teaching grammar to first - year non - english major students at phuong dong university through meaning - focused tasks = dạy ngữ pháp cho sinh viên năm thứ nhất không chuyên tiếng anh

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY
Hanoi university of languages and international studies

DEPARTMENT OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES

Nguyễn thị h-ơng lan

Teaching grammar
TO first-year non-english major students
at phuong dong university
through meaning-focused tasks
(dạy ngữ pháp cho sinh viên năm thứ nhất không
chuyên tiếng anh tại tr-ờng đại học ph-ơng đông
thông qua các hoạt động chú trọng vào nghÜa
cđa cÊu tróc)
Field
: English Methodology
Code
: 601410
Supervisor : Lê Văn Canh, M.A.

hµ néi - 2009


TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATIONS.........................................................................................................

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...........................................................................................

ii

ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................

iii

LIST OF GRAPHS AND TABLES ..............................................................................

iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................

v

TABLE OF CONTENT.................................................................................................

vi

PART I: INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................

1

I.1. Rationale..................................................................................................................

1

I.2. Aims of the study.....................................................................................................

1

I.3. Significance of the study.......................................................................................... 2
I.4. Scope of the study....................................................................................................

2

I.5. The research questions.............................................................................................

2

I.6. Method of the study.................................................................................................

3

I.7. Design of the study..................................................................................................

3

PART II: DEVELOPMENT..........................................................................................

5

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW.......................................................................

5

1.1. Introduction.............................................................................................................

5

1.2. Approaches to grammar.................. .......................................................................

5

1.3. Forms-focused vs Meaning-focused grammar instruction. .................................... 7
1.3.1. Definitions of terminologies ................................................................................ 8
1.3.1.1. Forms-focused grammar instruction ................................................................

8

1.3.1.2. Meaning-focused grammar instruction ............................................................

8

1.3.2. Forms-focused activities .....................................................................................

9

1.3.2.1. Definitions of forms-focused activities ............................................................

9

1.3.2.2. Classification of forms-focused activities.........................................................

9

1.3.2.2.1. Repetition presentation drills ........................................................................

10

1.3.2.2.2. Substitution drills ..........................................................................................

11

1.3.2.2.3. Conversions ...................................................................................................

12

vi


1.3.2.2.4. Sentence modification ...................................................................................

14

1.3.2.2.5. Response practice ..........................................................................................

15

1.3.2.2.6. Translation exercises .....................................................................................

17

1.3.3. Meaning-focused activities .................................................................................

17

1.3.3.1. Definitions of meaning-focused activities ........................................................ 17
1.3.3.2. Classification of meaning-focused activities .................................................... 18
1.3.3.2.1. Interactive activities ......................................................................................

18

1.3.3.2.2. Persionalized activities ..................................................................................

18

1.3.3.2.3. Games ............................................................................................................ 19
1.4. Previous studies on meaning-focused grammar instruction ................................... 20
1.5. Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 21
CHAPTER 2: THE STUDY...........................................................................................

22

2.1. Design and methodology......................................................................................... 22
2.1.1. Subjects of the study............................................................................................

22

2.1.2. The instruments....................................................................................................

22

2.2. Data Analysis..........................................................................................................

23

2.2.1. Distribution of summed scores (items 1-12)........................................................

24

2.2.2. Questionnaires......................................................................................................

25

2.2.2.1. Students’ feelings about grammar learning......................................................

25

2.2.2.2. Students’ evaluation about the effects of grammar practice.............................

27

2.2.2.3. Students’ belief in grammar teaching method................................................... 29
2.2.2.4. Students’ tension with grammar learning.......................................................... 29
2.2.3 Comparison of students’ attitudes towards grammar learning between pre- 31
questionnaire and post questionnaire (items 1-12)........................................................
2.2.4. Comparison of students’ attitudes between pre-questionnaire and post 33
questionnaire (items 13-17)............................................................................................
2.3. Discussion...............................................................................................................

34

CHAPTER 3: RECOMMENDATIONS AND LIMITATIONS..................................

36

3.1. Recommendations...................................................................................................

36

vii


3.2. Limitations and suggestions for further study........................................................

36

PART III: CONCLUSION............................................................................................

38

REFERENCES...............................................................................................................

