VINH PHUC HIGH SCHOOL FOR THE GIFTED
FOREIGN LANGUAGE GROUP
INTEGRATING GRAMMAR TEACHING INTO
COMMUNICATIVE TASKS: A BRIEF VIEW
By:
Trần Thị Ngọc Quý
Văn Thị Bích Thảo
VINH YEN, 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part 1: Introduction………………………….……………………………………………3
Part 2: Theoretical background……..…………………………………………………..4
1. Definition of grammar ……..…………………………………………………………4
2. Different ways of teaching grammar……..…………………………………………4
2.1: Grammar Translation Method……..…………………………………………. 4
2.2: Direct method: ……..…………………………………………………………….4
2.3: Audio-Lingual method: ……..……………………………………………….... 4
2.4: The Natural Approach……..…………………………………………………... 5
2.5:Communicative Language Teaching……..…………………………………….5.
“Focus on form” and “Focus on forms” ……..………………………………….. 5
Part 3: Situation analysis………………………………………………………………...7
Part 4: Application………………………………………………………………………..9
Part 5 : Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………12
References ………………………………………………………….……………….…….13
2
Part 1: Introduction
It goes without saying that grammar plays a key role in foreign language teaching in
general and English language teaching in particular. Actually, it is one of the crucial
elements of a language without which people cannot communicate successfully as
Amy Quick (eHow Contributor) indicates “Correct grammar lends credibility to
written documents and dialogue; it demonstrates intelligence and eloquence.
Moreover,
grammar
ensures
your
message
is
broadcast
effectively
and
unambiguously. If you've got something to say, you might as well say it clearly.”
William Littlewood also shares the agreement on the importance of mastering
grammar, “The more thoroughly a learner masters the grammatical system, the more
effectively he or she can use this language for communication.”
However, how to teach grammar effectively has long been a controversial issue to
linguists, educators, teachers as well as those who are concerned.
In this paper, the issue is investigated under three perspectives:
1. Why grammar should be taught with integration into communicative activities?
2. How different in effectiveness between integrating grammar into tasks and
separating grammar teaching from tasks is?
3. When it is more effective to teach grammar separately from or teach Grammar
with integration into communicative activities?
As teachers of English at a High School where there are non-gifted as well as gifted
students, we are especially indulged in the topic because it is practically useful to our
professional development.
3
Part 2: Theoretical Background
No doubt, grammar is extremely important in building up the ‘skeleton’ for
language mastery, and so it has been paid great attention to, proved by a variety of
studies resulting in various methods in the course of language history. To get a deeper
understanding into the issue, definition of grammar as well as methods to teach it is
taken into consideration.
1. Definition of grammar
As is defined in Oxford Advanced learners’ Dictionary, grammar is “the rules
for changing the form of words and joining them into sentences.” which means
Learning grammar involves the study of the classes of words, their inflections, and
their functions and relations in the sentence. According to Ur (1996. Teaching
Grammar), “Grammar teaching involves any instructional technique that draws
learners’ attention to some specific grammatical form in such a way that it helps them
either to understand it linguistically and/or process it in comprehension and/or
production so that they can internalize it.”
2. Different ways of teaching grammar
There have existed various methods applied in language teaching, which are
Grammar Translation, Direct, Audio-Lingual and Communicative Language method.
2.1: Grammar Translation Method
According to River (1981:31), “There is much stress on knowing rules and
exceptions”, however, “communication is neglected” in Grammar Translation Method.
Students perceive grammatical rules deductively including tasks of translating from
the target language to their first language.
2.2: Direct method:
The Direct method appeared where fluency was paid attention to through
question-and-answer exchanges between teachers and learners. Grammar was taught
inductively in the target language. (Richards and Rogers.1986:9)
2.3: Audio-Lingual method:
In the 1950s, emphasis on mimicry of forms and memorization of certain
sentence patterns was encouraged in the Audio-Lingual method where grammar was
introduced inductively. In this type of method, no grammatical explanation was
4
applied but repeated practice over a pattern in a variety of contexts until the language
item was learned by heart.
2.4: The Natural Approach
Grammar is “inevitably acquired by understanding “comprehensible input”
(Krashen 1985). Procedure: Teacher provides comprehensible input and a stress-free
learning environment. Here learners use principles of Universal Grammar to process
the input.
