Abstract
The researcher conducted this study to seek and to illuminate the methodologies and strategies employed by English language teachers in grammar instruction at Babile Primary School. By engaging in a comparative analysis of the pedagogical beliefs and practical approaches of two seasoned English as a foreign language teachers, the study investigated the subtleties of their teaching methodologies and the various factors that shape their classroom decisions. This examination of the congruence or divergence between their beliefs and instructional methods reveals significant insights into the intricate belief systems of these English as a foreign language teachers and their implications for teaching practices. The analysis indicates that the English as a foreign language teachers at Babile Primary School maintain complex belief frameworks regarding grammar instruction; however, these beliefs do not consistently align with their actual teaching methods. The research identified numerous factors influencing the teachers' classroom decisions, many of which are intricately tied to the specific educational context of Babile Primary School. These results underscore the multifaceted nature of teaching English as a foreign language, highlighting the necessity of understanding and addressing the underlying influences that affect instructional practices. The findings sought to illuminate the nuanced ways in which educators navigate their roles and adapt their approaches to meet the needs of their students in an ever-evolving educational landscape.
Keywords
Belief, Practice, Grammar, Instructions, Teaching
1. Introduction
Grammar lessons are one of the key components of language that enable learners to communicate efficiently and meaningfully, thereby developing their communication skills. Grammar instruction is successful when it addresses grammatical points that improve communication
| [26] | Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology. New York: Prentice Hall. |
[26]
.
Grammar is crucial in language instruction as it demonstrates the practical application of language. It deals with how words modify themselves and come together to form sentences
| [18] | Harmer, J. (1987). Teaching and learning grammar. London: Longman. |
[18]
. Teaching grammar is a fundamental aspect of language that empowers students to communicate effectively and meaningfully, thereby honing their communicative abilities. The effectiveness of grammar instruction lies in addressing grammatical aspects that improve communication
| [13] | Farrell, T. S. C. (1999). The Reflective assignment: Unlocking pre-service English teachers' beliefs on grammar teaching. RELC Journal, 30(2), 1-17. |
[13]
.
In reference to individuals' perceptions of grammar instruction, several scholars have presented differing viewpoints. "Grammar is a component of the English language classroom that is not favored by many, but rather disliked by most."
| [9] | Crystal, D. (2004). Rediscover grammar. London: Pearson, Longman. |
[9]
. “The mention of grammar evokes negative recollections for some, stemming from their own experiences with grammar instruction." Teachers' perspectives not only shape their understanding of what constitutes grammar but also influence their approach to incorporating grammar into the classroom.
The significant impact beliefs can have on a teacher's effectiveness in the classroom has been emphasized
| [3] | Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: a review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching 36, 2 April 2003, 81-109. |
| [28] | Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2005). Professional development for language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press. |
[3, 28]
. This is evident in the way teachers' beliefs regarding the most effective approach to teaching grammar often manifest in their actual teaching practices. Scholars have emphasized the significant influence that beliefs may have on a teacher's efficacy in the classroom
| [3] | Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: a review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching 36, 2 April 2003, 81-109. |
| [28] | Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2005). Professional development for language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press. |
[3, 28]
.
Frequently, students are deprived of a voice in grammar instruction. When the teacher takes center stage, students simply end up rote memorizing rules and may even develop a distaste for language. Students must feel empowered to master the language, find interest in utilizing it, possess the confidence that they can learn it, take ownership of their own learning, and recognize the value in discussing language. Although traditional grammar instruction holds its merits, integrating a student-centered approach has been proven to benefit language learners in terms of learning styles, attitudes toward language, collaboration, self-reflection, analysis, language expansion, accuracy, and productivity. It is high time to prioritize the student in grammar instruction.
Persistent reliance on traditional grammar instruction methods by teachers, despite evidence of their ineffectiveness for students, has been consistently revealed in research findings. Mixed methods study sought to validate this contradiction, uncovering a misalignment between teachers' instructional methods and empirical research findings. This underscores the necessity for teachers to reassess their beliefs and practices in L2 writer grammar instruction, as current approaches do not align with language learners' aspirations to master the language. Furthermore, societal resistance to embracing student-centered approaches perpetuates the prejudice and social stigmas endured by English language learners in writing.
When EFL teachers are deciding on the most effective way to teach grammar, they will rely on their personal beliefs. These beliefs serve to determine and rationalize their choices regarding what to teach, how to teach it, and the reasons behind their teaching approach. These beliefs manifest as personal knowledge or personal theories. Teachers' beliefs play a pivotal role in how information about teaching is put into practice in the classroom. In order to improve individual teaching strategies as well as teacher education programs overall, it is important to understand instructors' beliefs
| [20] | Johnson, K. E. (1994). The emerging beliefs and instructional practices of preservice English as a second language teachers. Teaching & Teacher Education, 10(4): 439-452. |
[20]
. The findings of
| [3] | Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: a review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching 36, 2 April 2003, 81-109. |
[3]
, show that teachers' opinions of the most effective ways to teach grammar are shaped less by the methods they acquired in teacher training programs and via continuing professional development (CPD) and more by their past learning experiences. This explains why EFL teachers' approaches to teaching grammar are often outdated.
The majority of the time, this is because "there are no clear norms concerning teaching grammar, especially when the settings and places that teachers operate in are poorly defined and profoundly interwoven"
| [25] | Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 317-328. |
[25]
. Because of this issue, teachers have developed their own individualized ideas on how to teach grammar in language classrooms. These theories are based on the teachers’ personal beliefs
| [2] | Borg, S. (1998). Teachers' pedagogical systems and grammar teaching: A qualitative study. TESOL Quarterly, 32(1), 9-38. |
[2]
. Therefore, it is crucial to investigate teachers’ attitudes on teaching English grammar as well as their actual classroom procedures. As a result, the researcher in this study looked at the cases of five Babile Primary School EFL teachers and looked at their real methods and ideas on teaching grammar.
