TEACHING CONDITIONALS FOR UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
SarjanaPendidikan
LAURENSIA PAMELA SETIAWAN
NIM: 112012087
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS
UNIVERSITAS KRISTEN SATYA WACANA
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT
This thesis contains no such material as has been submitted for examination in
any course or accepted for the fulfillment of any degree or diploma in any
university. To the best of my knowledge and belief, this contains no material
previously published or written by any other person except where due reference is
made in the text.
Copyright @2016: Laurensia Pamela Setiawan and Gita Hastuti, S.Pd., M.A.
All rights reserved. No part of this thesis may be reproduced by any means
without the prior written permission of at least one of the copyright owners or the
English Department of SatyaWacana Christian University, Salatiga.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Grammar Teaching in the Post Method Era ... 4
Introduction
All languages have their own grammar to enable the users to create
meaningful expressions in the respective languages. Thus, learning the grammar
of a language is essential if one wants to be able to use the language properly.
Doff (2000) also believed that by learning grammar students can express
meanings in the form of phrases, clauses and sentences. Grammar is also one of
the important courses in the English Language Education Program (ELEP) of the
Faculty of Language and Arts (FLA) in Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana
(UKSW). Providing grammar courses is one of the attempts of the program to
prepare its students to be able to use English properly and in turn teach the
English language well.
As the researcher mentioned above that grammar is the foundation of a
language, ELEP offered Intermediate Grammar as one of the courses to help the
students in mastering the English grammar. Conditional sentences, or also known
as Conditional Clauses or If Clauses or simply The Conditionals, are one of the
challenging materials in Intermediate Grammar. The reason why the researcher
chose conditional sentences as a research topic was that conditional sentences are
quite complicated. As widely known, conditional sentences have 4 types including
type 0, I, II, and III, which may make the students confused when they should use
each type. In general, they are used to express that the action in the main clause
(without if) can only take place if a certain condition (in the clause with if) is
fulfilled. However, to understand the specific functions of each type, students may
In grammar courses, lecturers‟ role, together with their teaching
approaches, is really important to help the students to learn grammar effectively.
As explained by Azar (2007) one important aspect of the teaching of grammar is
to help learners discover the nature of language, the language consisted of a
predictable pattern that makes what we say, read, hear and write understandable.
Ellis (2006) also add grammar teaching is teaching grammar that includes various
techniques in teaching grammar to make the learners pay attention and make them
understand metalinguistically. The appropriate ways will give positive effects to
the students. Since the difficulties of one grammatical item to another are
different, lecturers may use different ways to teach different grammatical items.
The aim of this study is to describe how the Lecturers teaching Conditionals
in the Intermediate Grammar course, as well as the reasons leading to the choice
behind the chosen ways. The study is guided by the following research questions:
1) How did the two Lecturers teach conditionals? and 2) What are the reasons
behind Lecturers ways?
The participants of this study are the lecturers who taught the Intermediate
Grammar course, and the required data was collected through observations and
semi-structured interviews. The observations were conducted in the Intermediate
Grammar classes in UKSW when the participants taught conditional sentences.
Finally, this study is important for grammar lecturers because it will
provide some practical insights in teaching grammar, especially conditionals, in
LITERATURE REVIEW
Grammar and Its Importance
“Grammar is a system of meaningful structures and patterns that are governed by particular pragmatic constraints” (Larsen-Freeman, 2001). From that definition we know that grammar helps to form sentences so that they will have
meaning. Learning grammar is important as well because grammar proficiency
will help learners to organize words to make meaningful expressions or sentences.
In line with this, Doff (2000) also believed that by learning grammar students can
express meanings in the form of phrases, clauses and sentences. Furthermore,
Richards (1986) approved that grammar plays an important role in the four
language skills (i.e. speaking, reading, listening, and writing)
Therefore, grammar is necessary in order to make the sentences become
meaningful. In regard to learning grammar, Richards and Renandya mentioned
two good reasons for learning grammar, namely comprehensibility and
acceptability (2002, p.152)
Comprehensibility refers to knowing how to build and use certain
structures to make it possible to communicate common types of meaning
successfully. Without these structures, it is difficult to make comprehensible
sentences. In others words, teaching grammar is needed to help the students be
able to communicate using the target language. Meanwhile, acceptability means
not used appropriate grammar, they would be considerate as untrustworthy or
undesirable person.
