assignment - critical review

8/11/2019 Assignment - Critical Review

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/assignment-critical-review 1/12

INTRODUCTION

The English language plays a very important role in the National Curriculum. Great demands

are made of teachers to teach complex linguistic and grammatical concepts, as laid down in

the NC.

Most English teachers have received limited linguistic training at teacher training college.

Hudson and Walmsley (2005: 616) write:

Most younger teachers know very little grammar and are suspicious of explicit grammar

teaching. Not surprisingly, therefore, new recruits entering teacher-training courses typically

either know very little grammar (Williamson & Hardman 1995) or have no confidence in their

knowledge, presumably because they have picked it up in an unsystematic way (Cajkler &

Hislam 2002). This situation raises obvious problems for the implementation of the official

programme.

Teachers also have a very limited period of time to plan and organise lessons, mark

assessments, and so forth.

Pupils at schools also have difficulties with learning complex grammatical concepts.

Typically invented examples are used in the tradition of grammar teaching. These examples

are often simple but unrealistic. They find these difficult to relate to real linguistic settings and

almost impossible to apply to their own language production.

To address these problems we propose to create an English language teaching and learning

platform based on our existing research. The platform would be specifically designed for

teachers and students at secondary schools and delivered over the internet.



SUMMARY OF ARTICLE

I‟ve been reading an article written by Urszula Clark in 2009: Grammar in the Curriculum

for English: what next?

In it she surveys the attempts over the last fifty years to bring explicit teaching about

language into the English curriculum and outlines the kind of syllabus that such teaching

could follow.

These are some of the points she makes:

(1) There is no evidence that teaching grammar per se has any effect on pupils‟

command of formal written English. Teaching about language must be integrated with

subject teaching in order to be effective.

(2) Systemic linguistics as a means of describing the structure of the English language

has underpinned attempts in this country and Australia to bring language study into

the classroom. Although it is excellent for description, it is highly technical and laden

with unfamiliar words. To help classroom teachers get to grips with this powerful tool,

a pedagogic grammar is needed.

(3) Teachers (of reading, for example) are aware of the need to teach at the level of the

word, but are less competent in the equally important structures at the levels of the

sentence and discourse.

(4) There is little, if any, explicit teaching of the difference between narrative texts that

children learn to read and write with and the non-narrative structures of all school

subjects.



DISCUSSION

It is now twenty-one years since the Wigan Language Project, which taught Breakthrough

to Learning systematically, produced its results (doubling the percentage of pupils gaining

good GCSE‟s across the curriculum). Clark‟s article (though not written for that purpose)

gives theoretical reasons why it was so effective:

(1) The technical teaching about language at every level was integrated with the

language of subjects across the curriculum. For instance, being made aware of

nouns is not an empty exercise but shows us how human beings think: one cannot

begin to study anything without first naming the parts of a structure.

(2) The descriptive basis of BTL is systemic linguistics. However, in teaching a first

version of word-classes (parts of speech) I use the traditional terms (noun, verb etc.)

and keep it simple. The Fast track of BTL or, better still, the self-access course

Knowledge on Language would enable teachers to gain an understanding of the

complexities of language without overwhelming them.

Even better, as a first step, is the interactive online course for post 16 students

Language of Ideas, which teaches the structure of language by familiarity, without

using any metalanguage. This would empower teachers to become aware of the

special abstract language of their own subjects.

Clark‟s article explains in her own terms why BTL produced its amazing results. Nothing to

do with frightening people with tests or reviving ancient dogmas about “grammar”, but the

result of applying linguistic science to language across the school curriculum.



STRATEGIES TO MOTIVATE STUDENTS IN CLASSROOM

1) Pair work or group work

One of the successful ways, if the teacher is resourceful and skilful enough, to motivate

his/her students to participate in the lesson is to use “pair work” or “group work”

appropriately. Language is best learned through the close collaboration and communication

among students. This type of collaboration results in benefits for all or both learners. In fact,

learners can help each other while working on different types of tasks such as writing

dialogues, interviews, drawing pictures and making comments about them, play roles, etc.

Researches on Second Language Acquisition have shown that learners have differences in

mastering skills. While one student is good in drawing, another can be good in expressing

ideas verbally; a third other student can be good at role play and imitation. Besides, some

students find it less stressful, if not much comfortable to learn certain rules or usages of

language from their pears and comrades than from their teacher. Finally, communicative

language teaching requires a sense of community and an environment of trust and mutual

confidence which “pair work” or “group work” can provide.

2) The seating of the students

The way the students are seated in the classroom will often determine the dynamics of the

lesson. Indeed, a simple change in the seating pattern can make an incredible difference to

group coherence and student satisfaction, and I‟ve seen many other cases where seating

has been a crucial element in the success or failure of the lesson. The seating pattern you

use may, in some cases, not be fully under your control – if for example the desks are fixed

to the ground or the school has strict rules about not moving the furniture. Student numbers

are also going to be an issue.