One of the things that may influence how grammar is learned is EFL teachers’ views, as was previously indicated. EFL teachers' attitudes on teaching grammar and their classroom practices should be studied if teaching is mostly the product of their own beliefs. Academicians have highlighted the significance of English in EFL classroom. As an example,
| [35] | Wartenberg, D. (2001).‘Ethiopia’s Path towards a New Education Policy’ In Education in Ethiopia, Dieter Wartenberg and W. Mayrhofer (Ed.) 17-49 Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac. |
[35]
contends that "the English language is vital, as it serves as the medium of teaching for secondary schools (9–12) and higher education." For the sake of their future competence, Ethiopian students ought to at least speak fluent English. English language proficiency is demanded of students starting in primary school, even though it is seen to be essential for success in higher education, especially at the secondary and university levels. This is due to the fact that learning would become challenging for students throughout their secondary and university level if a foundation was not set for them at this early age
| [13] | Farrell, T. S. C. (1999). The Reflective assignment: Unlocking pre-service English teachers' beliefs on grammar teaching. RELC Journal, 30(2), 1-17. |
[13]
.
Grammar is taught in practically every school in Ethiopia, even the basic levels, according to the researcher's reading experience. However, teachers continue to complain about students' communicative incompetence which includes their grammatical incompetence when they enroll in advanced stage. Thus, tertiary students have not been able to effectively convey their thoughts both orally and in writing, based on the researcher's own experience and casual conversations with EFL and other teachers at Babile Primary School. On the other hand, according to recent researches, grammar is taught communicatively to improve students' oral communicative competence.
Additionally, the tasks used in communication grammar instruction are diversified, allowing students to participate in more meaningful and dynamic ways and inspiring EFL teachers to use communicative activities.
| [12] | Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
| [29] | Saricoban, A., & Metin, E. (2000). Songs, verse and games for teaching grammar. The Internet TESL Journal, 6(10), 1-7. |
[12, 29]
Explicate that teaching is an artistic endeavor that necessitates inventive and imaginative concepts to enhance its efficacy. They emphasize that English as a Foreign Language (EFL) instructors ought to embrace the utilization of diverse communicative activities, including games, simulations, role plays, and other accessible resources in the classroom. Academicians also stress the need for these strategies to be used in conjunction with grammar instruction in order to improve communicative grammar.
Hence, the researcher was motivated to look into the attitudes and classroom practices of primary school EFL teachers, particularly with regard to teaching grammar, as the subject is becoming more and more contentious these days. Accordingly, there is still disagreement on the most effective methods for teaching grammar, according to
| [8] | Corder, S. P. (1988). Pedagogic grammars. Grammar and second language teaching: A book of readings, 123-145. |
[8]
. EFL teachers should be given opportunity to reflect on their own work so that they may be encouraged to express and reflect on their ideas while also looking into any inconsistencies between their values and classroom practices, as proposed by
| [14] | Farrell, T. S. C. (2004a). Reflective practice in action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. |
| [15] | Farrell, T. S. C. (2004b). Reflecting on classroom communication in Asia. Singapore: Longman. |
| [28] | Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2005). Professional development for language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press. |
[14, 15, 28]
.
Research Gaps
There have been several researches done in this field at both the local and global levels in connection to grammar instruction. For instance, in the area of language teaching, teachers’ beliefs have been examined to see how personal beliefs and knowledge of the pedagogical systems of teaching have informed the instructional practices and decisions of EFL teachers (e.g.,
| [3] | Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: a review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching 36, 2 April 2003, 81-109. |
| [5] | Burns, A. (1992). Teacher beliefs and their influence on classroom practice. Prospect, 7(3), 5665. |
| [17] | Golombek, P. R. (1998). A study of language teachers' personal practical knowledge. TESOL Quarterly, 32(3), 447-464. |
[3, 5, 17]
. In addition, the study of EFL teachers’ beliefs, as
| [27] | Richards, J. C., Gallo, P. B., & Renandya, W. A. (2001). Exploring Teachers' Beliefs and the Processes of Change. PAC Journal, 1, 1, 41-58. |
[27]
have pointed out, "forms part of the process of understanding how EFL teachers conceptualize their work."
This study differs from earlier ones of a similar nature since, to the best of the researcher's knowledge, no particular study has been carried out to examine the teaching methods and beliefs of five Babile Primary School EFL teachers about grammar. Therefore, the researcher's goal in this study was to address the following two research questions by examining the teaching methods and views of five EFL teachers on English grammar teaching and their belief.
2. Review of Related Literature
2.1. The Role of Grammar in English Language Teaching
"There has been a passionate discussion over the last 100 years on the most effective approach to teaching a language"
| [4] | Brown, J. D. (2001). Using surveys in Language Learning Programs. New York: Cambridge University Press. |
[4]
. According to
| [1] | Atkins, J. Hailom, B and Nuru, M. (1995). Skill Development Methodology. Addis Ababa University: Addis Ababa Printing Press. |
| [12] | Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
[1, 12]
, grammar instruction is crucial to the teaching of languages. The authors point out that grammar is typically thought of as a foundational structural approach. According to them, conventional grammar emphasizes questioning the "form" of the grammatical components rather than the "meaning" of the sentence in relation to a context. Regarding the authors, in the past, the goal of instruction was for the students to acquire linguistic knowledge rather than to engage in conversation. "The structural approach's primary goal is to know the language”
| [31] | Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
[31]
.
One essential component of the language we use in daily conversation is grammar, which gives language its sense. It is regarded as a crucial component in teaching languages. Grammar is the systematic organization of any language and is closely related to meaning and communication. Making meanings apparent without modifying grammatical and linguistic systems is extremely challenging
| [16] | Frodesen, J., & Holten, C. (2003). Grammar and the ESL writing class. Exploring the dynamics of second language writing, 141-161. |
[16]
. It is true that grammar is important for all students, including Ethiopian students, EFL teachers, and other educators in general.
For example, in order to pass tests such as the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) and the Test of English as Other/Foreign Language (TOEFL), individuals from Ethiopia and the rest of the globe who wish to continue their studies abroad especially in the USA or the UK need to take an intense language course. Similar to IELTS, the TOEFL is a test of English competence that covers grammar, spelling, hearing, and reading comprehension in addition to a brief writing on a predetermined subject. Therefore, proficiency in the English language, particularly understanding of grammar, is seen as essential for many individuals who get scholarships. In this sense, grammatical understanding is what distinguishes the learned from the ignorant.
Grammar instruction has received varying attention and priority over time. For example, teaching grammar is seen as the primary tenet of language learning in the GTM, ALM (grammar translation method and audio lingual method respectively), and other conventional techniques. Conversely, in communicative language instruction, the importance of grammar is minimized and the communicative use of language is prioritized
| [36] | Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
[36]
.