40

APPENDICES................................................................................................................ I
Appendix 1: Student questionnaire on grammar leaning..............................................

I

Appendix 2: Sample of grammar lesson plan................................................................

VI

viii


LIST OF GRAPHS AND TABLES
Table 1: Sample table of distribution of summed scores (items 1-12)
Table 2: Sample table of distribution of summed scores (items 13-17)

Table 3: Distribution of summed scores: Students (n=31) attitudes
Table 4a: The result of students’ feelings about grammar learning in the pre and postquestionnaire
Table 4b: Mean scores of students’ feelings about grammar learning
Table 5a: The result of students’ evaluation about effects of grammar practice
Table 5b: Mean scores of students’ evaluation about effects of grammar practice
Table 6: Mean scores of students’ belief in grammar teaching method
Table 7: Distribution of summed scores (items 13-17)
Table 8: Mean scores of students’ tension to grammar learning
Table 9: Comparison of students’ attitudes between pre-questionnaire and post questionnaire
(items 1-12)
Table 10: Comparison of students’ attitudes between pre-questionnaire and post questionnaire
(items13-17)
Graph 1: Sampling distribution of sample mean differences (items 1-12)
Graph 2: Sampling distribution of sample mean differences (items 13-17)

iv


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
PDU: Phuong Dong University
CLT: Communicative Language Teaching
CA: Communicative Approach
L1: First language
L2: Second language
SD: Standard deviation
Df: Degree of freedom
P: Probability value
T: Teacher
S: Student

v


PART I: INTRODUCTION
I.1. Rationale
It is a fact that English has become more and more popular and vital in Vietnam in
recent decades. There have been more and more people rushing to study English in language
centers in the last few years because they hold a belief that English helps them be more
exposed to better job opportunities. In correspondence with this trend, in almost of schools,
colleges and universities, English has become a compulsory subject. Phuong Dong University
(PDU), where I have been working for five years, is not an exception.
During my five-year teaching English at this university, I find that most of students are
weak at expressing their thoughts in the right way. That means what they say are the words put
together without grammar rules. Their weakness at expressing ideas in the correct way is that
teacher often spends more time on explaining new grammar verbly than letting students
practice new grammar items orally. In other words, the grammar sections in the course book
(New Headway Elementary, by Liz and John Soars, third edition) are explained verbly and
grammar exercises are done passively by students. So that students are not interested in
learning grammar and they find grammar rather difficult to master. Their weakness at uttering
a right sentence does not meet the target of teaching and learning English- fluent
communication. Much worse, most of them put the words together rather than use the learned
grammar structures in speaking. In addition, many students are too shy to speak in the class
whereas most of the grammar lessons are carried out in traditional methods. This fact has
urged me to find out the way to help students apply their learned grammar knowledge in
getting the meanings across. Thus, in this thesis, I intend to investigate the effect of teaching
grammar through meaning-focused tasks.
I.2. Aims of the study
As far as we know, the key purpose of learning a language is always to communicate
fluently. That means, students can communicate. Therefore, in order to learn English well,
learners first have to master its grammar system. The fact at my university is that almost

1


students are better at learning grammar especially doing grammar exercises than using the
learned grammatical structures in expressing their thought in both writing and speaking. This
observation urges the researcher to bring some changes into those students. In this study, the
researcher wanted to test the hypothesis that applying meaning-focused practice activities in
grammar learning may help the students improve their communicative ability.
I.3. Significance of the study
This study is first hoped to be helpful to both teachers and students at Phuong Dong
University because its findings will enable not only the teachers but also the students to see
whether their ways of teaching and learning English in general and grammar in particular is
appropriate and effective. The practical meaning of this study is to suggest some ways for
combining teaching grammar in form-focused task with meaning-focused tasks to situation
students apply English grammar structures into expressing their opinions well when they
speak English.
I.4. Scope of the study
This study is set out to test the hypothesis that teaching grammar through meaningfocused activities may help the students to change their attitudes towards grammar learning so
that they find grammar learning more interesting and useful. The researcher, therefore, did not
intend to test the effectiveness of meaning-focused grammar instruction by means of a pre-test
– post-test experiment. It is the researcher‟s belief that if grammar teaching can bring about
positive changes in students‟ attitudes, they will find grammar learning more interesting and
useful. The outcome of this attitudinal change will be students‟ greater investment in grammar
learning.
I.5. research questions
This study intends to address the following two research questions:
1. What are students‟ initial attitudes towards grammar learning?
2. How have students‟ attitudes changed after the application of meaning-focused
activities?