I‟ll talk about average size classes – anything from 6 to 25. Teachers have different

preferences for seating arrangements – groups seated round small tables is often one

choice. This is probably the best option for the larger classes in this range, but for smaller

numbers and with adult or teenage students I think the horseshoe shape, which I find has all

of the advantages of groups, and none of the disadvantages. A horseshoe may be desks in

a U-shape with a hollow centre, students in a semicircle on chairs with arm-rests and no

desks, or students seated around three sides of a large table, with the teacher at one end.



4) Role play

This is another technique to vary the pace the lesson and to respond to the fundamental

notion of variety in teaching. Teachers are advised to use the role- play activity in order to

motivate their students and to help the less motivated learners take part in the lesson.

Besides, certain tasks in the student‟s book are followed by a role- play activity where it

becomes a necessity to undergo such an activity. As good examples of that we can state:

the hide (item) and guessing game, dramatizing an interview of customer and shop

assistant, doctor and patient conversation, etc.

5) Using realia, flash cards, Stories and songs in teaching

Realia and flash cards are considered as important tools in teaching especially a foreign

language, since they play the role of a facilitator in teaching new vocabularies such as fruits,

vegetables, clothes items, etc. Besides, they are very helpful in drawing especially

beginners‟ attention to follow and match new words to items. In addition, realia is an

authentic material that helps the teacher to overcome classroom artificiality. Creating stories

with the students is another way of developing speaking and writing skills. Actually, creating

stories is grounded in the students‟ ability to create a story from their personal experience. In

creating stories some issues are revealed such as: a) fluency, b) whether the students have

enough language to create the story, and c) accuracy.

Teachers are able to demonstrate techniques of using songs in different ways to teach

grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation and community building because the students like

songs and they motivate the students to learn the English language in an interesting way.

Teachers can elicit students‟ ideas about the song through activities such as prediction, mind

maps, word splashes, etc. Students discuss questions such as the feelings in the song, whatwill happen next, etc. and write their responses in an interesting manner. Students may write

and present how the song makes them feel and then draw a picture of their feelings while

listening to the song. Teachers respond to this presentation and ask questions. Then,

feedback is provided from the group.



6) Using audio visual material: cassette player, video, computer, etc.

Since our schools are equipped with various audio visual materials such as cassette

recorders, videos, computers, projectors, magic boards and many others, teachers should

use these materials when teaching. Indeed, they should include the appropriate material to

use while planning their lessons. For instance, we should include a cassette player in a

lesson based on listening, while we need to include a computer in any e-lesson or a lesson

about designing a website or an internet page about your school. Whereas, we can use an

overhead projector in presenting writing drafts for classroom correction or to read.

7) Using the L1 in the ESL classroom

Should we or shouldn‟t we use the students‟ first language (L1) in the classroom? This is one

of the questions which most divides ESL teachers, whether they are for it or against it. The

main argument against the use of the L1 in language teaching is that students will become

dependent on it, and not even try to understand meaning from context and explanation, or

express what they want to say within their limited command of the target language (L2). But

there are other, historical reasons why the use of the students‟ mother tongue went out of

favour. Initially it was part of a reaction against the Grammar-Translation method, which had

dominated late 19th and early 20th century teaching, and which saw language learning as a

means towards intellectual development rather than as being for utilitarian, communicative

purposes.

We can say that there are a few cases when we can resort to the student‟s mother tongue

such as- When there is a gap of communication or total misunderstanding, since it can

prevent time being wasted on fruitless explanations and instructions, when it could be better

spent on language practice. It can be used contrastively to point out problem areas ofgrammar. For example, various course books, like Headway, now encourage students to

translate model sentences into their own language in order to compare and contrast the

grammar.

It can be used with beginners, when students are trying to say something but having

difficulty, they can say it in their own language and the teacher can reformulate it for them.-

When students need to combine the two languages, for example in those lessons whose

focus evolve around translation and interpreting.



CONCLUSION

Clark asks this questions, if we are to embrace the differences of language, which variety

should we teach? And her answer:

“The one most appropriate for the sociocultural context within which teaching takes place

and its intended purpose. Not easy! No „one size fits all.”

Indeed it is not easy. Often in language schools and other teaching contexts abroad, when

you have a class of 30 students, what do you teach? It is very unlikely that all 30 students

will have the same needs. How can you please everyone? Even in a class of 2, students

might have differing needs.

As a simple example, when I draw students‟ attention to the differences between American

English and British English, for instance, one question I often encounter is, “Okay, we get the

differences, now which one should we learn.” My answer, “well that depends.” I often tell

students that if they are planning to go to the UK or America to study, then it can be a good

idea to learn to use the vocabulary from that context. But what about my students who don‟t

plan to travel to another country, but instead are learning English to be able to communicate

for their job.

These people might need English not to speak with “native” speakers, but with people who

have also learned English as a second language. What variety do they use? So while, the

difference between global varieties of English is important to know, I find that the issue often

leaves many of my students even more confused.