Regarding the importance that educators placed on teaching grammar at the outset of communicative language teaching (CLT),
| [6] | Celce- Murcia, M. (1991). ‘Grammar Pedagogy in Second and Foreign Language Teaching’. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3)459-478. |
[6]
explains that the advent of CLT had a significant influence on how language should be taught and acquired. She goes on to say that with the advent of CLT in language instruction, English language instructors worldwide have been questioning issues like "Should grammar be taught?", "When should grammar be taught?", "What grammar should be taught?", and "How grammar should be taught?"
| [6] | Celce- Murcia, M. (1991). ‘Grammar Pedagogy in Second and Foreign Language Teaching’. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3)459-478. |
[6]
. She calls this a turning moment for linguists and language educators to carefully reassess the function of grammar in language teaching.
The purpose of language instruction under the communicative method is to foster "communicative competence"
| [19] | Hymes, D. (1972). ‘On Communicative Competence’. In J. B. Pride and J. Holems (Eds.), Sociolinguistic, 269-293. Harmon worth: Penguin. |
[19]
. The main goal of teaching and studying foreign and second languages to students is to assist them in becoming more proficient communicators. In this context,
| [6] | Celce- Murcia, M. (1991). ‘Grammar Pedagogy in Second and Foreign Language Teaching’. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3)459-478. |
[6]
asserts that communicative competence serves as the cornerstone of communicative language instruction and that linguistic competence and communicative competence are closely related. The ability to manipulate the language system correctly and spontaneously is known as linguistic competence.
The concepts of communicative competence include appropriateness and the learner's willingness to apply pertinent methods to deal with specific language-related problems. Additionally, the cornerstone of communicative competence is linguistic competency. It is impossible to have communicative competence without linguistic competence
| [37] | Wilkins, D. (1976). Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
| [32] | Stevick, E. W. (1982). Teaching and learning languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
| [31] | Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
[37, 32, 31]
.
Thus, it is easy to infer from the aforementioned assertions that grammar plays a crucial part in both conventional and modern ELT teaching techniques, even in communicative language instruction where the goal is to foster learners' communicative competence. The real question, however, should be how to teach grammar in a communicative manner that encourages students to utilize the English language, rather than arguing for or against its inclusion. Generally speaking, grammar is seen as one aspect of communication skill.
2.2. Phases of Grammar Teaching
2.2.1. The Presentation Phase
Students "are introduced the form, meaning, and usage of a new piece of language" at this period, according to
| [18] | Harmer, J. (1987). Teaching and learning grammar. London: Longman. |
[18]
. The linguistic piece should ideally be presented in a relevant context. The EFL teacher is in charge of the exercises throughout this stage of the grammar instruction. To illustrate a scenario or deliver the lesson, he or she may make use of a text or visual aids.
2.2.2. The Practice Phase
In terms of organizing grammar instruction for communication, this is the second stage. This is where talents are acquired by practice or by doing.
| [18] | Harmer, J. (1987). Teaching and learning grammar. London: Longman. |
[18]
. This stage, according to
| [34] | Ur, P. (1988). Grammar Practice Activities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
[34]
, is when students receive a great deal of experience with the new structure, but their language output is closely supervised and guided by the EFL teacher to ensure that proper form and meaning are consolidated and mistake risk is minimized. The teacher's position becomes crucial as a result.
Learners are given the chance to practice the language as the EFL teacher models the object. Drilling is the most used method to get the entire class practicing.
| [34] | Ur, P. (1988). Grammar Practice Activities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
[34]
Reinforces this approach in the practice phase by recommending that EFL teachers support their students in avoiding making too many mistakes, gradually relinquish control over them, and help them go to the final stage, where students are comparatively free to use the language.
2.2.3. The Production Phase
The learners are now able to communicate and finish messages by using the language in meaningful ways. Consequently, fluency or the capacity to utilize the language should be the greater emphasis for EFL teachers than correctness. Students should ideally be able to express themselves freely at this point. They decide how the talk will go
| [6] | Celce- Murcia, M. (1991). ‘Grammar Pedagogy in Second and Foreign Language Teaching’. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3)459-478. |
[6]
.
Figure 1. A three dimensional grammar framework.
There is a tight relationship between the three components. According to this paradigm, teaching grammar is giving students the skills necessary to employ language forms correctly, meaningfully, and properly. Presentation, practice, and production/communication are the three stages that make up a good grammar instruction, according to
| [23] | Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and principles in language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press. |
[23]
.
PPP processes have contributed to successful grammar instruction, but they are not without shortcomings
| [23] | Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and principles in language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press. |
[23]
. As an illustration, PPP (presentation, practice and production) sees language as a sequence of products that may be obtained successively as accumulated entities, as
| [11] | Ellis, R. (2001). Introduction: Investigating Form‐Focused instruction. Language learning, 51(1), 1 46. |
[11]
describes. But SLA research has demonstrated that learners do not really acquire a language in this fashion; instead, they build a set of systems called inter-languages that are progressively reorganized and grammaticalized as learners include new elements
| [5] | Burns, A. (1992). Teacher beliefs and their influence on classroom practice. Prospect, 7(3), 5665. |
[5]
.
Additionally, studies on developmental sequences have demonstrated that before learning a particular grammatical feature, like negatives, learners go through a number of transitional phases. It can frequently take months or even years for learners to reach the goal form of the rule. Put differently, the process of acquiring a second language is incompatible with teaching, which is viewed as the demonstration and application of a set of skills. Because of its excessive linearity and behaviorism, PPP is therefore perceived as having no solid foundation in second language acquisition (SLA) theory and as failing to take learners' developmental preparation phases into consideration
| [11] | Ellis, R. (2001). Introduction: Investigating Form‐Focused instruction. Language learning, 51(1), 1 46. |
[11]
.
It will thus not likely result in the successful acquisition of taught forms. Furthermore,
| [24] | Lewis, M. (1993) The Lexical Approach: The state of ELT and the way forward. Hove: Language Teaching Publications. |
[24]
challenged this paradigm, claiming that it is teacher-centered and misrepresents the nature of teaching and learning since it views teaching as inflexible and learning as simple. Generally, PPP was insufficient because it does not accurately represent the nature of language teaching
| [24] | Lewis, M. (1993) The Lexical Approach: The state of ELT and the way forward. Hove: Language Teaching Publications. |
[24]
.