To sum up, the knowledge of grammar has a significant role in helping
produce meaningful comprehensible expressions that are socially acceptable.
Therefore, it is important to understand grammar when learning English as a
foreign or second language. At this point, teachers‟ assistance is required in order
to help the students understand the concepts and the uses of the English grammar.
Grammar Teaching in the Post Method Era
Kumaravadivelu (2003) introduced the term pedagogy in a broader sense
including issues about “classroom strategies, instructional materials, curricular
objectives, and evaluation measures”, as well as “a wide range of historiopolitical and sociocultural experiences that directly or indirectly influence L2 education” (p.34). He argued, “Post method pedagogy allows us to go beyond, and overcome
the limitations of, method-based pedagogy” (p.34). Within this broad sense of pedagogy, he visualized post-method pedagogy as “a three-dimensional system
consisting of pedagogic parameters of particularity, practicality, and possibility”
(p.34).
By means of particularity, Kumaravadivelu (2003) explained,
…any language pedagogy, to be relevant, must be sensitive to a particular group of
In other words, any language pedagogy can be said appropriate if it considers
the context in which it is applied.
The parameter of practicality implies that the right people to design such a
practical theory are the practicing teachers. The process of coming up to such a
theory of practice involves continual reflection and action (Kumaravadivelu,
2003, p. 35).
Meanwhile, the parameter of possibility “seeks to tap the sociopolitical
consciousness that participants bring with them to the classroom so that it can also
function as a catalyst for a continual quest for identity formation and social
transformation” (Kumaravadivelu, 2003, p. 37). This parameter recognizes that
students come to class with sociopolitical awareness. The approach and
techniques used in the classroom should encourage students to continue shaping
their identity and to give impacts to the society.
Each of the parameters above shapes and is shaped by the other in a
Figure 1. Beyond Methods: Macrostrategies for language teaching. B.
Kumaravadivelu (2003). United States of America : mary jane peluso.
As the above three pedagogic parameters is assumed to potentially form
the foundation for a post method pedagogy, and to enable the teaching practice to
go beyond the limitation of methods, Kumaravadivelu (2003) proposed a
macrostategic framework to help carry out the essential features of the post
method pedagogy in the classrooms. The framework contains macrostrategies and
microstrategies. The former refers to the broad guiding principles or the general
plan resulting from “historical, theoretical, empirical, and experiential insights
related to L2 learning and teaching” (p.38), whereas the latter refers to the
situation-specific, need-based classroom techniques which are generated by the
practicing teachers in attempt to operate the general principles in the
macrostrategies in their classroom contexts.
To link grammar and communication, Larsen-Freeman (2001, 2014)
recommended a three-dimensional grammar framework to aid students “use the
language accurately, meaningfully, and appropriately” (2014, p.258). The three
dimensions that should be there in teaching grammar are “structure or form”, “semantics or meaning”, and “use or the pragmatic conditions governing appropriate usage” (2014, p.258). Figure 2 shows the summary and the
Figure 2. D. Larsen-Freeman, (2014). Teaching grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. Brinton, & M.A. Snow (Eds.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (4th ed.) National Geographic Learning/Cengage, 256-270.
As seen from Figure 2, firstly, the form or structure wedge is related with
the way in which a certain grammar structure is constructed and organized within
a text or discourse (morphosyntactic and lexico grammatical patterns)
(Larsen-Freeman 2014). The sound (phonemic) and the writing (graphemic) patterns of
that grammar construction are also important to notice.
Secondly, the meaning or semantics wedge concerns with the meaning of a
particular grammar production. This may include the lexical meaning as
suggested in dictionaries, and grammatical meaning, which is suggested by certain
grammatical forms.
Thirdly, the use or pragmatics wedge deals with “the use of language in context” (Larsen-Freeman, 2014, p.258). The context may be a social context (determined by the speakers, their relations and the setting of the conversation), or
a linguistics discourse co-text (determined by the preceding and the following
decision of when and why a person uses a certain grammatical expression in a
certain context.
To sum up, as the figure of pie suggests, each dimension is part of the pie
and they are connected to another. This indicates that the three dimensions of
form, meaning and use cannot be separated. In other words, those three
dimensions (form, meaning, and use) need to be discussed in teaching grammar.
According to Larsen-Freeman (2014), the goal of the grammar teaching
should be “grammaring, the ability to use grammar constructions accurately,
meaningfully, and appropriately” (p.264). The term grammaring is to emphasize
the dynamic process involved in reaching the goal.
