Perceptions of Pre-service Teachers of English towards Grammar Teaching in the Turkish Context
Abstract
Purpose of Study: This study aimed to investigate the perceptions and classroom practices of Turkish pre-service teachers of English employing a quantitative research design.
Methods: In this study, which employs a quantitative research design, the questionnaire adapted from a recently conducted study was distributed to 39 female and 5 male senior students at the Department of English Language Teaching at an English-medium state university in Turkey. They were all enrolled in the course Practice Teaching. The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 18.
Findings and Results: The student-teachers favored benefiting from not only form-focused instruction and but also holistic, meaning-based approaches. They assumed an active role in the teaching process as informed decision-makers sensitized to cultural and individual variables in their contexts within which their perceptions were shaped. Instructional challenges were the establishment of form-meaning mappings, informed use of authentic texts, contextualization, target language use, and skills integration.
Conclusions and Recommendations: Classroom experience has helped student-teachers internalize the need for a balanced approach to grammar. Practice teaching course hours should be increased to proceduralize the skills of context-sensitive adjustments.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Alptekin, C., & Tatar, S. (2011). Research on foreign language teaching and learning in Turkey (2005–2009). Language Teaching 44(3), 328-353.
Andrews, S. (2003). Just like instant noodles: L2 teahcers and their beliefs about grammar pedagogy. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice 9(4), 351-375.
Arıkan, A. (2006). Postmethod condition and its implications for English language teacher education. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies 2(1), 1-11.
Azar, B. (2007). Grammar-based teaching: A practicioner‟s perspective. TESL-E,J 11(2).
Bailey, K. M. (1996). The best-laid plans: Teachers‟ in class decisions to depart from their lesson plans. In K. M. Bailey and D. Nunan (Eds.). Voices from the class. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Baleghizadeh, S., & Farschi, S. (2009). An exploration of teachers‟ beliefs about the role of grammar in Iranian high schools and private language institutes. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 52(212), 17-38.
Batstone, R., & Ellis, R. (2009). Principled grammar teaching. System, 37, 194-204.
Bax, S. (2003). The end of CLT: a context approach to language teaching. ELT Journal, 57(3), 278-287.
Borg, S. (1999). The use of grammatical terminology in the second language classroom: a qualitative study of teachers‟ practices and cognitions. Applied Linguistics, 20, 95-126.
Borg, S. (2001). Self-perception and practice in teaching grammar. ELT Journal, 53, 17-167.
Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in grammar teaching: A literature review. Language Awareness, 12(2), 96-108.
Borg, S., & Burns, A. (2008). Integrating grammar in adult TESOL classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 29(3), 456-482.
Burns, A. (1996). Starting all over again: From teaching adults to teaching beginners. In D. Freeman and J. C. Richards (Eds.), Teacher learning in language teaching (pp. 154-177). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Burgess, J., & Etherington, S. (2002). Focus on grammatical form: explicit or implicit? System, 30(4), 433-458.
Cook, G., & Seidlhofer, B. (1995). An applied linguist in principle and practice. In G. Cook and B. Seidlhofer (Eds.). Principle and practice in applied linguistics (pp. 1-26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Copland, F., & Neokleous, G. (2011). L1 to teach L2: Complexities and contradictions. ELT Journal, 65(3), 270-280.
Corder, S. P. (1988). Pedagogic grammars. In W. Rutherford and M. S. Smith (Eds.). Grammar and second language teaching: A book of readings (pp. 123-145). Boston: Heinle and Heinle Publishers.
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In D. C., and J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Eisenstein-Ebsworth, M., & Schweers, C. W. (1997). What researchers say and practitioners do: Perspectives on conscious grammar instruction in the ESL classroom. Applied Language Learning, 8, 237-260.
Elder, C., & Manwaring, D. (2004). The relationship between metalinguistic knowledge and learning outcomes among undergraduate students of Chinese. Language Awareness, 13(3), 145-162.
Ellis, R. (1998). Teaching and research: Options in grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 32(1), 39-60.
Ellis, R. (2002). Grammar teaching – practice or conciousness-raising? In J. C. Richards and W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 167-174). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 54(2), 141-172.
Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 83-108.
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2002). Doing focus on form. System, 30(4), 419-432.
Garrett, N. (1986). The problem with grammar: What kind can the language learner use? The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 133-148.
Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hu, G. (2011). A place for metalanguage in L2 classroom. ELT Journal, 65(2), 180-182.
Kayaoğlu, M. N. (2012). The use of mother tongue in foreign language teaching from teachers‟ practice and perspective. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32, 25-35.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (1994). The postmethod condition: (E)merging strategies for second/foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 27–47.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2001). Toward a postmethod pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 35(4), 537-560.
Lightbrown, P. M. (2000). Classroom SLA research and second languge teaching. Applied Linguistics, 21, 431-462.
Mojica-Diaz, C. C., & Sanchez-Lopez, L. (2010). Constructivist grammatical learning: a proposal for advanced grammatical analysis for college foreign language students. Foreign Language Annals, 45(3), 470-487.
Richards, J.C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: CUP.
Scheffler, P., & Cinciata, M. (2010). Explicit grammar rules and L2 acquisition. ELT Journal, 65(1), 13-23.
Schulz, R. A. (1996). Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: students‟ and teachers‟ views no error correction and the role of grammar. Foreign Language Annals, (29), 343-364.
Schulz, R. A. (2001). Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar teaching and corrective feedback: USA-Colombia. Modern Language Journal, (85), 244-258.
Scrivener, J. (2011). Teaching English grammar: What to teach and how to teach it. Oxford: Macmillan Publishers Limited.
Spada, N., and Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Form-focused instruction: isolated or integrated? TESOL Quarterly, 42, 181-207.
Swan, M. (2005). Legislation by hypothesis: the case of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 376-340.
Ur, P. (2012, October 19). How useful is the research? The Guardian Weekly (Learning English), p. 4.
VanPatten, B., Williams, J., and Rott, S. (2004). Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten, J. Williams, S. Rott, and M. Overstreet (Eds.), Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition (pp.1-26). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Walter, C. (2012, September 21). Time to stop avoiding grammar rules. Guardian Weekly (Learning English).p.4.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
ISSN 1305-578X (Online)
Copyright © 2005-2022 by Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies