ELE 129 (WEEK 1-2)

Key Terms and Concepts in Managing and Implementing

Standards-based Grammar Teaching

Learning Objectives:
At the end of these weeks, the preservice teacher (PST) should be able to:
A. Discuss the fundamental terms and concepts associated to the teaching and
assessing of grammar; and
B. Share the implications of one’s knowledge of key concepts in the teaching
learning process.

Grammar
Grammar is a lot conceived as language component even language
competence. But for this article, the term grammaring coined by Larsen-Freeman
(2001) as a process of doing grammar which she defines as the ability to use
grammar structures accurately, meaningfully and appropriately.
Diane Larsen-Freeman coined the term Grammaring, which is described as, 'the
ability to use grammar. constructions accurately, meaningfully, and
appropriately. ' (Larsen-Freeman, 2014, p. 264).
Grammar is more than just FORM. There should be MEANING in what we form so
we can use it appropriately in the right context to help us get the message
across.
As future English teachers, you need to remember these concepts on Gramar:
FORM, MEANING, AND USE.
Grammaring
Various authors have attempted to define the term “grammaring” differently.
Larsen-Freeman says “grammaring” can be seen as a “fifth skill.” Her definition of
the word is as follows: “the ability to use grammar structures accurately,
meaningfully, and appropriately” (ibid., p. 143). Although it was Larsen-Freeman
who first used the term in her book, From Grammar to Grammaring, this term has
gained several definitions in its subsequent use. According to Richards and
Schmidt (2002):
Grammaring is sometimes used to refer to the process by which language learners
use grammar to create messages through grammaticalizing or adding grammar
to a sequence of words to create finer meaning distinctions. The linguist Diane
Larsen-Freeman proposed grammaring as an important process in second
language acquisition. Grammaring emphasizes grammar as a dynamic process
rather than a system of rules (p. 552).
According to the definition stated above, grammar is no longer conceived as a
description of language or native speaker’s competence. Thus, a paradigm shift
arose about the teaching and learning of grammar. The purpose behind
teaching grammar is no longer the transmission of knowledge. Rather, teaching
grammar is now performed to enable students to use grammatical structures
accurately, meaningfully, and appropriately. In this respect, Larsen-Freeman
(2001) further states that “grammar teaching is not so much knowledge
transmission as it is skill development” (p. 255). Thus, different activities have
started to focus on developing such a skill.
Practical Activities for “Grammaring”
The practical activities that are used in “grammaring” fall into three categories as
specified by Freeman’s definition of the term. Given that language should be
used accurately, meaningfully, and appropriately, emphasis is laid upon form,
meaning, and use. For example, in teaching phrasal verbs, the form is presented
first. What should be explained is that a phrasal verb consists of a verb plus a
particle such as “break up.” However, explaining form alone is not enough for
understanding what the word means. Thus, meaning is a very important
dimension to evade any possible confusion that surrenders the phrasal verb
“break up,” as the latter cannot be guessed from the form only. Again, it is not
enough merely to instruct students how to use “break up” in speaking or writing in
English unless an explicit teaching has been supplied. Thus form, meaning, and
use are equally important for the teaching and learning of grammar. In general,
the practical activities that are used in “grammaring” can be categorized into: a.
form, b. meaning, and c. use.
A - Focus on form:
A distinction is often made between language use and language form. In other
words, there has been a continuous debate over whether to teach students the
language or teach them about the language. For Larsen-Freeman, both
language form and language use are equally important. In this vein, she states:
Teachers who focus students’ attention on linguistic form during communicative
interactions are more effective than those who never focus on form or who only
do so in de-contextulized grammar lessons (Spada and Lightbown 1993; cited in
Larsen-freeman 2002).
Among the activities that focus on language form are language games,
Cuisenaire rods, sentence completion, and sentence unscrambling tasks, among
others. In general, there are three important activities, namely: games, use of rods,
and sentence unscrambling activities.
B -Focus on meaning:
Linking form with meaning can be carried out by the use of different activities. In
fact, meaning should call for some sort of associative learning (cf. Ellis 1998). This
activity gives students the opportunity to associate the form with the meaning of
a particular target structure. For example, it is by associating form and meaning
that a phrasal verb can be understood. Moreover, meaning can also be made
clear by using realia and pictures. By using real-world objects or pictures, the
relationship between word and referent can be made more explicit. For example,
if someone asks you what a cabbage means, and you have a cabbage, you will
tell him this is a cabbage. Mimicry of the appropriate action is another way of
making the meaning of linguistic “signs” more clear.
C -Focus on use:
The right form with the right meaning should be selected for the right context to
ensure successful communication. A practical way of going about sensitizing
students to the effect of context on language is through making use of role
playing. The latter can be described, according to Larsen-Freeman (2001), as
follows:
Role plays work well when dealing with use because the teacher can
systematically manipulate social variables (e.g., increase or decrease the social
distance between interlocutors) to have students practice how changes in the
social variables affect the choice of the form (p. 261).
Role playing can be considered one of the most effective activities for
developing the appropriateness of the linguistic behavior of students due to its
simulation of real-life contexts.
In summary, the field of language teaching and learning has always been
controversial due to the blurriness of the boundaries among its different
components. One example in which controversies arise is the intersection of
“grammaring” with language skills under the umbrella of the so-called
communicative approach to language teaching and learning. Within the latter,
grammar as a skill is taught through form, meaning, and use by following three
main activities, namely rods, realia and role plays.