Grammar Teaching Ways
According Kumaravadivelu (2003), in the post-method era there are
several methods, approaches and techniques that can combine in teaching
grammar. In Brown (1994: 48), Anthony states techniques are the particular
activities that demonstrated in the classroom that are consistent with a method and
therefore in all together with an approach as well. Similarly, Brown (1994) claims
“techniques is any of a wide variety of exercises, activities, or devices used in the classroom for realizing lesson objectives.” (p.51). To be concluded, techniques is
the ways of teaching the form of exercises, activities, or devices that are
consistent with a method and an approach used and done. As for Harmer (2001)
mentioned that there are a number of study techniques which we can ensure that
exchanges or texts, but also clear about its construction and he mentioned several
techniques in teaching grammar:
The first one is demonstration which means language can be used in a text
which clearly shows what it means. Besides Lecturers may use pictures which
clearly shows what it means and also use pictures or various items of realia to
demonstrate meaning.
The second is explanation which means explain the construction of
language in diagrams using the board of overhead projector. He added that the
way Lecturers explain to the students will depend upon the language form we are
focusing on and the age, level and preferences of the class. However, as mention
by Brown (2002) teachers‟ approach to language teaching and learning plays a great role in the search for alternative techniques. With the integration of
explanation techniques, Gabrielatos (1994, as cited in Grounds and Guerrero,
2014) formulated the steps in PPP as follows: the teacher starts by presenting a
new grammatical item, students then practice using the new grammatical item in
guided activities, and finally students use the new grammatical item in free
communicative production (spoken or written) activities. Therefore, the
production phase is often so-called communication. Similar with Gabrielatos,
Harmer (2001) also explain that in this procedure, the teacher introduces a
situation which contextualizes the language to be taught. Then, present the
language. After that practice the language using accurate reproduction techniques
such choral repetition (where the students repeat a word, phrase, or sentence all
As mention in the (Grounds and Guerrero, 2014) and Harmer (2001), on
the presentation part there are two ways in presenting the rules which are
inductively, and deductively. “Deductive presentations are explicit and direct: a rule and its application” (p.23). Thornbury (2002) also believed that “deductive
approach starts with the presentation of a rule and is followed by examples which
the rule is applied.” (p.29)
Meanwhile, inductive presentations are “discovery-oriented”, encouraging
students to “notice” or “discover” new patterns/rules “in a realistic and meaningful context” (Gollin, 1998, as cited in Grounds and Guerrero, 2014, p.23). In grammar teaching, teachers present the examples at the beginning, then
generalizing rules from the given examples. Thornbury (2002) further explained,
“An inductive approach starts with some examples which a rule is inferred.”
(p.29)
The third is discovery. In this techniques students can be encouraged to
understand new language forms either by discovering them for themselves in a
text, or by looking at grammatical evidence in order to work out a grammar rules.
The fourth is accurate reproduction. In this techniques Lecturers ask
students to repeat new words, phrases or sentences in a controlled way, correcting
them when they get things wrong and showing approval when they use the form
correctly. Besides, Lecturers feedback also plays an important role in here.
Harmer (2001) mention “accurate reproduction – or controlled practice – is the
Fifth is immediate creativity. In this techniques Lecturers ask the students
to create their own sentences using the language form. Harmer (2001) add
“Immediate creativity is the „production‟ phase of the PPP approach. As an early activation of language it is not strictly a study activity, though most study
sequences will allow for it at some stage. It can also be used after any explanation,
or after a discovery activity.” (p.156).
Last is check question. To check the students understanding Lecturers may
ask several questions.
What mentioned above are techniques that can be used and developed in
teaching grammar. As the researcher mention before the aim of this study is to
describe the teacher‟s techniques in teaching Conditionals in the Intermediate Grammar course, as well as the reasons leading to the choice behind the chosen
techniques.
THE STUDY
Research Methodology
This is a qualitative study which focus to find out about how the 2
Lecturers teaching conditionals and the reasons behind the particular ways.