2


Especially, the following hypothesis was investigated:
Meaning-focused practice activities (mainly oral practice) help to change students‟ attitude
towards grammar learning.
I.6. Method of the study
This research aimed at measuring the effect of meaning-focused activities (mainly oral
practice) on students‟ attitudinal changes. Of many research methods, a survey design was
appropriate to the purpose of the study. One-Group Pre-questionnaire – Post-questionnaire
which is equivalent to One-Group Pretest – Posttest Design was applied to carry out this study.
This design can be diagrammed as follows:
Pre-treatment questionnaire
O

Treatment

Post – treatment questionnaire

X

O

Compare
In this diagram, O is dependent variable (attitude) and X is independent variable
(meaning-focused activities). X is the treatment administered to the subjects.
- A group of research subjects is measured on the dependent variable. O prior to
administration of the treatment condition. The independent variable X is then administered,
and the dependent variable O is again measured. The difference between the pre- and postquestionnaire scores is taken as an index of the effectiveness of the treatment condition.

- The one-group pre-treatment – post-treatment questionnaire design is weak because it does
not ensure the internal validity. However, it does provide some information in that it lets you
know if a change occurred between pre-treatment and post-treatment questionnaire.
I.7. Design of the study
This study is divided into three parts as follows:
Part one, introduction, deals with the reason for the research and the aims, scope and
methodology of the study. The research questions are also raised in this part.
Part two, development, consists of three following chapters:

3


- Chapter one gives some theoretical background relating to approaches to grammar, formsfocused vs meaning-focused grammar instruction, forms-focused grammar instruction,
meaning-focused grammar instruction, forms-focused activities, meaning-focused activities,
and some previous studies on grammar teaching as well.
- Chapter two provides an analysis on the attitudes of the first-year non- major students at
Phuong Dong University towards the use of meaning-focused activities (mainly oral practice)
in teaching and learning grammar. And the change in students‟ attitudes after applying
meaning-focused activities is also mentioned in this chapter.
- Chapter three focuses on some recommendations about using meaning-focused activities
(mainly oral practice) in teaching and learning grammar and some limitations as well.
Part three, conclusion, addresses the key issues in the study, summarizing some shortcomings
revealed during the process of completing this research paper and giving a suggestion for a
further research

4


PART II: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1. Introduction
It can not be denied that the role of teaching and learning grammar in learning a language
is very important, because grammar helps learners express their thought in a clear way. It is
considered as a skeleton of any languages. Thus, if learners master the grammar knowledge
that they are learning, it is much easier for them to acquire that language. However, for such a
long time, grammar has been a word that often freezes the hearts of students and teachers,
because the approaches of teaching grammar are too mechanical. Most approaches to grammar
teaching focus on individual constructions which have often been taught as a separate skill
disassociated from the rest of language learning. The students learning them have to do a large
number of grammar exercises in the form of multiple choice that are less helpful to
communicate. These pieces are never put together into a structural pattern that enables
students to discuss in English they are learning. So they will soon forget what they have
learned. Grammar learning is not funny and is not meaningful either. It, of course, is not
memorable. As Burner said: “Perhaps the most basic thing that can be said about human
memory, after a century of extensive research, is that unless detail is placed into a structural
pattern, it is rapidly forgotten” (Web, 2004)
1.2. Approaches to grammar
Just as the old saying goes, “there are approaches for teaching, but no definite ones”. It is
the same as grammar instruction. That is, there, definitely, are approaches to teach grammar.
In fact, there are different approaches to teach items of grammar and at different periods of
grammar instruction process that can be seen as follows;
* Teaching grammar through context
Old-fashioned grammar teaching was often decontextualized and pointless – the exercises
led nowhere, and the terminology was never used except in the exercises. Harris and Rowan
show quite convincingly that a conscious grasp of grammatical concepts requires deep