Prepared:

CATHERINA B. CUNANAN
ELE 129 Instructor
2.1.24
“Grammaring”: The Fifth Skill In Language Teaching and Learning
(Mohamed Benhima June 04, 2015 10:55 a.m.)
Fez - Language teaching and learning has always been a controversial area
within applied linguistics. According to Corder (1973), “what to teach or learn can
be described in linguistic terms as grammar […] or in psychological terms as
language skills” (p. 137). Although grammar refers to what we know about a
language such as phonology, syntax, semantics and pragmatics, language skills
are about what we do with language. This includes listening, speaking, reading,
and writing. Controversies often arise when the boundaries between these two
areas become blurred, as in the case of treating “grammaring” as a language
skill. In this respect, the present article will attempt to explain the background of
the issue surrounding “grammaring,” followed by a tentative definition of the term
and a description of the techniques for its implementation.
The teaching and learning of grammar has always been one of the most hotly
debated topics in the field of language education. The controversy over what,
exactly, grammar is led to the development of different models that attempted
to account for grammar differently. Grammar was considered a method of
language teaching and learning within the so-called Grammar-Translation
Approach. Within this approach, which draws from philology, grammar was
viewed as the core of language. However, with the shift from philology to
linguistics, the notion of grammar has changed accordingly. With the eruption of
modern linguistics, grammar began to be described as a system of structures in
addition to vocabulary and pronunciation.
With the shift from structuralism to transformational generative grammar, the
notion of grammar has been redefined as the system of rules that every native
speaker of a language has acquired. It is in this sense that grammar has moved
from being a set of mechanical structures to being psychological, or rather,
cognitive constructs. What reinforces this last premise is the fact that grammar has
come to be described as a competence. A case in point here is the so-called
grammatical competence constituting only one aspect of our overall
communicative competence in addition to sociolinguistic, strategic, and
discourse competences. A more recent view considers grammar as a skill.
According to Larsen-Freeman (2001), “grammar is to be seen as a skill not as a
competence” (p. 67). That is, when we speak or write, we are always involved in
“doing” grammar, whether consciously or unconsciously. Hence, this process of
doing grammar is termed “grammaring.”
Grammaticalizing
In the process of grammaticalization, an uninflected lexical word (or content
word) is transformed into a grammar word (or function word). The process by
which the word leaves its word class and enters another is not sudden, but occurs
by a gradual series of individual shifts.
Grammaticalization is the continuous, gradual, historical process through which
languages generate grammatical material like affixes, articles, pronouns, and
prepositions.
Grammaticalization refers to the process by which lexical items come to take on
grammatical functions such as marking of tense, aspect, grammatical relations,
definiteness, modality, etc. From: International Encyclopedia of the Social &
Behavioral Sciences, 2001.
Error Correction vs. Feedback
Feedback and correction are both important aspects of teaching, but they serve
different purposes. Feedback is guidance, corrections are for when the response
was flawed or wrong, and proceeding on that, the student would not be able to
succeed. The feedback is an important element in classroom teaching.
You don't have to praise every error, but be aware of how you are responding to
them. Try to use positive language. Rather than saying, “This is wrong” try saying
“This isn't quite right” or “There's a better way to say this.” Rather than saying “I see
a problem in this sentence” try saying “Very good!
What is error correction in teaching?
The goal of error correction is that learners understand and grasp the target
language of a lesson, develop their language skills, and build up their
confidence and interest in language learning through our efforts.
Why is feedback and error correction important?
Providing feedback and correcting errors to learners on their performance is an
important aspect of teaching. In the traditional educational environment the
errors made by the students are frequently corrected and given feedback
because the focus of classroom instruction is on accuracy.
What are the importance and advantages of error corrections and feedback in
grammar teaching?
Feedback has a crucial role in learners' awareness of their errors and
performance. However, immediate feedback or correction should be avoided
so that the learner has the time to think on his/her error and to maintain the flow
of communication. So, feedback should be given after the learner's
performance.
5 Ways to take feedback and correct mistakes
TOM GARSIDE 28TH JULY 2016