Context
This research is conducted in the English Language Education Program
(ELEP) in the Faculty of Language and Arts (FLA) in UKSW, Salatiga, Central
Java. The researcher choose FLA because grammar is really important in this
grammar (ET 212), and intermediate grammar (ET 221). Intermediate grammar
itself is worth four credits and it has around two hours in one meeting. ELEP
students can take the Intermediate Grammar (ET 221) course in the second
trimester, ideally after they have passed basic grammar with BC as the minimum
score. There are six grammatical points offered in the intermediate grammar
course including modals, gerunds and infinitives, degrees and comparison,
adjective clauses, noun clauses, and conditionals type I, II, and III. The lecturers
have to cover six grammatical points in 14 meetings with three tests in the sixth,
the eleventh, and the fourteenth meetings. Therefore, the researcher is interested
in investigating the lecturers‟ techniques in teaching this grammatical item to help students understand the concepts better.
Participants
The participants of this study are two Intermediate Grammar lecturers
who each taught one Intermediate Grammar class in the second trimester of the
2015/2016 academic year. There were two Intermediate Grammar classes at that
time; hence, the participants represent the whole population at that time.
Lecturer A is a female lecture that had been graduated from English
Educational Program, mastered of translation, and doctor philosophy of
translation studies. Lecturer A has been teaching English for more than 15 years.
Similarly with Lecturer A, Lecturer B also had been graduated from
English Language Education program and mastered English Language Teaching.
Data Collection Instruments
The researcher used observation, semi-structured interview, and a
questionnaire on lecturer profile to get the data. First of all, the researcher used
observations to observe the lecturers when teaching conditionals type I and II, and
mixed-type, especially the techniques that the participants used in teaching
conditionals. The researcher used field notes to help make necessary information
when the researcher observed the participants in the classes. The researcher
observed Lecturer A while she was teaching conditionals type I and II in Meeting
12. Meanwhile, the researcher observed Lecturer B while she was teaching the
mixed-type conditionals in Meeting 13 because the class meetings were scheduled
at the same time and the researcher could not be in two different places at the
same time to do the class observations.
Second, semi-structured interviews with the participants were conducted
to dig deeper information from the participants based on the observation data.
Each semi-structured interview was guided by eight main questions (see
APPENDIX A). Third, the participants were asked to fill out the lecturer profile
form (see APPENDIX B) to get the information regarding their education and
their teaching experiences. Such information may influence the way the
participants teach conditionals. Furthermore, the researcher also use the
Data Collection Procedures
First of all, the researcher studied the intermediate grammar syllabus to
decide when to do the observations. After that, the researcher informed the
participants about this study, the reason why the participants were chosen and the
purpose of this study. Both Lecturer A and B had the same schedule when
teaching intermediate grammar (ET 221). Lecturer A teaches Intermediate
Grammar (ET 221) every Tuesday at 9-11 am, however Lecturer B teaches every
Monday at 4-6 pm. There were 14 meetings x 100 minutes in one trimester. The
materials on Conditionals were scheduled to be discussed in Week 12 for type I
and II, and Week 13 for Type 3 and mixed type conditionals.
The researcher observed Lecturer A on April 5th 2016, as for Lecturer B
the researcher observed on March 28th 2016. After studying the result of the
observation, the researcher conducted semi-structured interviews with the
participants using eight main questions that were developed on the basis of the
observation results as a guide. Finally, the researcher asked the participants to fill
out the lecturer profile form to uncover some background information.
Data Analysis Procedure
After the observations were done, the researcher coded them according to
theoretical framework. A list of interview questions was designed for the
semi-structured interview with each participant based on the possible themes that
occurred after observations. After that, the researcher coded them into the
also used pseudonyms to identify the data in observations, interview, and lecturer
profile form.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
As the researcher mentioned above that grammar is the foundation of a
language, the ELEP of FLA in UKSW offers Intermediate Grammar as one of the
courses to help the students in mastering the English grammar. This study aims to
describe how the 2 Lecturers teaching Conditionals in the Intermediate Grammar
course, as well as the reasons leading to the choice the chosen ways.
Lecturer A
There were 28 students in Lecturer A‟s class. These are what happened in
class during the observation on April 5, 2016 when Lecturer A was teaching
Conditionals types I and II.