5

understanding that is not often gained through practice exercises alone (Harris, 1962, pp. 2141). Traditional drill and practice will be the most meaningful to students when they are
anchored in the context of writing assignments or the study of literary models. Students find
grammar most interesting when they apply it to authentic texts. It is a good idea to try using
texts of different kinds, such as newspapers and the students‟ own writing, as sources for
grammar examples and exercises. This approach makes grammar relevant and alive. It also
avoids the artificiality of studying sentences isolation, a problem with grammar books. So, in
real texts, students can see how sentences connect and contrast to each other through their
grammar.
* Teaching grammar in a communicative approach
While grammar can be thought as static knowledge, it can also be considered a process.
Language teachers would not be content if their students could recite all the rules of language
grammar but apply them. That means they were able to communicate in the right way. The
goal of grammar learning is that students can apply grammar in an unselfconscious fashion to
achieve their communicative ends. Littlewood suggests that students understand functional
meaning and relate structure to communicative function (Littlewood, 2000, pp. 4-10)
* Teaching grammar according to the sequence of language acquisition
Much of the frustration with most current approaches results from attempts to teach too
much too soon. Researchers such as Lyster maintain, “Considerable evidence has accumulated
that much grammar acquisition occurs in a relatively fixed order; learners are not able to
master one aspect until they have mastered certain others” (Lyster, et al., pp. 457- 467)
* Conflating inductive approach and deductive approach
The value of deductive and inductive approaches in teaching grammatical rules has been a
long debated subject. Deductive approach advocates a prior exposure of the students to
language fundamentals in a very systematic and logical method. The inductive approach
represents a more modern style of teaching where the new grammatical structures or rules are
presented to the students in a real language context (Goner, Phillips & Walters, 1995, p.135).
The students learn the use of the structure through practice of the language in context, and

6

later realize the rules from the practical examples. In both approaches, students practice and
apply the grammatical structures.
* Meaning, context and form should be integrated
Some people have the misconception that grammar is only about form. It, of course, is
about accuracy of form, but it is also about meaning and use. For example, the students need
to learn how to form the verb tenses in English. But unless they also know what they mean
and when to use them, they can never use the verb tenses accurately, meaningfully, and
appropriately in communication. Grammar dimensions enable teachers to focus their students‟
attention on the specific learning challenges that a grammatical structure presents so that the
benefits of their teaching can be maximized. Meaning must be clear. There is no point learning
“grammar” if the meaning of the language item is not clear.
1.3. Forms-focused vs Meaning-focused grammar instruction
Forms-focused instruction contrasts with meaning-focused instruction. The instruction
was formerly described where there is some attempt to draw learners‟ attention to linguistic
forms – Stern‟s (1990) “analytic strategy”, but afterwards it is referred to instruction that
requires learners to attend only to the content of what they want to communicate.
As Widdowson (1998) has criticized this distinction and argued that so-called formsfocused instruction has always presented segments of various kinds (phonemes, words,
collocations, morphemes, sentence patterns, tones and so on) to the learners in models,
whereas meaning-focused activities still expect learners to process forms in order to decode
and encode messages. According to him, the key difference lies in the kind of meaning that
learners must think of whether it is semantic meaning (as in the case of language exercises) or
pragmatic meaning (as in the case of communicative tasks). Widdowson‟s point is well taken,
but there has been an argument that it is nothing new.
In addition, Second Language Acquisition researchers have always used the term “form”
to refer not just to form (e.g, - ed in the regular past tense in English), but also to the semantic
meaning(s), a form realized in use (e.g, completed action in the past).