So, PPP has been used for many centuries, unless the EFL teachers use their creativity to deliver PPP in a very clever way, the prior method of PPP simply time limited students to duplicate a model in a set linear order without considering the underlying intricacies of the language itself or the teaching/learning process. This prevented both EFL teachers and students from customizing the lesson to suit their preferences.
2.3. Approaches to Grammar Teaching
2.3.1. Deductive Versus Inductive Approaches
The EFL teachers clearly lays out grammatical principles in a logical method. While there is no explicit explanation of rules in the inductive approach, rules are discussed thoroughly before instances are given. Using relevant context and examples, the students are either guided in discovering the governing structures or given the opportunity to do so. While inductive grammar focuses on finding the rules, deductive grammar training is more closely associated with rules-driven instruction. The relationship between inductive and deductive techniques is that the former goes from general to particular, while the latter goes from specific to general
| [30] | Rutherford, W. E. (1987). Second Language Grammar: Learning and Teaching. London: Longman. |
[30]
.
2.3.2. Explicit, Implicit and Inclusive Approaches
Formal instruction, overt grammar instruction, the product-oriented method, and the deductive approach are other names for the explicit approach. Grammar rules are explicitly presented in this manner of teaching grammar
| [18] | Harmer, J. (1987). Teaching and learning grammar. London: Longman. |
[18]
. With this method, the EFL teacher gives the students clear explanations of grammar rules. The underlying premise of explicit instruction is that cognitive rules may be transformed into unconscious processes of production and understanding
| [7] | Cook, V. (2001). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching. London: Oxford University Press. |
[7]
. However, one of
| [22] | Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language Acquisition. NewYork: Pergamon Press. |
[22]
’s criticisms of his "acquisition-learning" hypothesis, which holds that learning cannot lead to acquisition, is directly at odds with this remark.
The terms "inductive teaching," "skill-oriented method," and "covert training" are other terms for the implicit approach. The purpose of this lesson is to increase the students' awareness of certain grammatical structures. The intentional effort to particularly bring the learners' attention to the formal aspects of the target language is referred to as "consciousness raising". According to
| [8] | Corder, S. P. (1988). Pedagogic grammars. Grammar and second language teaching: A book of readings, 123-145. |
| [18] | Harmer, J. (1987). Teaching and learning grammar. London: Longman. |
[8, 18]
, this method of teaching grammar involves concealing grammatical truths from students.
Although it combines explicit and implicit methods, the inclusive approach to teaching grammar ignores its shortcomings. It is also referred to as the balanced approach or integrated approach
| [1] | Atkins, J. Hailom, B and Nuru, M. (1995). Skill Development Methodology. Addis Ababa University: Addis Ababa Printing Press. |
[1]
. This method, known as integrative grammar according to
, comprises of three Es (EEE): expression, explanation/deductive reasoning, and exploration/inductive reasoning. Learners are encouraged to use their grammatical knowledge to express themselves (to construct meaningful sentences). In order to teach a lesson, the EEE approach integrates both explicit and implicit instructions. He claims that there are two techniques to teaching grammar in an inclusive manner: the first involves combining the best elements of explicit and implicit methods, while the other involves using either explicit or implicit methods exclusively, depending on the situation and context and where they are needed to be suitable.
Generally speaking, even though the academicians used various titles for explicit, implicit, and inclusive ways to teaching grammar, a close examination of the text suggests that there is not really much of a distinction between the words explicit or direct or even deductive, implicit or indirect or inductive, and inclusive or integrative or eclectic approaches. For this reason, in the researcher’s opinion, it will be treated as one as long as their goals are identical.
2.4. Techniques of Communicative Grammar Teaching
Communicative grammar refers to the presentation of grammar in a relevant, intentional, and contextual way. Without an equivalent grasp of the meanings that forms transmit, mastering forms in language acquisition would be meaningless. This demonstrates the equal significance of grammatical meanings and forms in language instruction. "Communicative grammar comprises of content and construct; content refers to what is being offered to students and construct addresses how the material is being communicated to learners via grammar learning problems," state
| [10] | Dickens, P and Woods, E. (1988). Some criteria for the development of communicative tasks. JSTOR: TESOL Quartely, 22(4): 623-646. Retrieved April 10, 2016 from http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587260 |
[10]
.
Additionally, they emphasize that successful language usage requires both communication and grammar, which are complimentary components. To put it in another way, "content" and "construct" are the two main concerns of communicative grammar.
| [29] | Saricoban, A., & Metin, E. (2000). Songs, verse and games for teaching grammar. The Internet TESL Journal, 6(10), 1-7. |
[29]
Propose the following methods of communicative grammar presentation in respect to "how content is being delivered" in a communicative grammar.
Pictures: they are more contextualized than students' textbooks, well-designed visuals have the power to inspire pupils and elicit a greater response than words alone. Graphs: allow for many interpretations and have the capacity to engage students with various linguistic applications. Games: play a crucial role in encouraging the student to practice grammatical rules and utilize the language in communication.
Role-play: Students' communication abilities will benefit greatly by contextualizing any grammatical points. Students that use this strategy also benefit from improved dramatization and word-of-mouth expression of their thoughts. Pupils may act out and get a lot of knowledge from one another since it's humorous and dramatic. Songs: the majority of songs include a wealth of backstory and genuine resources. Poetry: like poems, music, reflects the moral sentiment of a culture and conjures images of cultural practices. Telling Story: stories are enjoyed by most people, but especially by kids. For this reason, elementary school instructors should choose engaging stories that allow pupils to infer both form and meaning from the story while also presenting grammatical rules in a relevant context.
Problem Solving: activities that require the solution of difficulties, whether they be hypothetical or actual. They offer conducive environments and applications for prolonged communicative grammar practice. Learners can benefit from communicative grammar exercises by using the language properly in various contexts.
3. Methodology
The following research questions were attempted to be addressed by the case study of the beliefs of the five EFL teachers and their actual instructional practices in teaching grammar:
1. What are the five EFL teachers' beliefs about the way grammar should be taught in Babile primary school?
2. What are EFL Teachers’ actual classroom practices of teaching grammar at Babile Primary School?
3.1. Tools
The researcher utilized two techniques to gather data: unstructured interviews and observations were compared to see where beliefs and practices overlapped and disagreed.
