« Return to Thread: (teach) how helpful is grammar instruction?
Re: (teach) grammar instruction
by karenstanleyma-3
::
Rate this Message:
John wrote:
> If the question you're interested in is whether instruction improves learners' ability to use 'explicit declarative knowledge under controlled conditions' (N&O, p. 486), then N&O provide a clear positive answer. If you're interested in how instruction affects practical ability to use the language, the findings point to a very different answer.
>
Instruction is often simply the beginning point. If you accept Richard Schmidt's "noticing hypothesis" that a learner must first notice something about the language (or in this case, grammar) before it can begin to be absorbed into the learner's system and eventually into productive language, then there may be many instances in which instruction forms part of this initial noticing and understanding.
The fact is, if learners can produce a form on a grammar test, then there is a greater possibility of their using it later. It doesn't mean that such learners will be able to IMMEDIATELY use it correctly in all circumstances or even many circumstances where learners' attentional resources are being called on for other more immediate and more pressing tasks.
I believe that practice with a structure after you have learned about it is also CRUCIALLY important for learners.
A small experiment to help students practice with a structure they had learned about was reported in the Asian EFL Journal:
http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/site_map_2007.php
(Select Article 15)
My highly abbreviated summary:
Students were first tested to make sure they had knowledge of clauses expressing unreal conditions in the future. (They did not include students unfamiliar with the structure in their research tasks.)
Students were then given explanations of a writing task and example compositions using this structure, followed by the assignment of an appropriate topic (Examples of such topics: What would happen if there were no water? What would happen if you didn't go to college?). They were asked to include 5 unreal future clauses in their own compositions. Following the initial composition writing, different groups were given different treatments. Then, three weeks later, they were asked to write on another topic (again using five such clauses).
Students who had had their errors underlined in the initial composition and had then been asked to revise their compositions were the most successful in using those types of sentences/clauses the second time around.
Obviously, this is simply one small attempt to have students take grammar that they know and practice using it to communicate meaningful information. Is it perfect? Of course not. However, it does take students who already know the structure and help them put it to use.
Practicing what you know theoretically is an important element in almost everything we learn. When I learned to type, I was given information about where the letters were on the keyboard and where to place my fingers on the keys for the maximum effect. I understood it very well, but I certainly couldn't have turned around after one careful guided practice session in a class and been able to touch type quickly and accurately.
Subsequent to typing instruction, I had to practice for an extended period before I got to the point that I could touch type. At that early point, I could have typed more quickly using just 2 fingers and being able to look at the keys. However, while people who do NOT get that type of instruction and practice may be eventually able to type reasonably quickly using (most often) two fingers and with a need to look at they keys, they rarely (if ever) can type as quickly with the same degree of accuracy that I can now.
Again, you can't expect instruction to do EVERYTHING. But you can look at grammar instruction as a helpful tool in allowing students to acquire certain forms more quickly, and to eventually use them with a higher degree of accuracy.
Karen
> If the question you're interested in is whether instruction improves learners' ability to use 'explicit declarative knowledge under controlled conditions' (N&O, p. 486), then N&O provide a clear positive answer. If you're interested in how instruction affects practical ability to use the language, the findings point to a very different answer.
>
Instruction is often simply the beginning point. If you accept Richard Schmidt's "noticing hypothesis" that a learner must first notice something about the language (or in this case, grammar) before it can begin to be absorbed into the learner's system and eventually into productive language, then there may be many instances in which instruction forms part of this initial noticing and understanding.
The fact is, if learners can produce a form on a grammar test, then there is a greater possibility of their using it later. It doesn't mean that such learners will be able to IMMEDIATELY use it correctly in all circumstances or even many circumstances where learners' attentional resources are being called on for other more immediate and more pressing tasks.
I believe that practice with a structure after you have learned about it is also CRUCIALLY important for learners.
A small experiment to help students practice with a structure they had learned about was reported in the Asian EFL Journal:
http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/site_map_2007.php
(Select Article 15)
My highly abbreviated summary:
Students were first tested to make sure they had knowledge of clauses expressing unreal conditions in the future. (They did not include students unfamiliar with the structure in their research tasks.)
Students were then given explanations of a writing task and example compositions using this structure, followed by the assignment of an appropriate topic (Examples of such topics: What would happen if there were no water? What would happen if you didn't go to college?). They were asked to include 5 unreal future clauses in their own compositions. Following the initial composition writing, different groups were given different treatments. Then, three weeks later, they were asked to write on another topic (again using five such clauses).
Students who had had their errors underlined in the initial composition and had then been asked to revise their compositions were the most successful in using those types of sentences/clauses the second time around.
Obviously, this is simply one small attempt to have students take grammar that they know and practice using it to communicate meaningful information. Is it perfect? Of course not. However, it does take students who already know the structure and help them put it to use.
Practicing what you know theoretically is an important element in almost everything we learn. When I learned to type, I was given information about where the letters were on the keyboard and where to place my fingers on the keys for the maximum effect. I understood it very well, but I certainly couldn't have turned around after one careful guided practice session in a class and been able to touch type quickly and accurately.
Subsequent to typing instruction, I had to practice for an extended period before I got to the point that I could touch type. At that early point, I could have typed more quickly using just 2 fingers and being able to look at the keys. However, while people who do NOT get that type of instruction and practice may be eventually able to type reasonably quickly using (most often) two fingers and with a need to look at they keys, they rarely (if ever) can type as quickly with the same degree of accuracy that I can now.
Again, you can't expect instruction to do EVERYTHING. But you can look at grammar instruction as a helpful tool in allowing students to acquire certain forms more quickly, and to eventually use them with a higher degree of accuracy.
Karen
« Return to Thread: (teach) how helpful is grammar instruction?
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