7

Ellis (2000) has argued that the essential difference between forms-focused and meaningfocused instruction lies in how language is viewed and the role the learner is invited to play. In
this respect, it should be noted that attention to lexical forms and the meanings they realize,
where words are treated as objects to be learned, constitutes forms-focused instruction. As said
at the beginning of this introduction, “form” involves more than grammar.
Of course, many interactions that occur inside the classroom will be neither entirely formsfocused nor meaning-focused but a combination of both, although achieving a dual focus is
not easy (Seedhouse, 1997b).
In effect, then, it is possible to distinguish types of forms-focused instruction according
to whether attention to form primary or secondary, as when it is intergrated into meaningfocused instruction.
1.3.1. Definitions of terminologies
In this part, the researcher wants to give definitions of some terminologies that are used in this
study with a hope that the readers find it easier to understand.
1.3.1.1. Forms-focused grammar instruction
Forms-focused instruction is traditionally defined that “Forms-focused grammar
instruction is that in which learners are typically encouraged to master each linguistic item in
synthetic syllabus one at a time, to native speaker levels using synthetic materials,
methodology and pedagogy" (Wilkins, 1976, in press-b, p. 4)
1.3.1. 2. Meaning-focused grammar instruction
There have been existed various ways of defining meaning-focused task, a very
common and familiar term in language teaching and learning.
According to Ur (1996,p.83) one of the teacher‟s tasks is to help his or her students make the
„leap‟ from form-focused accuracy work to fluent, but acceptable, production, by providing a
„bridge‟. He argues that a variety of practice activities that familiarize them with the structures
in context can do this by giving them practice both in form and communicative meaning.
Dr. Tony Hung, the Head of the English Language Centre, Baptist University, in Hong Kong,
in response to Sunga‟s interview question on the place of grammar in a meaning-focused
communication system, claims that „It ensures accuracy of form, which is as important as

8

appropriateness of utterance for purposes of communication. While it has to be acquired
mainly in the course of communicative activities rather than in isolation, it need not be left
entirely to take care of itself, but may be „focused on‟, as and when the need arises‟ (Sunga,
2001, p.47).
Belgar and Hunt (2002) state that tasks that generate greater negotiation of meaning appear to
be more benificial for interlanguage development. Engaging in negotiation should produce
higher degrees of comprehension as it will result in more finely tuned input as a result of
paraphrasing and lexical substitution. It should also promote greater flexibility in the learner‟s
rule system by encouraging the exploration of new hypothesis about the structure of the target
language
1.3. 2. Forms-focused activities
One type of practicing activities applied in grammar teaching and learning is forms-focused
activities. Thus, what forms-focused activities are and what types there are. The answers for
these questions are mentioned in this part.
1.3.2.1. Definitions of forms-focused activities
According to Thornbury (Thornbury, 1999, p.91), to achieve accuracy, the learner
needs to devote some attention to form, that is „getting it right‟. When learners take care of
form, they will not be more worried about meaning than about uttering their thought in a right
order. That suggests practice activities focused on accuracy should work best if learners are
already familiar with the meanings they are expressing.
A practice activity which is good for improving accuracy will have these features:
- Containing forms that motivate learners to express their accurate ideas, so they will
focus on what they are saying and they have no left-over attention to how they are saying.
- Creating familiarity in expressing ideas of the learners
- Making class-time the most effectively. In other words, activities can monitor
accuracy more easily and more successful if time is sufficiently managed.
- Stimulating learners to avoid their previous ambiguous message and to produce out
right sentences.
1.3.2.2. Classification of forms-focused activities

9


Normally, this kind of drill activities is a controlled practice, which aims at giving
students rapid practice in using a structural pattern. This is often done by the whole class
rather than pairs of students, and the teacher is able to get students to ask and answer questions
quickly and effeciently. The chief advantage of this technique is that teachers can correct any
mistakes that the students make and can encourage them to concentrate more on the given
patterns, overcoming difficulties. But these activities do not help students be more creative in
expressing their ideas. To avoid this disadvantage, Harmer (1991) advises teachers neither to
overuse nor to spend much time on such uncreative activities. That is as soon as students show
their abilities to make correct sentences with the new language item, the teacher should move
onto creative activities.
Drills, in the Harmer‟s viewpoint (1991:43), are “fairly mechanical ways of getting students to
demonstrate and practice their ability to use specific language items in a controlled manner”.
And Rivers and Temperly (1991) classified oral drills into the six following types:
1.3.2.2.1. Repetition presentation drills
In simple repetition drills, the instructor gives a model sentence containing a particular
structure or form to be manipulated and the students repeat the sentence with correct
intonation and stress. Repetition drills are not, in one sense, a special category of exercises
which will be used for practicing certain types of structure; they represent, rather, a commonly
used technique for familarizing the student with the specific structure. For this reason, they are
sometimes called presentation drills. This oral exercise can be illustrated as below:
Model

Can you cook?.

Yes, I can

Student

Can you cook?.

Yes, I can

Model

Can you drive a car?.

No, I can‟t

Student

Can you drive a car?.

No, I can‟t

(Unit 6: Can You Speak English?, New Headway – Elementary, by Liz and John Soars, Third edition )

However, this activity seems unreal for students to apply to the certain situation. The above
example indicates that unless the students are looking at a picture of a city, it could become
completely mechanical when they attend only to the clue words, or merely repeat them

10


absentmindedly. According to the authors, this activity should be real and applicable. That
means this activity must refer to real-life objects the students can see and respond.
1.3.2.2.2. Substitution Drills

Each substitution requires correlative changes to be made somewhere in the model sentence as
follows:
Model

He brings his lunch.

Cue

You ................

Respond

You bring your lunch.

Cue

Jane and Mary .................

Respond

Jane and Mary bring their lunches.

(Unit 1: Hello everybody!, New Headway – Elementary, by Liz and John Soars, Third edition)

This drill in terms of correlative substitution, the authors think it is an effective way for
learning these items: possessive, reflexive, the –s ending of third person singular verb in the
present tense, the changing forms of the verb be and so on. To some extent, this activity is still
mechanical so the authors suggest designing the cue with a natural sounding tag helping
students concentrate on the meaningful conversation.
Another subdivision of substitution drills is called multiple substitution drills. These drills

require students replace odd items with appropriate slots. On the other hand, students have to
think more of the whole meaning of the sentence rather than the meaning of individual word
forming that sentence. For this reason, students need to be very alert to perform this exercise
successfully.
Example: Students have to find out the use of “many / much”
Model

She brings too many pencils to schools.

Cue

Peter

Respond

Peter brings too many pencils to schools.

Cue

Money

Respond

Peter brings much money to school.

Cue

Students

11

Respond

Students bring too much money to school.

(Unit 5: Where do you live?, New Headway – Elementary, by Liz and John Soars, Third edition)

This activity can be a testing device to see whether students can continue to make a certain
grammatical adjustment they have been learning while they are distracted by other
preoccupations.
1.3.2.2.3. Conversions
This term is used for exercises in changing the sentence type, by combining two sentences into
one, moving from one mood or tense to another, changing word class (such as replacing nouns
by pronouns), substituting phrases for clauses or clauses for phrases (such as adverbial phrases
for adverbial clauses, infinitive phrases for clauses), or substituting single words for phrases or
phrases for single words (such as adverbs for adverbial phrases, adjectives for adjectival
phrases). Conversions are classified into three subdivisions: general conversions,
combinations and restatement, which can be seen as follows:
- General conversions:
Example

Change the following statements into questions

Cues

a. John and I are in the classroom.
b. I am a student.
c. The actress lives in Canada.
d. My aunt and uncle have their breakfast early.

e. We can‟t work together.

This traditional type of elementary conversion exercise requires the student to attend to a
number of different aspects of forming yes-no questions. These five items require the student
to use subject-inversion with be, do periphrasis with singular and with plural subjects, and
with main verbs including have and do and modal verb. This is a formidable task for an
elementary-level student.
Another example of conversions exercises is that students have to use an appropriate pronoun
to replace a noun phrase after listening carefully to each of the statement and the promted
nouns or noun phrases.

12


Model

This is my girl friend. I told you about my girl friend. My girl
friend is good. My girl friend works as a nurse. I love my girl
friend very much.

According to the authors, practicing those conversion exercises could be more vivid when
structures are associated with action. So students can have chance to make their own
invention.
- Combinations:
Combinations are a form of conversion exercises which have also been used for many years.
They involve a process which reflects certain features of transformational grammatical
analysis and can be implemented in some differential aspects of the rules. For instance,
students often have difficulty in understanding when the relative pronoun either must be
retained or can be omitted.
The following Example requires students to combine each pair of sentences into one

by using that or omitting it.
a. Give me the book.
I lent you the book two weeks ago.
b. I gave you the book.
The book is about wild animals.
- Restatement:
Another kind of conversion exercises is restatement which means learners use another
structure to express the same idea.
Model

I don’t agree with you.

Respond

My idea isn‟t the same as yours.

Cue

I don’t think so.

Respond

It isn‟t my idea.

