Diana Boland Rebekah Gerard Philip Dixon May 2013.

Context Based Grammar Instruction vs.

Traditional Grammar Instruction:

Application of Grammar Concepts in Writing and Attitude towards Learning

Grammar Diana BolandRebekah Gerard

Philip DixonMay 2013

Research Question

What are the effects of intervention strategies using grammar in context on student attitudes and performance?

Introduction

Hypothesis

When students receive grammar in context instruction, writing scores on the IB rubric’s language criteria section will improve, and as a result of understanding how to apply their grammar lessons in their writing, student attitudes about grammar and writing will also improve.

Our students are not applying grammar concepts in their written work.

Our students, whether in 8th, 9th, or 12th grade, are making the same consistent errors in their writing despite traditional grammar instruction.

Why is this Important?

If students were better able to integrate their grammar learning into their writing, teachers would be able to better execute vertical instruction.

When students are able to proficiently apply English grammar concepts to their writing, they are better able to illustrate deeper level critical thinking and analysis.

Why is this Important?

Ganjabi, Mahyar. (2011). Grammar instruction and error correction: a matter of Iranian students’ beliefs. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9, 1285-1308.

In order for students to use grammar successfully in their writing, teachers need to have a deep understanding of how students’ attitudes impact their learning.

Review of Literature

Hadley, Alice Omaggio. (2001). Teaching language in context. Boston: Thomson Higher Education.

A basic assumption underlying cognitive methodology [is] that meaningful learning [is] essential to language acquisition and that conscious knowledge of grammar [is] important.

Students must first find a real purpose to written and oral discourse. Once this is established, learning grammar will not only become important, but purposeful which will break down the mental barriers our students associate with learning grammar mechanics.


Nunan, David. (1998). Teaching grammar in context. ELT Journal. 55/2, 101-109.

Grammar in context is the process of teaching students how to meaningfully use grammar conventions in various forms of discourse.

It is all too frequent that courses and teachers do not make the connection between how the use of proper grammatical form results in clear and successful communication.

Teaching grammar in context works because meaning becomes clear to students. They are able to see a real life application of grammar. It is a tool that facilitates clear discourse.


Weaver, Constance. (1996). Teaching grammar in context. Porthsmouth, NH: Boynton/ Cook Publishers.

Weaver, Constance. (1996). Teaching grammar in the context of writing. The English Journal, 85(7), 15-24.

We found that as early as 1936 the need to teach grammar in context was recognized by the Curriculum Commission of the National Council of Teachers of English

Teaching grammar, in the context of writing works better than teaching grammar as a formal system, if our aim is for students to use grammar more effectively and conventionally in their writing.

Using a cognitive constructivist approach to education, rather than a behaviorist learning theory, creates individualized instruction that motivates learners and responds to student needs

We ultimately referenced to Weaver’s general guidelines for the teaching of grammar. These include strategies such as: engaging students in regular and frequent writing activities, emersion in literature, and teaching relevant grammatical conventions within the context of students’ writing.


The research of Weaver, Nunan, and Hadley confirm that teaching grammar in the context of writing is more effective than the traditional approach to language mechanics. Students who are taught writing and grammar mechanics in context will retain the knowledge longer and be able to more effectively communicate their ideas in written discourse.

Summary

A convenience sample using a static group pre/post test design measured students’ application and proficiency of grammar concepts in writing. The control group and the experimental group are the same.

A post test design was used to assess differences in student attitude under each condition.

Research Design

Using grammar in context grammar instruction to teach grammar instead of traditional text book based grammar instruction in 8th, 9th, and 12th grade English Language Arts. It is a static group design, so students acted as both the control group and the experimental group.

Intervention

171 Colegio Americano de Quito students 49 eighth grade English Language Arts

students X ninth grade English Language Arts

students X twelfth grade English Language Arts

students 15 English Language Arts classes of mixed

abilities

Sample

Traditional Grammar instruction was given and students’ writing was evaluated using the appropriate IB writing rubrics for pre and post tests.

Grammar in context instruction was given and students’ writing was evaluated using the appropriate IB writing rubrics for pre and post tests.

Grammar Attitudes likert scale was given along with both posttests.