3.2. Data Collection
The association between attitudes and actual classroom practices regarding grammar instruction was examined in this study using a qualitative case study methodology
| [2] | Borg, S. (1998). Teachers' pedagogical systems and grammar teaching: A qualitative study. TESOL Quarterly, 32(1), 9-38. |
[2]
. Over the course of a semester, data was gathered. Non-participatory observations of the English teachers’ classrooms with pre- and post-lesson interviews were the sources of the data.
With the assistance of two other teachers who were not engaged in the actual study, the original interview questions were piloted, and as a consequence, the questions were further modified. The purpose of the interview questions was to gather information on the English teachers’ opinions on teaching grammar instruction, and various methods of grammar instruction, such as grammar corrections. Additional inquiries were designed to gather details on the English teachers’ real-world methods of instruction as well as the variables that impacted the methods and techniques they selected.
The primary study instrument employed to gather data about teachers' perspectives on teaching grammar was interviews. A pre-study interview was conducted to set the stage for each teacher's experience; a pre-lesson interview was done to gather details about the lesson that would be taught; and a post-lesson interview was arranged to enable English teachers to consider the significance of the entire experience
| [21] | Johnson, K. E. (1999). Understanding language teaching: Reasoning in action. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. |
[21]
. Over the course of a semester, two non-participatory classroom observations were conducted with each English teacher in order to gather data on their actual methods of instruction
| [16] | Frodesen, J., & Holten, C. (2003). Grammar and the ESL writing class. Exploring the dynamics of second language writing, 141-161. |
[16]
.
Despite being beyond of his control, the researcher was unable to conduct more classroom observations, despite his best efforts. During post-lesson interviews, discussion topics were derived from specific incidents of events witnessed during the sessions and the field notes of the accompanying observer. Exercises, teaching resources, and lesson plans were also gathered.
3.3. Method of Data Analysis
The process of collecting and analyzing data was circular, with each step of data gathering being facilitated by the analysis of previously gathered data. A triangulation procedure was used to confirm the results from all the different sources
| [17] | Golombek, P. R. (1998). A study of language teachers' personal practical knowledge. TESOL Quarterly, 32(3), 447-464. |
[17]
. For instance, the data from classroom observations, and the interview with the English teachers were compared to see where beliefs and practices overlapped and disagreed. Subsequent analyses of the interview data were centered on applying inductive analytic techniques to identify noteworthy themes and patterns
| [2] | Borg, S. (1998). Teachers' pedagogical systems and grammar teaching: A qualitative study. TESOL Quarterly, 32(1), 9-38. |
[2]
.
4. Analysis and Interpretation
4.1. EFL Teachers’ Belief Statement from Interview Questions
Table 1. Frames the five EFL teachers’ convictions about issues of language and syntax educating as expressed during the meetings.
S/n | | Tr1 | Tr2 | Tr2 | Tr2 | Tr2 |
1 | Grammar is necessary to learn and should be taught. | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ |
2 | Grammar principles must be understood by students and applied to their writing. | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ |
3 | One helpful technique for teaching grammar is drilling. | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ |
4 | Proper use of tenses is a fundamental aspect of grammar. | √ | * | √ | √ | * |
5 | Teaching grammar entails teaching linguistic structures. | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ |
6 | For language things to be taught effectively, there is a space for purposeful, overt grammar instruction. | √ | * | √ | * | √ |
7 | Indirect (covert) instruction has a place in helping students learn languages. | ⅹ | √ | √ | √ | ⅹ |
8 | The ways that grammar is taught to students are mostly determined by their degree of English language competency. | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ |
N.B: √=Agree, ⅹ=Not Agree and *=Not Stated
Based on the material presented above, almost all English teachers harmonize that teaching grammar is essential to helping students apply grammatical structures appropriately in written work. Undeniably, Tr1 stated that he would only avoid explicitly teaching grammar in situations when his students were already proficient in grammar, writing, and listening comprehension; syntax structure specially. All five English teachers felt that students would make less grammatical mistakes in their syntax structure if they could apply these rules and structures appropriately in sentences, even if they may not need to be able to explain grammar rules directly. Additionally, Tr5 stated that if he found out that his students had not fully grasped a grammatical structure and were unable to apply it appropriately in speech and writing, he would not think twice about teaching it again.
Teaching grammar is crucial for students to effectively apply grammatical structures in their writing. According to the information provided, the majority of English teachers agree on this point. Tr1, for example, mentioned that he would only skip teaching grammar directly if his students were already skilled in speaking, writing, and listening. 1. Each of the five teachers believed that students would significantly reduce their grammatical errors in both writing and speaking by effectively applying the relevant rules and structures in their sentences, even if they couldn't articulate the grammar rules themselves. Furthermore, Teacher 1 expressed that if he discovered his students struggled to understand a particular grammatical structure and failed to use it correctly in their communication, he would readily revisit the topic and provide additional instruction without hesitation.
Furthermore, all five English teachers are unwavering about giving their students grammatical exercises. For instance, Tr1 mentioned that he recognized he had profited from his English teacher's grammar drills while he was a student, which is where his conviction in their use came from. His first response, when asked what grammar meant to his as a teacher, was that it was about teaching tenses and sentence structure. "The first thing that springs to me is employing the proper tenses at the correct time, past tense, present tense, and sentence formation," he said. It seems more like the structure to me. As an English grammar, Tr2 was asked to define grammar. He said that grammar is made up of the structures that give sentences meaning.” He said, Grammar can be thought of as the component pieces of English. The way phrases are put together and the elements required to convey meaning through sentences seem to me like a puzzle. Additionally, Tr1 stated that he was in favor of exercises involving grammatical patterns since they would help students "isolate and detect grammar problems in their work."
Tr3 thinks that incidental teaching of grammar has a place in language classrooms, while Tr2 is skeptical of the method. Incidental teaching of grammar is the covert teaching of grammar through the presentation of objects as part of another language activity like reading, writing, speaking, or listening. The primary worry raised by Tr4 regarding the accidental teaching of grammar is that students who lack the requisite language proficiency would not be able to take advantage of this indirect method. Tr1 said: When you observe this kind of grammar while working on something, such as a paragraph, you might inform them that this is the style of language you employ. Here and there, you present this and that in an accidental (teaching) manner. There is a lot of variation. Tr3 indicated a clear preference for using drills and tables together with the formal instruction of grammar principles and sentence patterns. He declared that he was in favor of teaching pre-established grammatical points on purpose. He had strong reservations, however, regarding the accidental and deductive methods of teaching grammar. The remaining two English teachers, on the other hand, stated that they preferred both the communicative and inductive approaches to grammar instruction, as well as the conventional method that uses drills to teach grammar rules and sentence structures.