All these kinds of restatements can be invented to practice different grammatical features.
Model

Tom decided to buy a new car.

Respond

Tom made decision to buy a new car

13


Another type of replacement (sometimes called a contraction) consists of replacing a longer
expression with a shorter expression.
Example: Restate each of the following sentences by replacing an infinitive
construction for the relative clause, the words italicized with a noun phrase....
Model :

I need a desk that I can put my books on.

Respond: I need a desk to put my books on.
1.3.2.2.4. Sentence modification
Rivers and Temperly (1991) subdivide sentence modification into three kinds of activities
such as expansions, deletions and completions.
- The first kind is expansions which require strictly grammatical manipulation. They are
suitable for learning how to use adjectives and adverbs. They can be directed by either a
teacher or a student
Basic sentence

She leaves the house.

Cue

Early

Respond

She leaves the house early.

Cue

Rarely

Respond

She rarely leaves the house early.

Additionally, expansions give students the opportunity to create new sentence from a basic
one. This activity often creates more competitiveness in learning among students themselves.
Cue

The man crosses the street.

Student A

The tired old man crosses the busy street.

Student B

The businessman crosses the main street hurriedly twice a
day.

- The second one is deletion activities in which learners have to change the forms of the
sentence. That means students have to transfer negative into affirmative, changing the other
grammar items concerned.
Example: Delete the negative elements in the following sentences, making any

necessary changes.

14


Cue

They haven’t got any coffee.

Respond

They have got some coffee.

Cue

She doesn’t like Sandwiches.

Respond

She likes Sandwiches.

- The last one is completions. When students do these activities, they are to complete the
uncompleted sentence given as a cue. The students finish the sentence either with a
semantically constant segment in which some syntactic or morphological change must be
made according to the cue, or with a suitable segment which is to some extent semantically
governed by the cue, or with a segment of their own invention.
For example, when students practice the first conditional sentence, they will hear the
half of the sentence “If I study hard ...”, then finish it. And from the finished sentence another
student can make some inventions relating to the cue.
Cue

If I study hard, ...

Respond

If I study hard, I will get good marks.

Cue

If I get good marks,...............

Respond

If I get good marks, I will be a good student.

In addition, completion exercises allow students to make their personal semantic contribution
within a syntactically fixed framework. It is useful for practicing such things as restrictive and
non-restrictive relative clauses.
For instant, students have to complete the unfinished sentences with any suitable
infinitive constructions after hearing the cue.
Cue

She has decided.............

Respond

She has decided to marry him

Or

She has decided not to marry him

Or

She has decided to take a job

1.3.2.2.5. Response practice:

15


In fact, all useful exercises in term of meaning are forms of response practice. These activities
are often question-answer or answer-question ones divided into three sub-classes: questionanswer practice, answer-question practice, and rejoinder.
- In question-answer practice, the structure of questions can be practiced through conversion
exercises which are useful for practicing tenses, pronouns and cleft sentences. It is most
frequently associated with pictures, slides, or films, reading materials, some projects or
activities, or games.
For example, the students have just met each other and want to know each other.
Q

What is your name?

A

I‟m Lisa.

Q

Where are you from, Lisa?

A

I‟m from England.

(Unit 1: Hello every body ! New Headway, Elementary, by Liz and John Soars, Third edition)

- While answer-question practice takes place when the teacher or some students has the
answer and the others must find out what is its question. This type of exercise is done naturally
and interestingly in games as Twenty Questions, Who and What.
- And rejoinder is often the interaction of communicating. The activities help students know
how to interchange ideas on the restricted topic. Basing on the real communication, they show
either their agreement, or disagreement, or pleasure...These responses are frequently not taught
in any systematic way to students of English. Some rejoinders will be learned incidentally
because teacher will use them frequently, others can be practiced in an oral exercise from time
to time.
For instant, after listening to the following cues, students are to respond to each with
an appropriate rejoinder.
Cue

Excuse me.

Respond

Yes?

Cue

I‟m sorry I‟m late. The traffic is bad today.

Respond

Don’t worry. Come in and sit down.