First of all, Lecturer A gave one example of Conditionals type I by writing
a sentence (on the board): “If it rains, I will stay in the building.” The sentence mentioned by Lecturer A did not exist in the course handbook. Then she asked the
students, “From that example, what is the structure of Conditionals type I?” Some
of the students were quiet, however some of them tried to answer Lecturer A‟s questions. She added some sentences of her own to drill the students. This showed
the theory of grammar teaching techniques which is explanation by Harmer
(2001). In this section Lecturer A also used PPP approach mentioned by Harmer
(2001) and (Grounds and Guerrero, 2014) in the presenting part Lecturer A
the students. In this part also showed that Lecturer A used inductive approach in
presenting the conditional type I. Thornbury (2002) further explained, “An
inductive approach starts with some examples which a rule is inferred.” (p.29)
After that Lecturer A asked the students to do the exercise under the
explanation of conditionals type I. This is included in practice stage in PPP. As
mentioned by Harmer (2001) and (Grounds and Guerrero, 2014) which stated that
students then practice using the new grammatical item in guided activities. To
help students do the exercises, Lecturer A asked them to translate the English
words into Indonesian. As mentioned by Thornbury (2002), “In terms of efficiency, translation is probably the most economical means of conveying
meaning - at least in terms of orienting learners a rough idea of the meaning.” (p.40).
Few minutes later, when introducing Conditional type II, Lecturer A gave
a sample sentence first “If it rained, I would stay in the building,” then she asked the students “so „if it rained‟ itu pakainya tenses apa?” (“So, what is the tense
used in the sentence „If it rained‟?”). Again, she gave the sentence from the
handbook “if I were rich I would buy a new car. Itu berarti saya kaya atau tidak?”
(it means, I am rich or not?) Then, the students answered “no”. From this part Lecturer A still use PPP which is presenting the conditionals type II. Still the
same with when she teach conditional type I, she still used inductive to present the
grammar rules. Besides, she also asked the students first by saying “itu pakainya tenses apa?; itu berarti saya kaya atau tidak?” (“So, what is the tense used in the
discovery-oriented mention by (Gollin, 1998, as cited in Grounds and Guerrero,
2014, p.23) inductive presentations are “discovery-oriented”, encouraging
students to “notice” or “discover” new patterns/rules “in a realistic and meaningful context”. However, according to Harmer (2001) techniques, Lecturer A used the last techniques which is check questions to make sure whether the
students were already understand or not.
Subsequently, Lecturer A asked the students to do the exercises to practice
conditionals type II. Similarly, this is the practice part mentioned by Harmer
(2001) and (Grounds and Guerrero, 2014) which stated that students then practice
using the new grammatical item in guided activities. Again, she asked the students
to translate the exercise in Indonesian. Thus, the researcher asked Lecturer A in
the interview on 20th April 2016, the reasons behind ask the students to translate
into Indonesian and Lecturer A stated:
“If you cannot do anything you still have Indonesian and Indonesian is not very
different from English and there are also lots of similarities between English and Indonesian so I asked them if they were confused to make a meaning they can go
back to Indonesian to get the meaning correct.”
From her statement she still believe that L1 plays important role in
teaching grammar. It is not surprising that she used translation. Her statement in
line with Thornbury (2002), “In terms of efficiency, translation is probably the most economical means of conveying meaning - at least in terms of orienting
learners a rough idea of the meaning.” (p.40).
Based on the Lecturer A observation and interview, Lecturer A used the
where she gave the sample sentence first and then followed them up with the
discussion of the rules, while inviting students‟ participation and helping them to get the meaning first and the functions of the grammar patterns by making use of
their knowledge in Indonesian (L1). Besides, she also used translation as her
techniques in teaching conditionals. When the researcher looked at Lecturer A
Lecturer Profile from she wrote that “I don‟t believe in any specific superior way
of teaching grammar” (Lecturer Profile Form, July 25th 2016).
In line with theory from Kumaravadivelu (2003) mentioned that “Post method pedagogy allows us to go beyond, and overcome the limitations of,
method-based pedagogy” (p.34). In other words, in post-method era, the method used by a teacher should be generated by the teacher him/herself by considering
the students‟ needs, the students‟ grammar background, the materials and the
limitation of time.
To sum up, based on the observation and interviews above, Lecturer A
used inductive approach in teaching conditionals, especially in the presentation
phase of PPP proposed by (Grounds and Guerrero, 2014). Firstly she explained
the rules first then give the students the examples, after that she asked the students
to do the exercise related with the rule that has been explained before.
Unfortunately, based on the observation, the use of PPP approach as
proposed by Gabrielatos (1994, as cited in Grounds and Guerrero, 2014), is not
completed yet because Lecturer A did not follow the production phase.
