the transformation of the idiomatic structure of “inner speech”, which is the language of self-direction and intrapersonal communication, into “syntactically and semantically elaborated form”

What this psychologist implies is that teachers have to help their students with the intellectual organisation and the expression of ideas on the ground of language knowledge to make their writing performance well-organised

One of the techniques that a teacher can employ in this method is unscrambling sentences A passage or a text is given to students In this passage or text, the sentences are put in a scrambled order They are asked to unscramble these sentences This exercise is normally given to reinforce cohesion and coherence at the above sentence level, as articulated by Larsen-Freeman (2000):

This type of exercise teaches students about the cohesion and coherence properties of language They learn how sentences are bound together at the suprasentential level through formal linguistic devices such as pronouns, which make a text cohesive, and semantic propositions, which unify a text and make

it coherent (p 133)

Briefly, the CLT method is completely different from the first three methods In CLT, grammar is taught both at the sentential level and at the suprasentential level As discourse is dealt with, special attention is paid to the latter, namely cohesion, coherence, and organisation This brings about a breakthrough in the teaching of contextualised grammar

2.3.3 Summary of the methods of teaching grammar

All the four methods above can be wrapped up in the summary table, Table 2.3.3

A Sentential level grammar: Form

1 Grammar-translation method - Grammar: Elaborate explanation of deductive grammar

- Writing: Composition, precis (of the reading passage), the writing of the answers to comprehension questions

2 Direct method - Grammar: Inductive instruction of grammar

- Writing: Paragraph writing based on memory or the reading passage in the lesson as a model

3 Audio-lingual method - Grammar: Inductive grammar instruction in the target

language

- Writing: The last skill to be developed; the natural order

of acquisition: Listening  Speaking  Reading  Writing (Speaking and listening preceded reading and writing competence)

B Suprasentential level grammar:

Function

4 Communicative language teaching - Grammar: Instruction of contextualised grammar for

communication: cohesion, coherence, and organisation

- Writing: Contextualised

Table 2.3.3: Summary of methods of grammar and writing teaching (adapted from

Larsen-Freeman, 2000)

2.4 Implications for grammar teaching and learning

Based on the two sections of 2.2 and 2.3, this one presents the pedagogical practices which can be carried out in the two corresponding views as follows

2.4.1 Developing students’ comprehension about grammar in writing

The details of this sub-section can be seen at the two contradictory paradigms: sentential and suprasentential

2.4.1.1 At the sentential level: Focus on accuracy

Students’ understanding about grammar at this level is on the ground of accuracy

They are to practise the grammatical points to make unrelated sentences whose forms can be acceptable in language The more they drill the points, the better they can produce exact sentences in isolation on their own Their teachers help them correct their own mistakes made during the writing Simultaneously, they give them the full explanation about the mistakes so that they can understand them better and avoid them in the next writing

Paying attention to the accuracy of grammar, DeCarrico and Larsen-Freeman (2002,

p 28) pointed out that grammar learning was thought to take place through a process

of verbal “habit information” and of inductive “rule formation” First, students were helped with the habits of the second language through the variety of the pattern practice Then, they were supported in correcting their mistakes to prevent the formation of their bad habits which were difficult to eradicate Finally, through formulating, testing, reviewing, and practising the grammatical structures, they caught the rule formation, received the feedback, and produced new sentences Clearly, this way of teaching is strictly based on the ALM

At the sentential level, to get used to the structures of the isolated sentences of the target language, students are usually asked to do the grammatical exercises For

example, some types of the grammatical practices of accuracy introduced by Ur

(1996, p 84) can be used to achieve this:

Types of grammatical practices of accuracy

Awareness: After being introduced structures, students are given opportunities

to encounter them and do a task focusing on the form and/or meaning

Controlled drills: Students produce the examples of the structures The

examples are predetermined by the teacher/textbooks and have to conform to clear, closed-ended cues

Meaningful drills: Again the responses are very controlled, but students make a

limited choice of vocabulary

2.4.1.2 At the suprasentential level: Focus on fluency (text)

The ground of fluency is employed to develop students’ comprehension at this

paradigm In reality, when learning how to write a language, students at the beginning level are always asked to write disconnected sentences However, when reaching the intermediate or advanced level, first, they are required to write well-organised and connected sentences Next, they are asked to make paragraphs, essays, compositions, and texts optionally or obligatorily

The research by Byrne (1988, p 25) indicated that at this level students continued from sentence practice to the production of a text It was the text that provided them with a setting within which they could practise, for example, sentence completion,

sentence combination (cohesion), paragraph construction (organisation), and

coherence This led them to the achievement of writing in a language

To get success in the grammatical practices at the suprasentential level, students are

usually required to do the following types of exercises of fluency These exercises

were also suggested by Ur (1996, p 85):

Types of grammatical practices of fluency

Guided, meaningful practice: Students form sentences of their own according

to a set of patterns but exactly what vocabulary they use is up to them

(Structure-based) free sentence composition: Learners are provided with a

visual or situational cue, and invited to compose their own responses; they are directed to use the structure