4.2. Classroom Practices
Table 2. Frames the five EFL teachers’ genuine study hall rehearses while showing English sentence structure.
No of Items | Observed Classroom Practices | Tr1 | Tr2 | Tr3 | Tr4 | Tr5 |
1 | The majority of the lessons used a typical teaching methodology, clearly presenting grammatical concepts and rules. | + | + | + | + | + |
2 | Most lessons were teacher-centered, meaning that the instructor gave directions, clarified things, and asked questions to get feedback. | + | + | + | + | + |
3 | Teachers and students both used grammatical language in a notable way. | + | + | + | + | + |
4 | Communicative exercises were incorporated into the lessons in one of two ways: either as a practice exercise during the session or as an introduction at the beginning. | + | + | * | + | * |
5 | Speaking and writing assignments were combined with the lessons. | * | + | + | * | + |
6 | Throughout the samples writings, teachers fixed every grammar mistake. | + | * | + | * | + |
7 | Grammar mistakes were marked by teachers using pertinent symbols. | * | * | * | * | * |
Key: pre and post lesson; +: observed, *: limited occurrence
In view of teaching grammar communicatively, this section of the study discusses the conditions of the classrooms observed, primarily emphasizing the shortcomings that were noted in the two courses.
Table 2 shows that all English teachers taught grammar in a way that was mostly based on tradition.
The majority of the observed classes were teacher-centered, with all five English teachers giving directions and explanations as well as probing the students' understanding of grammar-related topics with questions and answers. For instance, Tr1 mostly used worksheets for his teaching, particularly for his first session. It was found that speaking and writing activities did not incorporate grammar very well. While Tr2 first lesson tried to include grammar into speaking and writing exercises like poetry writing and reading short passages, his second lesson focused on the deductive, overt grammar of regular and irregular verbs, which was subsequently reinforced, and students' understanding was assessed at the conclusion of the session using fill-in-the-blank worksheets. In order to demonstrate their mastery of the material, his students in the second class had to do different worksheets: regular and irregular verbs.
Furthermore, the remaining three English teachers explained grammar concepts in the observed courses by using the meta-language of grammar. For instance, Tr3 mentioned concepts like "regular verbs" and "irregular verbs," whereas Tr4 utilized statements like "singular noun must have a singular verb." The way in which English teachers gave comments on their students' paragraph writing is another resemblance between their methods in the classroom. For instance, the Tr2 and Tr5 pointed out every grammatical mistake their students made in their paragraph writing, and the fixed version was subsequently placed above the mistake.
When the researcher talking about a cognitive process, he think it is crucial to keep in mind that these all five English teachers’ opinions can only be deduced via conversations and observations of their instructional style. In this case study, however, the researcher adopt the position that it is reasonable to propose that the teachers’ views are the greatest predictors of the kinds of instructional judgments they made in the classroom during grammar teaching. As a result, the researcher made an effort to assess if there was any evidence of convergence or divergence between their professed views and their actual classroom actions.
English teachers need to be cautious not to let students "claim loyalty to views congruent with what they perceive as the present teaching paradigm rather than consistent with their unmonitored beliefs and their behavior in class," as noted by
| [38] | Woods, D. (1996). Teacher cognition in language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press. |
[38]
.
The researcher observed a significant degree of convergence for all English teachers between their declared views and their actual classroom behavior. Tr1 is convinced that his students may gain from this overt approach to grammar training, having personally experienced the benefits of receiving specific instruction on grammatical principles when learning English. Tr1 real methods of teaching grammar, which involved giving clear explanations and directions on grammar terms and structures, were consistent with his "conventional approach to grammar teaching."
Interestingly,
| [21] | Johnson, K. E. (1999). Understanding language teaching: Reasoning in action. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. |
[21]
notes that many language teachers are emphatic about not replicating the same kinds of formal language learning experiences they experienced as students. This seems to go counter to example of
Tr1.
Tr1 was not only open to replicating his own educational journey, but also devoted to it due to his belief that the method would assist his students. In several ways,
Tr2 and Tr3 views on teaching grammar in a more hidden or indirect way aligned with their real-world classroom experiences.
Tr4 stated in the pre-study interview that he thought grammar instruction need to be incorporated into speaking, writing, and reading. Rather of getting specific instruction on adverbs of manner, students were actively debating and composing poems and short tales during teaching grammar in his lesson on the subject. The researcher observed considerable difference as well, despite the seeming convergence of
Tr5 actions and views. For instance,
Tr5 provided clear grammar explanations in lesson on adverbs of manner, but the exercises were not placed within the framework of relevant communicative scenarios. His grammatical instruction was actually systematic and prescriptive rather than casual.
4.3. Findings and Research Discussions
English teachers may also face challenges such as large class sizes, limited resources, and diverse student needs, which can make it difficult to implement their preferred teaching methods. Furthermore, external pressures such as standardized testing and curriculum requirements may also impact the way teachers approach their lessons.
Furthermore, teachers may also be influenced by their own educational background and training, as well as the expectations of their colleagues and school administration. This can lead to a discrepancy between their stated beliefs and their actual classroom practices. Moreover, teachers may also struggle with balancing the need to cover a wide range of content with the desire to provide meaningful and engaging learning experiences for their students. This can result in a gap between what teachers believe is best for their students and what they are able to realistically achieve in the classroom. Thus, the differences between what teachers say and what they do in the classroom can be attributed to a variety of factors, including time constraints, external pressures, and personal and professional influences. Understanding these factors can help to bridge the gap between teachers' beliefs and their classroom practices, ultimately leading to more effective and impactful teaching.
All English teachers understand the importance of time management in the classroom, as it directly impacts their ability to cover all necessary material and engage students effectively. However, they often find themselves struggling to balance their desire to delve deeply into a topic with the constraints of a packed curriculum. This can lead to difficult decisions about what to prioritize and how to best utilize the limited time available.
Teachers must also consider their own teaching preferences and styles when managing time in the classroom. Some may prefer to spend more time on certain topics or activities, while others may prioritize covering a wider range of material. Balancing these personal preferences with the demands of the curriculum can be a challenging task for English teachers.