APPLICATION IN TEACHING

There was a time, not so long ago, when virtually every high school English teacher who

heard the word "grammar" could immediately recall Warriner's, diagramming sentences, and

endless skill and drill exercises.

These teachers embraced the notion of prescriptive (also called traditional or school)

grammar. Grammar was taught as a discrete set of rigid rules to be memorized, practiced,

and followed.

During the height of the whole language movement, when teaching grammar in isolation

became taboo, these teachers were left frustrated and baffled by the lack of grammar

instruction in the classroom.

English teachers of later generations, on the other hand, joined the profession embracing

ideas of descriptive (also called transformational ) grammar. These teachers believed that

grammar instruction should be matched to the purpose of the user. Teachers found

descriptive grammar theories to be more flexible, reflecting actual usage and self-expression

over "correct" structures.

Some people credit the descriptive approach with a general loosening of rules regarding

grammatical structures that were once considered unacceptable, such as split infinitives.

Furthermore, they also cannot assume that prescriptive or descriptive approaches, in

isolation, are singularly effective. Rather, English and language arts teachers must embrace

the notion that grammar instruction, like any other content area, should reflect current

pedagogical approaches.

Grammar instruction should be tailor-made to meet the needs of students, and should weave

both prescriptive and descriptive practices into relevant, meaningful instruction.

Standards and Pre-Assessment

Sound instructional practice begins with assessment and planning. Begin building your

grammar instruction plan by comparing what students must know with what they already

know.

Identify the standards. In this standards-driven era, your district or school curricula

may dictate grammar skills to be taught at each grade level. If the skills are not

labeled as grammar skills, use the proofreading/editing skills that are listed under



writing standards. These standards clearly identify what your students must know

and what you are responsible to teach.

Determine what students know. The next step is to determine what your students

already know through an assessment. Be careful with this assessment; it is easy to

test surface knowledge of a grammar concept without testing the underlying

knowledge. Many students will be able to recognize a sentence fragment as

incorrect, but they may not know the concept by its correct name, why it is incorrect,

or how to correct it. Design your assessment to reveal true understanding of the

grammatical concepts.

Plan instruction. Use the results of the pre-assessment to outline three to four

grammar skills to focus on each week. The goal of effective grammar instruction is to

weave it into the reading and writing that function as the backbone of the English

curriculum. So, consider your pacing guide and embed grammar concepts logically

into it.

Grammar Instruction Made Easy

The DailyTwo

Introduce grammar concepts through "the daily two."

Write two sentences on the board each day that demonstrate a balance of correct and incorrectapplications of the concepts upon which you are focusing.

Establish a routine that requires students to rewrite in a notebook the two sentences, making thenecessary grammatical corrections as they write.

As you review the sentences on Monday, present succinct, immediately applicable grammar instruction.

Teach the correct vocabulary to describe the grammatical concept and explain the underlying rule, orprescription for application.

Each set of the remaining weekly sentences should be used to practice correct application of the grammaticalconcepts for that week, and reinforce concepts from previous weeks. While other minor problems might beincluded, such as end marks and beginning capitalization, the emphasis must be to practice and reinforce themajor concepts.

TheWeeklyFive

Continue grammar instruction by expecting students to apply the grammatical concepts you are teaching in theirown writing.

If the concept is subject-verb agreement with an interrupting phrase, assign students to apply thatconstruct in at least four sentences during an in-class writing assignment.

Collect the papers and carefully select five papers appropriate in topic to be shared with the class.

White out the student names and make enough copies of the paper for each student.

Review with the students the grammar concepts found in the 'daily two' and ask students to proofreadthe student papers in search of either correct or incorrect application of those ideas, and then discuss.

One aDay

Finally, weave grammar instruction into reading instruction and study.

Ask students to search for examples of the grammar concept in a piece of literature or nonfiction beingread or studied by the class.

Turn this into a contest by having pairs or small groups skim to locate examples of the concept to pointout to the class.

Ask students to explain how incorrect usage of grammar in the passage might affect the reader.



APPENDIX



References

Clark, U. (2010) „Grammar in the Curriculum for English: What Next?‟, Changing

English 17:2, 189-200.

Halliday, M. (2002) „On grammar and grammatics‟ in J. Webster (ed.) On Grammar:

Vol 1 of the Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday , London: Continuum: pp. 384-417.

Hudson, R. and J. Walmsley (2005) The English Patient: English grammar and teaching in

the twentieth century, Journal of Linguistics 43.3, 593-622.

Kolln, M. and Gray, L. (2010) (6th edition) Rhetorical Grammar: Grammatical

Choices, Rhetorical Effects, New York, NY: Longman.

Myhill, D., Jones, S., Lines, H., and Watson, A. (2012) „Re-thinking grammar: the

impact of embedded grammar teaching on students‟ writing and students‟

metalinguistic understanding‟, Research Papers in Education 27:2, 139-166.

Tyler, A. (2012) Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Learning: Theoretical

Basics and Experimental Evidence, New York, NY: Routledge.

assignment - critical review

Documents