(Structure-based) discourse composition: Learners hold a discussion or write a

passage according to a given task; they are directed to use at least some examples of the structure within a discourse

Free discourse: Students are given no specific direction to use the structure;

however, the task situation is such that instances of it are likely to appear

2.4.2 Developing students’ communication about grammar in writing

The practice to grow students’ comprehension about writing-based grammar requires communication The details are seen in the three sub-sections below

2.4.2.1 Communicative purpose

In studying grammar at the suprasentential level, Harmer (1991, p 46) revealed that

students needed to drill the communicative purpose: Writing about things which they

wanted to happen as a result of what they wrote Thus they would select the grammatical items of language which were appropriate for this purpose

2.4.2.2 Communicative context-writer

Texts can be seen as the means by which writer students perform an action on reader students Byrne (1988, p 27) unveiled that the writers had to know that they were communicating in a written situation They were to see which readers they were addressing so that they could do the effective pieces of writing As such, they must know how to use written language to keep contact with their readers and get the feedback of the information from the readers

2.4.2.3 Communicative context-reader

In writing, the communicative context-writer and the communicative context-reader

are not separated from each other With his interest in the latter, Johns (1990, p 50)

stated that a writer had to know the interaction between a writer and a reader so that he/she could give his/her reader a good piece of writing This piece was evaluated against whether it was coherent, cohesive, and well-organised through this reader’s comprehension

To wrap up, writing should always be done in its socio-cultural context, in which such components as purpose, writer, and reader are to be taken into full account

2.5 Summary

This chapter has briefly reviewed the theoretical background about grammar in writing Grammar is taught and practised at the two contradictory levels At the sentential level, grammar brings students disconnected sentences which are grammatical and partly meaningful On the contrary, with the knowledge of suprasentential level grammar, students are able to create paragraphs, essays, compositions, and texts which are cohesive, coherent, and well-organised It is grammar at the second level that helps students understand the use of language

The grammatical lessons and practices should be given to students according to their levels Teachers let their students have a chance of learning and drilling grammar in writing Generally, the grammatical activities are to be designed so that the students can practise language purposefully To do this, they need to practise grammar especially at the suprasentential paradigm so regularly that such writing is no longer a problem for them when putting a pen on a sheet of paper

CHAPTER 3 DESIGN AND METHOD OF INVESTIGATION

3.1 Introduction

Chapter 2 has explored the nature of language as an autonomous system and as a social phenomenon in general and one of its levels – grammar – in particular according to these two paradigms These views about the nature of language and, in our case, grammar, one of its levels, should be taken into consideration in teaching and learning In the light of this theoretical framework, this chapter sets up the research design in terms of research site, participants, data types and methods of data collection, and analytical framework to find out the information to answer to the

research questions about the way teachers and students think, feel, and behave in

relation to grammar in a writing-based lesson

3.2 Research design

To Kumar (1996, p 74), a research design is a procedural plan that is adopted by the researcher to answer questions validly, objectively, and economically To do this, one has to take into account such issues as what to study, how to conduct the study, what procedures to adopt so as to obtain answers to the research questions, and how to carry out the tasks needed to complete the different components of the process

As the task of identifying the study problem, or what to study, has been completed in

Chapter 1, this chapter deals specifically with the consideration and the justification

of two other components, i.e the overall methodology – how to study – and the method of investigation – what procedures to adopt to obtain answers to research

questions

3.2.1 Overall approach: Ethnography

In this study, the overall approach adopted is ethnography Therefore, it is necessary

to examine what it is and why it can be employed to find out the information to

answer the main research question and its sub-questions about the role of grammar in

a writing-based lesson

An ethnographic study was defined in 1985 by Richards, Platt, J., and Platt, H as

… the study of the life and culture of a society or ethnic group, especially by personal observation The related field of ethnology studies the comparison of the cultures of different societies or ethnic groups In studies of language learning or in description of how a language is used, the term of ethnographic research is sometimes used to refer to the observation and description of naturally occurring language (e.g between mother and child, teacher and students, etc.) (p 129)

It can be drawn out from the block quotation above that this qualitative type of research was originally carried out in the study of ethnic communities in sociology and later applied into the field of education What allows for this transfer lies in the concept of “naturally occurring” phenomena, social and educational alike, via the

employment of participant observation as a main method for data collection In

education specifically, this methodology is normally effective with the research problems that involve language use in settings like a classroom

Exactly one decade later in 1995 Hammersley and Atkinson made further elaboration

on this term by going into detail of the types of participant observation, the researcher’s involvement in terms of time, and the things he or she is supposed to do

in the field to find information that later can address the study:

In recent decades ethnography has become a popular approach to social research, along with other kinds of qualitative work It involves the ethnographer participating, overtly or covertly, in people’s daily lives for an extended period of time, watching what happens, listening to what is said, asking questions – in fact, collecting whatever data are available to throw light

on the issues that are the focus of the research (p 1)