Theoretical Development of Writing Skills in ELT
2.6 Sub-skills of Writing and their Underlying Theories
2.6.9 Grammar
Ur (1991, p. 87) maintains that grammar is a set of rules that define how words (or parts of words) are combined or changed to form acceptable units of meaning within a language. Grammar helps one to learn a language accurately and effectively. But it should be taught consistently as a means to improving mastery of the language, not as an end in itself. Learners cannot produce real-life discourse only by knowing how to construct grammatically correct sentences. They must learn how to create meaning within practical situations and how to produce longer units of language. Grammatical accuracy alone is of no use, unless it is used to produce purposeful meanings in real-life contexts. Though the usefulness of grammar in effective language learning cannot be denied, there is strong reaction against traditional prescriptive rule teaching. Ur (1991, pp. 82-83)provides some guidelines on presenting and explaining a new grammatical structure:
1) The structure itself: In general, a good presentation should include both oral and written forms, and both form and meaning.
2) Example: Enough examples of a structure in a meaningful context (contextualised examples) should be provided, and the teacher must ensure that the students understand their meanings.
3) Terminology: Whether a structure should be called by its grammar-book depends on the situation and the learners. Analytically minded learners will benefit from the use of terminology.
4) Language: Whether the structure should be explained in the students’ mother tongue, or in the target language, or in a combination of the two, depend on the individual teacher’s situation and judgement.
5) Explanation: The teacher should maintain a right balance between accuracy and simplicity in the presentation of the information about a new structure. It should be reasonably accurate but not too detailed. As a rule, a simple generalisation, even if not entirely accurate, is more helpful to learners than a detailed grammar- book information.
6) Delivery: The teacher must speak (and write) clearly and at an appropriate speed.
7) Rules: The teacher will have to fix whether a rule would be helpful for his students or not. Explicit rules are helpful to analytically-minded students. Besides, if the learners can perceive and define the rules on the basis of examples, the teacher should let them do so (inductive method). If the learners find it difficult, then it is better to provide the rules and invite them to produce examples (deductive method). The teacher himself will have to decide which method is likely to prove more effective in his particular situation.
The chief purpose of grammar practice should be to help students acquire the structures so perfectly that they are able to produce them accurately on their own.
Sometimes it is found that a student produces correct samples of a structure when he is being tested on it, but he makes mistakes in the same structures in free speech or writing, which proves that the student has not mastered the structure thoroughly. The teacher’s job is to help students make the ‘leap’ from form-focused accuracy work to fluent, but acceptable, production, by providing a ‘bridge’: a variety of practice activities that familiarise them with the structures in context, giving practice both in form and communicative meaning (Ur, 1991, p. 83).
In general, the lessons should include a representative selection of activities that give both form-focused and meaning-focused practice. Ur (1991, p. 84)gives descriptions of a few practice activities for different English structures. They are arranged in sequence:
from a rigidly controlled and accuracy-oriented exercise in the initial stages to a fluency activity, which provides opportunities for the free and contextualised use of the grammar towards the end.
Type 1––Awareness: After the introduction of the structure, learners are made to encounter it within some kind of discourse, and do a task that focuses their attention on its form and/or meaning.
Type 2––Controlled drills: The students give examples of the structure. These examples are predetermined by the textbook or the teacher, and have to conform to very clear, close-ended clues.
Type 3––Meaningful drills: Here also the responses are rigidly controlled, but learners have a scope to make a limited choice.
Type 4––Guided meaningful practice: Learners construct their own sentences according to a set pattern but they can freely pick up their own vocabulary.
Type 5––(Structure-based) free sentence composition: Learners are asked to make their own responses based on a visual or structural cue. They are told to use the structure.
Type 6––(Structure-based) discourse composition: Learners become involved in a discussion or write a passage following a given task. They are instructed to use a few examples of the structure within the discourse.
Type 7––Free discourse: Here also hold a discussion or write a passage according to a given task, but they are not given any particular direction to use the structure. Nevertheless, the situation is designed in such a way that examples of the structure occur frequently.
If new structures are presented carefully and students are given plenty of varied practice in using them, it can be hoped that they will make relatively few mistakes.
Grammatical mistakes should not be seen as a sign of inadequacy on the students’ or on the teacher’s part rather it should be considered a means to advance teaching and learning. It is better to correct only those mistakes, which are detrimental to comprehensibility and lead to misunderstanding. If the students have difficulty to produce a particular structure without mistake, the teacher should give more time and effort next time he presents it. If a certain structure proves particularly problematic for the students, the teacher should give a review and extra practice of the structure.