NALA 2013 - What has grammar teaching ever done for us?
Embed Size (px)
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