Instrumentation and Data Collection

Researcher bias

Instrumentation

Threats to Validity

The two-tailed t test showed no significant change in student attitudes after receiving traditional grammar instruction or grammar in context instruction ( t = 1.6619, df = 170, P = 0.984)

Results: Attitude

Group Traditional Instruction Grammar in Context

Instruction

Mean 31.05 31.71

SD 5.23 5.80

8th, 9th and 12th grade attitude

Grammar Attitudes 8th, 9th, 12th Graders30.6

30.8

31

31.2

31.4

31.6

31.8

TraditionalIn Context

Student Attitude

Group Traditional

Instruction

Grammar in

Context

Instruction

Mean 32.10 31.78

SD 4.62 5.63

Means and Standard Deviations of 8th Grade for Attitude

31.6

31.65

31.7

31.75

31.8

31.85

31.9

31.95

32

32.05

32.1

32.15


8th grade Attitude

Group Traditional

Instruction

Grammar in

Context Instruction

Mean 29.47 30.54

SD 6.11 5.44


28.8

29

29.2

29.4

29.6

29.8

30

30.2

30.4

30.6

30.8


9th grade attitude

Group Traditional

Instruction

Grammar in

Context

Instruction

Mean 31.79 32.94

SD 4.60 6.04


31.2

31.4

31.6

31.8

32

32.2

32.4

32.6

32.8

33

33.2


12th grade attitude

A two-tailed t test result showed a statistically significant difference when comparing student scores after receiving traditional grammar instruction compared to grammar in context instruction (t = 3.0988, df = 170, P = 0.0023).

Results: Traditional Instruction vs. Grammar in Context: 8th, 9th and 12th grade

Group Traditional

Instruction

Grammar in

Context

Instruction

Mean .21 .68

SD 1.05 1.24

Results: 8th, 9th and 12th grade Traditional Instruction vs. Grammar in Context

Traditional Instruction Grammar in Context Instruction0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Combined Change Score

Combined 8th, 9th and 12th grade Change Score

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Pre TestPost Test

Traditional Instruction Grammar in Context Instruction

Pre/Post Test Scores for 8th, 9th, 12th

Group Traditional

Instruction

Grammar in

Context

Instruction

Mean .63 .69

SD 1.24 1.47

Means and Standard Deviations of 8th Group Gains looking at Traditional and Grammar in Context Instruction

Traditional Instruction Grammar in Context Instruction0.6

0.61

0.62

0.63

0.64

0.65

0.66

0.67

0.68

0.69

0.7

Change Score

8th Grade Change Score


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Pre TestPost Test

8th Grade Pre/Post Test Scores

Group Traditional

Instruction

Grammar in

Context

Instruction

Mean .20 .98

SD .80 1.14

Means and Standard Deviations of 9th Group Gains looking at Traditional and Grammar in Context Instruction


0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Change Score


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Pre TestPost Test


Pre/Post Test Scores for 9th grade

Group Traditional

Instruction

Grammar in

Context

Instruction

Mean -0.11 .38

SD 1.00 1.07

Means and Standard Deviations of 12th Grade Performance Scores during Traditional and Grammar in Context Instruction

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Change Score



Control Experimental2.45

2.5

2.55

2.6

2.65

2.7

2.75

2.8

2.85

2.9

2.95

Pre TestPost Test

12th Grade Pre/Post Test Scores

While the impact on student attitudes towards grammar instruction were not impacted in a statistically significant way, the change scores reflected in student work illustrate the effectiveness of grammar in context instruction.

Discussion

We will present a vertical action plan to our English Department based on the philosophy of grammar in context instruction. Our study will provide model lessons, model strategies, and a basis for implementing a secondary wide grammar instruction revolution.

Action

Ganjabi, Mahyar. (2011). Grammar instruction and error correction: a matter of Iranian students’ beliefs. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9, 1285-1308.

Hadley, Alice Omaggio. (2001). Teaching language in context. Boston: Thomson Higher Education.

Nunan, David. (1998). Teaching grammar in context. ELT Journal. 55/2,

101-109.

Weaver, Constance. (1996). Teaching grammar in context. Porthsmouth, NH: Boynton/ Cook Publishers.

Weaver, Constance. (1996). Teaching grammar in the context of

writing. The English Journal, 85(7), 15-24.

References

Diana Boland Rebekah Gerard Philip Dixon May 2013.

Documents

Transcript of Diana Boland Rebekah Gerard Philip Dixon May 2013.