Post-task feedback is the stage of an ESOL class where much of the real learning
happens; it is during feedback that students reflect on their ideas, correct their
mistakes and apply the language that we teach in a restricted, experimental and
discursive setting. However, feedback stages are all too often focused on the
product of the task (the correct answers) rather than the process of how these
answers were reached. This restricts student production of language to single
words, or (in the case of many multiple-choice tasks), individual letters. This goes
against the interactional goals of communicative language teaching, and is
restrictive rather being used to generate ideas and possible ways of
communicating an idea. Here are some ideas to make student language more
critical, informed and productive during feedback and error correction stages:

1) Call on students by name and encourage peer commentary

A simple way to make post-task feedback efficient is to ensure that you call on
individual students by name when you want to hear their answer. This prevents
more confident students taking over and makes student responses more focused
and thoughtful. Remember, if you call on a particular student and they are slow
to answer, don’t let others interrupt. Keep your focus on them and let them think
before answering. If they don’t know, they need to be comfortable with telling
you that they need help. That’s OK. Keep an eye on who is doing well in the tasks
that you set by monitoring carefully: try standing back from your students and
watching who is working and how they are tackling the task. Then choose weaker
students to answer easier questions, and pass trickier details on to the stronger
students to provide a challenge.

Calling on students by name also enables more peer comment on answers which
are given in feedback. Before ‘rubber-stamping’ a student response as correct,
ask other individuals if they agree with the given answer or if they can add
anything to the first idea. It is important for students to discuss their responses and
come up with a best response to a question that they have been working on
rather than just focusing on a single idea that they think is correct. Try using some
of these questions when next doing feedback:
‘Do you agree with that?’
‘Did you hear any other information to add to that?’
‘Is there another way we could answer that question?’
2) Let the students take control of feedback
Rather than acting as the sounding board for students’ ideas, why not hand over
control of the feedback process to the class, allowing you to step back and
monitor answers as they come? Start the feedback stage by asking one student
for their answer to a question and then let that student choose someone else to
answer the next one, playing the part of the teacher for that part of feedback.
Guide the interaction between students so that they develop each other’s ideas
through student-controlled interaction (with your guidance where necessary,
obviously). If this becomes a regular routine in your classroom, students will know
to expect more independent discussion and will look less to you for the ‘correct
answers’, gaining the confidence to put forward their ideas in a more informed
way.
3) Ask for justification
Instead of simply looking for a single, correct answer to the questions students
have worked on, focus them on the process by which they found the answer that
they have. This raises the level of cognitive work that students apply to tasks and
leads to a more generative, process-oriented approach to the work you ask them
to do. Students are more likely to respond using full sentences if they know you will
push them for justification and comment on their ideas.
You could do this by asking students questions to make them link their answers to
keywords in a reading or listening text, and encourage them to reflect on their
choice of language in speaking or writing tasks:
‘Why did you put that idea for question 3?’
‘How did you get that answer?’
4) Prompt for task answers
Do you ever ask your students ‘what’s the answer to number one’, ‘what about
number two’? This can get repetitive, and may not explore the language and
ideas that students work with in the tasks you set. Try using different prompts for
student responses; writing key words next to question numbers on the whiteboard
can help students to identify where the correct answer is, in preparation to discuss
the relationship between that word and an appropriate feedback response. This
requires students to make the links between key words and the ideas that they
have been thinking about during the task, again, raising the cognitive level of
their work and engaging them more in the process of getting to appropriate
answers rather than just getting things right and moving on.
5) Make feedback competitive
After performing review, consolidation tasks, or where all the students in the class
are strong in a particular area of the activity you plan, you could try splitting the
class into groups of three or four and lead feedback as a competition. Assign a
‘buzzer’ noise to each group (animal noises or sound word, like ding ding / bang
bang… work well). Frame your teacher prompts as full questions rather than
question numbers (‘how did Sally say that she felt about the holiday’ rather than
‘what’s the answer to number 2?’) and have students call out their buzzer noise
before answering. Only accept answers from students who made the buzzer noise
before answering, and assign points accordingly. This is a little slower than the
standard feedback stage, but a lot more fun, and the introduction of a buzzer
noise before responding works as a confidence booster, as they have to interrupt
with speed and assertiveness in order to give their answer and be eligible for
points.
Overall, always bear in mind the purpose of feedback stages: to generate target
forms, to explore how and why students found the answers to the task that they
did (not just to focus on what the correct answer is), and to give an opportunity
for you to guide and correct them in their suggestions. These purposes are simply
not addressed if the only interaction during feedback is a list of numbers, letters
and single-word answers from the students.