As an illustration, Tr1, Tr2 and Tr3 stated that they personally favored a logical method to teaching grammar over an inductive one, "not because we don't think the latter is beneficial, but because we feel that the deductive approach is easier" and hence took less time to apply. They also mentioned that parents, in addition to the needs of the curriculum and the school administration, were the sources of their time demands.
Another significant reason why teachers continue to choose the old way of teaching grammar despite their enthusiasm for innovative teaching techniques is the powerful emotions and attitudes connected to it
| [27] | Richards, J. C., Gallo, P. B., & Renandya, W. A. (2001). Exploring Teachers' Beliefs and the Processes of Change. PAC Journal, 1, 1, 41-58. |
[27]
. They discovered that a significant number of survey respondents thought grammar was necessary for four language skills learning and that "direct grammar teaching would result in more proper usage," even though they proposed developing resources and exercises to master English as a (deemphasize grammar instruction).
In the courses that were observed, Tr1 in this case study continued to teach grammar using the traditional manner, despite his stated preference for a communicative approach. The two teachers in this case study were unaware of their perspectives on the teaching and learning of English grammar until they were questioned directly by the interviewer. They also couldn't compare their theories with classroom procedures since they didn't know how to teach grammar. Rather than looking for or analyzing "best practices," our role as researchers was to function as a mirror for the two teachers, enabling them to reflect on their work. Since language instructors' beliefs about successful teaching form the basis of their teaching behavior, the researcher suggests that opportunities be provided for teachers to reflect on their work (e.g.,
| [14] | Farrell, T. S. C. (2004a). Reflective practice in action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. |
| [15] | Farrell, T. S. C. (2004b). Reflecting on classroom communication in Asia. Singapore: Longman. |
| [28] | Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2005). Professional development for language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press. |
[14, 15, 28]
. This would enable teachers to express and reflect on their views while also looking into any gaps between their beliefs and classroom practices.
5. Conclusion
The claimed views and actual teaching methods of an experienced English language teachers in a primary school were examined in this case study. The results implied that English teachers do, in fact, hold a complex set of beliefs that, for a variety of intricate reasons some of which are directly tied to the teaching context do not always translate into their classroom actions. Language teachers may learn a lot about the significance of accessing teachers' views and contrasting these beliefs with real classroom practices, even though generalizations of this case study may be problematic. Additionally, the researcher hope that this case study will serve as a catalyst for other educators and researchers to consider and scrutinize their own assumptions regarding the way they teach language.
6. Summary
1. The results showed that these EFL teachers did not know much more about their ideas about teaching grammar, but it was clear from the interviews that their beliefs and their actual practices which were verified by observations were very comparable.
2. Nonetheless, there was a difference in their opinions, methods, and what the most recent research suggests regarding the most effective communicative grammar instructions.
3. The goal of teaching grammar in elementary schools should be to enhance students’ general communication skills rather than just helping them memorize a list of grammatical terms.
4. Therefore, teaching students communicative grammar is essential if they are to be able to communicate with others in writing or verbally.
5. In this context,
| [23] | Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and principles in language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press. |
[23]
emphasizes how employing the aforementioned strategies may help teachers foster a laid-back environment that is engaging and inspiring for the students and greatly aids in introducing the structural, semantic, and communicative elements of language into the classroom.
6. This study looked at and contrasted the opinions and real methods of instruction of five EFL teachers of English in Babile primary school. The results showed that although the five EFL teachers were not highly conscious of their attitudes about teaching grammar, it was clear from the interviews that their beliefs and their actual practices which were verified by observations were very comparable. Their views, behaviors, and what is currently recommended by literature about the most effective ways to use language for communication, however, diverged.
Abbreviations
IELTS | International English Language Testing System |
TOEFL | The Test of English as Other/Foreign Language |
EFL | English Language Learning/English as a Foreign Language |
TEFL | Teaching English as a Foreign Language |
EEE | Expression, Explanation/Deductive Reasoning, and Exploration/Inductive Reasoning |
SLA | Second Language Acquisition |
PPP | Presentation, Practice and Production |
CLT | Communicative Language Teaching |
GTM | Grammar Translation Method |
ALM | Audio Lingual Method Respectively |
Author Contributions
Ashenafi Shimeles Shumiye is the sole author. The author read and approved the final manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares there is no conflicts of interest.
References
| [1] |
Atkins, J. Hailom, B and Nuru, M. (1995). Skill Development Methodology. Addis Ababa University: Addis Ababa Printing Press.
|
| [2] |
Borg, S. (1998). Teachers' pedagogical systems and grammar teaching: A qualitative study. TESOL Quarterly, 32(1), 9-38.
|
| [3] |
Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: a review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching 36, 2 April 2003, 81-109.
|
| [4] |
Brown, J. D. (2001). Using surveys in Language Learning Programs. New York: Cambridge University Press.
|
| [5] |
Burns, A. (1992). Teacher beliefs and their influence on classroom practice. Prospect, 7(3), 5665.
|
| [6] |
Celce- Murcia, M. (1991). ‘Grammar Pedagogy in Second and Foreign Language Teaching’. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3)459-478.
|
| [7] |
Cook, V. (2001). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching. London: Oxford University Press.
|
| [8] |
Corder, S. P. (1988). Pedagogic grammars. Grammar and second language teaching: A book of readings, 123-145.
|
| [9] |
Crystal, D. (2004). Rediscover grammar. London: Pearson, Longman.
|
| [10] |
Dickens, P and Woods, E. (1988). Some criteria for the development of communicative tasks. JSTOR: TESOL Quartely, 22(4): 623-646. Retrieved April 10, 2016 from
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587260
|
| [11] |
Ellis, R. (2001). Introduction: Investigating Form‐Focused instruction. Language learning, 51(1), 1 46.
|
| [12] |
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
| [13] |
Farrell, T. S. C. (1999). The Reflective assignment: Unlocking pre-service English teachers' beliefs on grammar teaching. RELC Journal, 30(2), 1-17.
|
| [14] |
Farrell, T. S. C. (2004a). Reflective practice in action. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
|
| [15] |
Farrell, T. S. C. (2004b). Reflecting on classroom communication in Asia. Singapore: Longman.
|
| [16] |
Frodesen, J., & Holten, C. (2003). Grammar and the ESL writing class. Exploring the dynamics of second language writing, 141-161.
|
| [17] |
Golombek, P. R. (1998). A study of language teachers' personal practical knowledge. TESOL Quarterly, 32(3), 447-464.