2.5: Communicative Language Teaching
The Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) appeared in the 1960s and
1970s and was considered as a language teaching methodology against the
Audiolingual Method (AM). Brindley (1986:11) pointed out that “the 1970s and 1980s
could be regarded as the area of communicative language teaching”. This method laid
emphasis on communicative proficiency rather than merely mastery of structures or
grammar. Wilkins states that the systems of meanings lay behind the communicative
use of language, not describing the core of language through traditional concepts of
grammar and vocabulary. Needless to say, CLT prevailed for its prominent characters.
3. “Focus on form” and “Focus on forms”
One of the issues currently a lot of applied linguists concerns focus on the most
effective form of grammar instruction in the communicative classroom (Doughty and
Williams 1998; Lightbown 2000; Norris and Ortega 2000). The discussion revolves
around the degree to which educators need to direct their students’ attention to getting
hold of grammar while keeping a focus on communication activities. Hence, some
advocate minor to no interruption in communication, limiting attention to grammar by
means of corrective feedback (Doughty and Varela 1998). Nevertheless, others vote
for separate attention to grammar and combination of the language items provided in
increasingly communicative activity later on (DeKeyser 1998).
These two extremes have been referred to as ‘focus on form’ and ‘focus on
forms’. “Focus on form” is integrating grammar teaching into tasks, which favours
grammar teaching integrated into a curriculum consisting of communicative tasks with
the primary focus of attention is on meaning (Ellis, 2001). The teaching of a
grammatical structure may arise from the need of the students during the process of
implementing a certain communicative task. ‘Focus on forms’, by contrast, according
5
to Ellis (2001), refers to the instruction involving a “structure-of-the-day” approach,
where the students’ primary focus is on form (i.e., accuracy) and where the
activities are directed intensively at a single grammatical structure.” This book
claims that ‘focus on forms’ approach is the deliberate teaching of grammar. In fact, in
every “focus-on-forms” lesson, students experience a three-step procedure, which is
‘PPP’ – presentation, practice and production.
The question coming up is “Should grammar be taught separately from or with
integration into communicative activities?”
There are some researchers who propose that focus-on-forms approach be
effective. According to DeKeyser (1998), grammatical structures are learned through
via the explicit knowledge and can be achieved by means of a focus-on-forms
approach.
While other researchers, however, such as Doughty (2001) argues that focus-on-form
is most effective way to develop second language because learners can understand and
produce meaningful messages through communicative activities. In short, each has its
own strengths and should both be applied in grammar teaching. Nevertheless, if the
aim of the language teaching is for communication, focus-on-form is preferrable.
6
Part 3: Situation analysis
Teachers’ goal in teaching and learners’ need must meet so as to bring about
good results. Thus, what grammar points to be introduced to students should be made
clear to learners in order for them to grasp tightly. In order to do so, teachers must plan
beforehand what the points to give students are. This answers the requirements of a
lesson plan for every teacher for every lesson they carry out. As a result, we do not
quite agree with the idea “pre-planned focus on a given grammar structure will not
lead to effective learning”. Rather, I would prefer the words “will not” to be changed
into “may not” when it comes to the case of a teacher pre-planning every detailed
grammar point and trying to teach all in a limited span of time.
Consequently,
overloads of work obviously lead to ineffectiveness. Catherine Walter is right when
refuting the reliability of the notion “Grammar should only be taught at the point when
the need for a structure emerges during a task” by adding “In a class of 30, one
learner's need might not correspond to another's. Few teachers are able to give a clear
and reliable explanation of every grammar point that pops up’. Actually, teachers
cannot match all the individual needs of every student in a single lesson. When faced
with a variety of situations in a short time, it is too difficult for the teacher to solve the
problems neatly and satisfactorily. Moreover, Catherine Walter is especially correct
when saying ‘There is no guarantee that the needs that happen to emerge over the
length of a language course will correspond to the structures that the learners will need
in their subsequent use of that language’. In the environment where this happens, this
will lead to a kind of mismatch and “ineffectiveness”, which is a “should-not” in
teaching because what students achieve can only be consolidated well through practice
again and again.