Lecturer B
In Lecturer B‟s class, there were 30 students altogether. These are what happened in class during the observation on March 28, 2016 when Lecturer B was
teaching mixed-type conditional.
First of all, Lecturer B explained about the mixed-type conditionals, “So normally the time in the if-clause and the time in the result clause are different:
one clause may be in the present and the other one in past tense. For example if he
were a good student, he would have studied for the test yesterday.” Lecturer B mentioned the example from the student‟s handbook. The student‟s handbook
itself especially for mixed-type conditional presented the rules first then followed
by the examples.
She also reminded the students “jadi kalau pakai past tense gunakan had +
v3.” (So, if you use past tense you have to use had + v3). Based on Harmer (2001) this is included in explanation theory. According to PPP, this is included in
presentation stage. By mentioning the structure first then followed by the
examples, Lecturer B showed to use deductive approach. As mention by
Thornbury (2002) “deductive approach starts with the presentation of a rule and is
followed by examples which the rule is applied.” (p.29). Then, the researcher asked Lecturer B the reasons behind using deductive approach, and she answered:
Because the handbook itself presents the theory first and then the exercise so
what I did in class at that time just to made it clear this is the pattern and let‟s try the exercise based on the pattern that they have learned so basically, I‟m
just repeating what the book presented using Bahasa Indonesia to the
From Lecturer B answered, showed that the students handbook became the
reasons behind the techniques used in teaching mixed-typed conditionals.
After explained about mixed-typed conditional, Lecturer B asked the
students to do the exercise about mixed-typed conditionals. This part is related
with PPP mention by Harmer (2001) and (Grounds and Guerrero, 2014) which
stated that students then practice using the new grammatical item in guided
activities. Furthermore, she discussed the exercise 9 on page 88, in which the
instruction is to change the sentences into conditionals. She mentioned “karena di true sentencenya menggunakan present dan past, jadi kalau mau di ubah juga
harus pakai present dan past tense juga ya.” (Because the true sentence uses present and past, so if you want to change the sentence into conditionals you have
to change it into present and past tense too). Then, she asked the students “lalu jadinya bagaimana?” (So, what is the answer?).
She reminded the students to the rule over and over again, and invited
students to share their opinion of how to do the exercise. Based on the observation
on Lecturer B also she showed to drill the students by reminding them the
structure of mixed-typed conditional until the students understand about the
materials. Besides, that is the techniques mentioned by Lecturer B on the Lecturer
Profile Form. As mentioned in the theory of Paulston and Bruder (1976),
“grammar lesson should consist of grammatical rules which explain the
particularities of the structural pattern to be learned plus a series of drills from a
mechanical level to a communicative in order to give the students optimum
Next, Lecturer B asked the students to understand the meaning first in
order to change the statements into conditionals. Lecturer B said “Coba maksud dari kalimat ‘the room is full of flies because you left the door open‟ apa?”
(“What is the meaning of „the room is full of flies because you left the door open‟?”). When Lecturer B explained the sentences she asked the students to
imagine the meaning of the sentences. This finding is also related with the theory
from Larsen-Freeman (2014) of three-dimensional grammar framework: that three
dimensions of form, meaning, and use should be addressed in teaching grammar.
Lecturer B used the context to help the students understand first about the
sentences. As she mentioned in Lecturer Profile Form, she responded that
grammar should be given in context, lecturer should explain grammar in a way
that matches with the students‟ cognitive level. This is still related with theory from Kumaravadivelu (2003) that “Post method pedagogy allows us to go beyond, and overcome the limitations of, method-based pedagogy” (p.34).
To sum up, based on the observation and interviews above, Lecturer B
used deductive approach in teaching conditionals, especially in the presentation
phase of PPP proposed by (Grounds and Guerrero, 2014). Firstly she presented
the rules to the students, then she asked the students to do the exercise related with
the rule that has been explained before. After that, Lecturer B asked the students
to make a sentence to check their understanding. However, similar to Lecturer A,
CONCLUSION
The aim of this study is to describe how the Lecturers teaching
Conditionals in the Intermediate Grammar course, as well as the reasons leading
to the choice behind the chosen ways. As a conclusion this study finds that both
Lecturer A and B used PPP approach in teaching conditional type I, II and
mixed-typed conditionals. In Presentation stage they explained about conditionals.
