NALA 2013 - What has grammar teaching ever done for us?

download NALA 2013 - What has grammar teaching ever done for us?

of 52

  • date post

    28-Nov-2014
  • Category

    Technology

  • view

    705
  • download

    0

Embed Size (px)

description

 

Transcript of NALA 2013 - What has grammar teaching ever done for us?

  • 1. Jo Gakonga
  • 2. What has grammar teaching ever done for us?
  • 3. Why does teaching grammar get a bad press?
  • 4. Illustrations from Jan, J.M. & Olla, R. (1950) El Ingls Prctico; Comercio, Exmenes y Viajes, Buenos Aires: Academias Pitman.
  • 5. Do we need to teach grammar at all?
  • 6. Catherine Walter IATEFL Plenary 2011 Should we be planning to teach grammar? http://iatefl.britishcouncil.org/2011/sites/iatefl/files/session /documents/walter_grammar_iatefl2011_handout.pdf
  • 7. Do we need to teach anything?
  • 8. Krashen's Input Hypothesis (1977)
  • 9. "Language acquisition does not require extensive use of conscious grammatical rules Stephen Krashen
  • 10. "Acquisition requires meaningful interaction in the target language in which speakers are concerned not with the form of their utterances but with the messages they are conveying and understanding."
  • 11. "The best methods are therefore those that supply 'comprehensible input' containing messages that students really want to hear.
  • 12. "The best methods are therefore those that supply 'comprehensible input' containing messages that students really want to hear. i+1
  • 13. Monitor theory
  • 14. Introduced in 1965 to give English speaking Canadian children a chance to learn French
  • 15. Practice" is replaced by "creative construction. Learners encouraged to experiment with linguistic forms.
  • 16. Errors are not seen as bad
  • 17. Canadian immersion studies (Swain 1985; Genesee 1987).
  • 18. The result?
  • 19. Immersion students often perform as well as native French-speaking students on tests of reading and listening comprehension in French.
  • 20. However, they seldom achieve the same high levels of competence in speaking and writing as they achieve in comprehension.
  • 21. Three problems: Grammar is less complex and less redundant than that of native speakers. Their grammar is influenced by English grammar. Their use of language is often non-idiomatic
  • 22. BUT..
  • 23. Of significance for ESOL learners
  • 24. Common ground
  • 25. Significant amounts of exposure A real need to communicate (Paucity of opportunity to speak?) Common ground
  • 26. So, explicit teaching is necessary.
  • 27. Should we forget grammar and only teach vocabulary? Vocabulary is arguably more important
  • 28. Should we forget grammar and only teach vocabulary? Michael Hoey Lexical Priming
  • 29. Should we forget grammar and only teach vocabulary? Lexical Approach Michael Lewis
  • 30. Should we forget grammar and only teach vocabulary? ..but do they get enough exposure?
  • 31. Evidence to support grammar teaching?
  • 32. meta-analysis Norris and Ortega (2000)
  • 33. meta-analysis Gass and Selinker (2008)
  • 34. meta-analysis Spada and Tomita (2010)
  • 35. Other reasons to teach grammar?
  • 36. Conscious knowledge of grammar is seen to help at Ellis 1994 different stages.
  • 37. Pretty much all course books based on it
  • 38. Learners expectations
  • 39. Seen as very traditional but
  • 40. Different / less traditional approaches all include grammar
  • 41. Task Based Learning Jane and Dave Willis
  • 42. Learners do task and rehearse their language to present to group Learners present what they have practised Teacher gives input on the gap.
  • 43. Task Based Learning Language Output input
  • 44. Proponents of task-based teaching all argue for a place for pre-planned grammar instruction in a TBI framework. Skehan, 2003; Willis & Willis, 2007; Ellis, 2006
  • 45