|
| [18] |
Harmer, J. (1987). Teaching and learning grammar. London: Longman.
|
| [19] |
Hymes, D. (1972). ‘On Communicative Competence’. In J. B. Pride and J. Holems (Eds.), Sociolinguistic, 269-293. Harmon worth: Penguin.
|
| [20] |
Johnson, K. E. (1994). The emerging beliefs and instructional practices of preservice English as a second language teachers. Teaching & Teacher Education, 10(4): 439-452.
|
| [21] |
Johnson, K. E. (1999). Understanding language teaching: Reasoning in action. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
|
| [22] |
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language Acquisition. NewYork: Pergamon Press.
|
| [23] |
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and principles in language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
|
| [24] |
Lewis, M. (1993) The Lexical Approach: The state of ELT and the way forward. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
|
| [25] |
Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 317-328.
|
| [26] |
Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology. New York: Prentice Hall.
|
| [27] |
Richards, J. C., Gallo, P. B., & Renandya, W. A. (2001). Exploring Teachers' Beliefs and the Processes of Change. PAC Journal, 1, 1, 41-58.
|
| [28] |
Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2005). Professional development for language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press.
|
| [29] |
Saricoban, A., & Metin, E. (2000). Songs, verse and games for teaching grammar. The Internet TESL Journal, 6(10), 1-7.
|
| [30] |
Rutherford, W. E. (1987). Second Language Grammar: Learning and Teaching. London: Longman.
|
| [31] |
Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
| [32] |
Stevick, E. W. (1982). Teaching and learning languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
|
| [33] |
Sysoyev, P. V. (1999). ‘Integrative L2 Grammar Teaching: Exploration, Explanation, and Expression’ The Internet TESL Journal, 5(6). Retrieved April 10, 2016, from
http://iteslj.org/Articles/Sysoyev-Integrative html
|
| [34] |
Ur, P. (1988). Grammar Practice Activities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
|
| [35] |
Wartenberg, D. (2001).‘Ethiopia’s Path towards a New Education Policy’ In Education in Ethiopia, Dieter Wartenberg and W. Mayrhofer (Ed.) 17-49 Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac.
|
| [36] |
Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
| [37] |
Wilkins, D. (1976). Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
| [38] |
Woods, D. (1996). Teacher cognition in language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
|
Cite This Article
-
APA Style
Shumiye, A. S. (2024). Beliefs and Practices in Teaching Grammar Instruction: Babile Primary School in Focus. International Journal of Elementary Education, 13(4), 78-88. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeedu.20241304.11
Copy
|
Download
ACS Style
Shumiye, A. S. Beliefs and Practices in Teaching Grammar Instruction: Babile Primary School in Focus. Int. J. Elem. Educ. 2024, 13(4), 78-88. doi: 10.11648/j.ijeedu.20241304.11
Copy
|
Download
AMA Style
Shumiye AS. Beliefs and Practices in Teaching Grammar Instruction: Babile Primary School in Focus. Int J Elem Educ. 2024;13(4):78-88. doi: 10.11648/j.ijeedu.20241304.11
Copy
|
Download
-
@article{10.11648/j.ijeedu.20241304.11,
author = {Ashenafi Shimeles Shumiye},
title = {Beliefs and Practices in Teaching Grammar Instruction: Babile Primary School in Focus
},
journal = {International Journal of Elementary Education},
volume = {13},
number = {4},
pages = {78-88},
doi = {10.11648/j.ijeedu.20241304.11},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeedu.20241304.11},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijeedu.20241304.11},
abstract = {The researcher conducted this study to seek and to illuminate the methodologies and strategies employed by English language teachers in grammar instruction at Babile Primary School. By engaging in a comparative analysis of the pedagogical beliefs and practical approaches of two seasoned English as a foreign language teachers, the study investigated the subtleties of their teaching methodologies and the various factors that shape their classroom decisions. This examination of the congruence or divergence between their beliefs and instructional methods reveals significant insights into the intricate belief systems of these English as a foreign language teachers and their implications for teaching practices. The analysis indicates that the English as a foreign language teachers at Babile Primary School maintain complex belief frameworks regarding grammar instruction; however, these beliefs do not consistently align with their actual teaching methods. The research identified numerous factors influencing the teachers' classroom decisions, many of which are intricately tied to the specific educational context of Babile Primary School. These results underscore the multifaceted nature of teaching English as a foreign language, highlighting the necessity of understanding and addressing the underlying influences that affect instructional practices. The findings sought to illuminate the nuanced ways in which educators navigate their roles and adapt their approaches to meet the needs of their students in an ever-evolving educational landscape.
},
year = {2024}
}
Copy
|
Download
-
TY - JOUR
T1 - Beliefs and Practices in Teaching Grammar Instruction: Babile Primary School in Focus
AU - Ashenafi Shimeles Shumiye
Y1 - 2024/10/10
PY - 2024
N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeedu.20241304.11
DO - 10.11648/j.ijeedu.20241304.11
T2 - International Journal of Elementary Education
JF - International Journal of Elementary Education
JO - International Journal of Elementary Education
SP - 78
EP - 88
PB - Science Publishing Group
SN - 2328-7640
UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeedu.20241304.11
AB - The researcher conducted this study to seek and to illuminate the methodologies and strategies employed by English language teachers in grammar instruction at Babile Primary School. By engaging in a comparative analysis of the pedagogical beliefs and practical approaches of two seasoned English as a foreign language teachers, the study investigated the subtleties of their teaching methodologies and the various factors that shape their classroom decisions. This examination of the congruence or divergence between their beliefs and instructional methods reveals significant insights into the intricate belief systems of these English as a foreign language teachers and their implications for teaching practices. The analysis indicates that the English as a foreign language teachers at Babile Primary School maintain complex belief frameworks regarding grammar instruction; however, these beliefs do not consistently align with their actual teaching methods. The research identified numerous factors influencing the teachers' classroom decisions, many of which are intricately tied to the specific educational context of Babile Primary School. These results underscore the multifaceted nature of teaching English as a foreign language, highlighting the necessity of understanding and addressing the underlying influences that affect instructional practices. The findings sought to illuminate the nuanced ways in which educators navigate their roles and adapt their approaches to meet the needs of their students in an ever-evolving educational landscape.
VL - 13
IS - 4
ER -
Copy
|
Download
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