In order for a lesson to be successful, numerous factors, such as the teacher, the
learner as well as the facilities should be taken into account. The first indispensible
factor, the teacher, is vital in learning and teaching process. He must be the one who is
not only well-qualified but also sensible enough in choosing the suitable teaching
methods. As mentioned above, CLT is currently taken into consideration in language
pedagogy. According to Weaver (1996), we should bring “grammar instruction fully to
life to make it purposeful and communicative”, (following “focus on forms”) in spite
7
of the fact that “grammar instruction has recently been associated with contextual
teaching” (Clandfield, Mora, 2003). In addition, the four skills, (listening, peaking,
reading and writing) should also be taught through the four steps pre-, while- and poststages in an attempt to provide integrated learning environments (Bayram Pekoz.
2008. Grammar teaching), which means “focus on form” being applied. Indeed,
Translation method has its own advantages especially in cases of difficult grammar
items. In short, either grammar be taught separately from or with integration into
communicative activities, has its own strengths and should both be applied in grammar
teaching.
Moreover, the teacher should be flexible to make use of different ways to complete his
teaching role. Nonetheless, in order for the teacher’ role to be completed successfully,
the second factor in question is the learners. Vietnamese high school students tend to
be used to being given explicit language forms and clear explanation. When it comes
to the communicative tasks, they are afraid of taking risk producing language
communication for fear of making mistakes. Another factor hindering this kind of
tasks from success lies in students’ gaps in the language level. A weak student might
be too afraid to talk with a strong one while at the same time, the latter may feel bored
to work with the former. Moreover, the big class size (sometimes up to 40 to 50
students) also contributes to the difficulties in communicative activities. However,
young students show their interest in interacting with each other in the target language
once the teacher knows how to create interest in them. Suitable communicative tasks
for different groups of students, clear explanation accompanied with vivid tone, voice
and posture, for example, all excite students, helping them get involved in the tasks
better.
Comes next is the third factor, facilities. Thanks to the development of technology,
there have been a variety of modern equipments (such as computer, radio and head
projector)
provided in aid of teaching. It is really beneficial to two approaches
discussed, focus on forms (when presenting grammatical items thanks to PowerPoint
animation, for example) and focus on form (when presenting contexts with the help of
pictures as well as videos). Admittedly,
grammar should be integrated into
communicative activities so as to get the best results in grammar teaching.
8
Part 4: Application
Admittedly, there is still time when teaching grammar separately from
communicative does bring about better results than integrating it into communicative
tasks, that is in classes coaching for the University Entrance Exam. This technique
helps save time and directly leads students to answering the questions requested,
multiple choice. As a result, in this environment, in the production stage, tasks are
also assigned, not in the communicative approach but in traditional way.
Nevertheless, in the real context at a high school where the writers of this paper
are working, the procedure of three steps of pre-, while-, and post- stages are mostly
applied in their lessons. Communicative questions may be given first to lead students
into the topic of the lesson naturally and excitedly. Followed is the presentation,
either implicit and inductive (for advanced learners) or explicit and deductive (for
low- level ones). According to Nunan (1998), teaching grammatical item likes
building a wall with linguistic “bricks” with the simple ones put at the bottom and up
are the more complex layers. This is where teaching grammar separately from tasks known as ‘focus on forms is applied. The ‘wall’ must be strong enough so as not to
collapse later on.
Clearly, examples in real context are appreciated by students for their use of
making the language items more vivid and clearer in form and use, leading to better
understanding and practical use. The diversity in the lesson does great help and
sometimes translation technique, such as into Vietnamese or vice versa is applicable
for difficult or confusing language items, or simply, for a change, which the author
finds it beneficial. Grammar teaching leads to success if students can master and use it
in communication. Then, practicing tasks in production stage is most important for it
scales the values of the amount of knowledge students get hold of. Suitable
communicative tasks of interesting and familiar topics helps students get more
involved in the activity assigned to complete. Pair work and group work is of great
benefit in this kind of practice. A group of gifted students can well work out the task in
groups in excitement. When guided in a sensible way, students are really excited in
such kinds of activities. Following is one example of a lesson plan to integrating the
introduction of one grammar rule into communicative tasks.