However, in this stage Lecturer A choose to use inductive but Lecturer B choose
to use deductive. Then on the Practice stage, they asked their students to do the
exercise. In this stage Lecturer A choose to use translation to help the students
understand the concept. However Lecturer B choose drilling techniques. The
students‟ grammar background, limitation of time, and the materials became the
main reasons of the techniques used by both Lecturer A and B.
By the presence of this study, Both Lecturer A and B also used PPP
approach in teaching conditionals. They explained the materials, then asked the
students to practice by doing the exercises on the handbook. However, both
Lecturer A and B did not do the production of PPP approach. The researcher
suggests that the lecturer could add the activities that encourage communicative
production of PPP approach to reach the goal of the approach itself, which is
communication.
Lastly, hopefully this research may be a great example for teachers of
English Language Education Program (ELEP) in considering which approaches
believes that this research can be developed into a larger scale of research in the
future, which the researcher had not managed to conduct due to the limited time.
As a conclusion, this research can still be explored further and deeper related with
techniques and approaches in teaching grammar.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, I would like to give my biggest gratitude to my Almighty God
and savior, Jesus Christ. I would never be able to finish this study without Him. I
would also like to thank my supervisor, Mrs. Gita Hastuti, S.Pd., M.A. for her
willingness to give her time to read and give suggestion to my thesis in the midst
of her busy schedule. Besides, I would like to thank my examiner, Anita
Kurniawati, M.Hum, a great gratitude comes from my heart for her inputs and
also kindness to examine my thesis. I would also like to thank the lecturers whom
I have observed and interviewed for the time they gave me and for the answers
which gave great contribution to this thesis. Big thanks also to my best friends;
Ivana, Triyuli, Kezia, Kristin, Eva and also my PPL team (Yubi, Luky, Oliv,
keykun, Yuan) who always listened to my problems, and supported me. Last but
not least, I would like to thank to my family who always support me to finish my
thesis.
References:
Anthony, E. M. 1963. Approach, method and technique. English Language Teaching 17: 63–67.
Brown, Doughlas. (1994). Principles of language Learning and Teaching (3rd
Ellis, R. (2006) Current Issues in the Teaching of Grammar: An SLA Perspective. TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 40, No. 1, p.83-107.
Grounds, P., & Guerrero, S. (2014). Primary Methodology Handbook: Practical Ideas for ELT. mexico: Richmond publishing, S.A.de C.V.2014.
Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. 3rd edition. Pearson Education Ltd.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2001). Toward a postmethod pedagogy.TESOL Quarterly 35:4:537–60.
Kumaravadivelu. (2003). Beyond Methods: Macrostrategies for language teaching. United States of America : mary jane peluso.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001). Teaching Grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia (ed.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (3rd edn., pp. 251-66). Boston, MA:Thomson/ Heinle.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2014). Teaching grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. Brinton, & M.A. Snow (Eds.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (4th ed.) National Geographic Learning/Cengage, 256-270.
Paulston, C. B., & Bruder, M. N. (1976). Teaching English as a Second
Language: Techniques and Procedures. Winthrop Publishers.
Richards, J. C. and T. Rodgers (1986). Approaches and Methods in Language
Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J., & Renandya, W. (Eds.). (2002). Methodology in language teaching:
An anthology of current practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
APPENDIX A:
Here are some questions for the interview with the lecturers:
Basic questions:
1. What did you think were the difficulties that students possibly faced when
learning conditional sentences?
2. What did you do to anticipate them?
3. How would you describe students‟ English proficiency level in your class? Questions for teacher A*
1. Why did you explain the conditional sentences using context?
2. Why did you often use inductive approach in teaching conditional
sentence?
3. Why did you ask the students to connect with the general rules and the
degree of possibility in teaching conditional sentence?
4. If the students were still confused you suggested that the students could
translate the sentences on the exercises into Indonesian. Why?
5. How did you teach the mixed types and type 3 of conditionals to students?
Questions for teacher B*
1. Based on the observation, why did you often use Indonesian when
teaching the conditional sentences?
2. Why did you often use deductive approach in teaching conditional
3. Why did you translate the statements or questions on the exercises into
Indonesian too?
4. Why did you ask the reason behind the students‟ answer? 5. How did you teach type 1 and 2 of conditionals to students?
*Will be adapted based on the observation
APPENDIX B:
Questionnaire on Teacher’s Profile
Name :
Education :
Level Graduation
Year Institution Major
Graduate
Masters
Ph.D.
Teaching Experiences
Belief and Principles in teaching grammar