9
Sample Grammar Lesson 1: Used to
1. Pre-grammar
a) The teacher discusses the topic "changes in people’s life over the years"
b) The teacher shows a picture of a man. One part of the picture was a few years ago
and the other is today. The old one shows his smoking while the new one displays his
non-smoking. The teacher then asks students to compare the two parts of the picture.
2. While-grammar
a) This stage provides a context for input generation and an opportunity to notice the
new grammatical structure. The teacher tells them they are going to learn a new
structure (for the purpose of noticing) but does not mention the name of structure (for
motivational purposes).
b) The teacher makes a transition from the context created in 1b to the grammatical
point by showing the same picture and telling the picture differences with "used to"
and "simple present tense" (i.e. "He used to smoke a lot, but now he doesn't, he doesn’t
smoke any cigarette now", etc).
c) The teacher creates other contexts for the teaching of grammatical point through
some other picture comparisons, discussions, stories, or reading/listening texts.
d) The teacher asks some clarification check questions to ensure that the meaning is
clear. Some examples:
Did he smoke a lot in the past?/Does he smoke a lot now?
Did he feel well in the past?/Does he feel well now?
e) The teacher asks the students to formulate the rule on the board for the given
10
sentence providing help if needed.
He used to smoke a lot.
S + Used to + V …
(Note: The while-stage may involve production of the new structure through some
questions about the pictures. In this case, however, the purpose is to confirm whether
the meaning has been clarified.)
3) Post-grammar (adapted from Fatma Toköz, former student): Brainstorming
The teacher asks students to think back to when they were a child and asks the
following questions: "What are the differences and similarities between your life then
and now? Think about where you lived, your likes/dislikes, your holidays and your
family, and fill in the following lines with appropriate sentences".
Your life as a child...
________________________________________
________________________________________
________________________________________
Your present life...
________________________________________
________________________________________
________________________________________
Role-play
The teacher forms pairs of students and gives a role play to each student in which
students are supposed to be old friends meeting after a long time. They are supposed to
communicate and note the differences in each using either their imagination or the role
play cues.
Writing
The teacher asks students to write a story about the following topic for the school
magazine: Imagine that you have been asleep from 2007 till 2050. You have just
woken up to be shocked about everything around you. Compare your old and new lives
and write your story using "used to".
11
Part 5: Conclusion
In conclusion, undeniably, grammar is a must
in language teaching and
learning, and there are various ways to meet the need of working out this well, among
which focus on forms as well as focus on form are only two. Whether to integrate the
teaching of grammar into communicative tasks or teach it separately is upto the
teacher’s choice basing on his/her purpose of teaching that point. In addition, to get the
best result, different essential factors such as the teacher, the learner as well as the
class size or facilities in the teaching process should be taken into account. Whichever
method to be used, students’ engagement in learning is the final result to assess the
effectiveness of the teaching pedagogy. Varying teaching and learning process is
essential to engage students in classroom activities. In the time when teaching English
aims at developing students’ communicative skills, applying focus on form approach
seems to prevelance but it also requires a great many preparations and efforts of the
teacher as well as the activeness and enthusiasm of the students. Within the limit of the
paper, it is hoped that these aforementioned suggestions can be beneficial to anyone
who is keen to diversify their own teaching techniques.
12
References
1. Canh. N.V & Barnard. (2009). A survey of Vietnamese teachers’ beliefs about
grammar teaching.
2. Doughty, C. and E. Varela. 1998. Communicative focus on form. In Focus on
Form
in Classroom Second Language Acquisition.
3. Doughty, C. (2001). Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form.
4. DeKeyser, R. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning
and practicing second language grammar.
5. Ellis, R. (2001). Investigating form-focused instruction. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Formfocused instruction and second language learnin g.
6. Nunan, D. (1998). Teaching Grammar in Context, ELT Journal Volume 52/2 .
Oxford University Press.
7. Oxford Advanced learners’ Dictionary
8. Ron Sheen (2002). ‘Focus on form’ and ‘Focus on forms’. ELT Journal Volume
56/3, July, Oxford University Press .
9. Ur (1996). Teaching Grammar
10. Weaver, C. (1996). Teaching grammar in context.
11. http://www.ehow.com/about_6609703_importance-english-grammar.html
12. http://asian-efl-journal.com
13
- Xem thêm -
.PDF 
13 
1555 
147 