(Unit 4 : Take it easy. New Headway, Elementary, by Liz and John Soars, Third edition)

16


1.3.2.2.6. Translation exercises
According to Rivers and Temperley (1991), translation exercises have slipped into disfavor in
recent years. This is not because translation itself is comprehensible. In fact, it is a natural
process with many practical uses.
Oral translation drills can be useful when the students learning English share the same firstlanguage background. A series of sentences in the native language is given to elicit rapid
formulation of equivalents in English.
In short, such types of oral practices are very structured way to introduce students to a new
grammatical item. However, most of the oral drills tend to be mechanical and less
communicative as they require little free communication from students. Most of these
exercises can be, to some extent, converted into written practice.
1.3.3. Meaning-focused activities
Another type of grammar practicing activities discussed in this study is meaning-focused
activities, the definition and the classification of which are made clear in the following
sections.
1.3.3.1. Definitions of meaning-focused activities
There are many activities on grammar learning in which meaning-focused activities
seem to be the most effective. These activities can be defined as any kinds of practicing the
language on the part of the learners, and usually under the teachers‟ supervision.
Meaning-focused activities are classroom activities that associate with using English
grammar in real situations. These activities enable students to apply exact grammar structures
to express their ideas successfully. These activities also create students interest in learning
grammar as Ur (1988:15) states that „Interest is an essential feature of successful practice‟.

Meaning- focused activities in grammar teaching is a process that enables learners to
get fluency in communication. And meaning-focused activities satisfy the target of learning a
language. Practice activities with the aim at developing fluency need to divert attention away
from forms. To do this, these tasks are designed according to these features: attention to
meaning, authenticity, communicative purpose and repetition.

17


When activities ensure attention to meaning, students pay attention more to what they
are saying rather than how the sentence is formed.
And activities are also authentic. That means what students interact in class is the
same as with the real-life situation.
Furthermore, activities should not go far away from communicative purpose though
these activities are only chunks which are easily memorisable.
To help students remember their learned grammar knowledge, repetition of the
activities can not be lacked.
1.3.3.2. Classification of meaning-focused activities
1.3.3.2.1. Interactive activities
As noted above, one of the problems about drills is that they are fairly monotonous. Some
ways must be found to make the controlled language practice more meaningful and more
enjoyable. One of them is using interaction activities which are designed in such a way that
students can work together to exchange information in a purposeful and interesting way.
For example, students have to write down another student‟s name in the chart, then ask
that student these questions:
Questions

S1

S2

S3

What is your favorite leisure activity?
Where do you often (do your favorite leisure activity)?
How often do you (do your favorite leisure activity)?
(Unit 4: Take it easy. New Headway, Elementary, by Liz and John Soars, Third edition)

Students can move around the class questioning various classmates and fill in this chart
according to the answer. When students have finished, they can compare the results.
1.3.3.2.2. Personalized activities
This type of activity is designed in a way that students can not only practice grammar
but also talk about themselves in an involved way. Besides, they are asked to discuss things
that affect their personality and to use this subject matter as focus for their grammar practice.
One way of making practice drill more attractive is to get students to contribute something of

18


their own to it by their teacher‟s instruction and encouragement. During the practice, they will
be more involved in the activities.
For example, students are practicing “Can/ Can not”. They work in groups and one
after the other has to say about their ability:
I am Ha. I can sing but I can‟t dance.
I am Mai. I can ride a bike but I can‟t drive a car.
I am Minh. I can play the guitar but I can‟t play the piano.
(Unit 6: Can You Speak English? New Headway, Elementary, by Liz and John Soars, third edition)

This activity is named chain drill, it is not very mechanical. For this activity, students can
practice the form of a grammatical item they have just learnt.

1.3.3.2.3. Games
Games can be integrated part of teaching syllabus. Teachers can use games at any
stage of language teaching process. When they teach new language items (presentation,
controlled practice and communicative practice) or when they revise previously presented
language items, provided that games are suitable to the purposes of each stage.
Practicing game-like activities, the learners can gradually realize English grammar
structures. During the lesson, learners can explore the context and discover the new language
rules themselves. They can have many chances to practice communicating through game-like
activities. If the topics of the selected games are suitable and interesting, learners can take part
in the lesson more actively and enthusiastically. Moreover, these games enable students to
understand the lessons easily, and then draw the conclusion of the structures from the contexts
which may create in game-like activities. As a result, it is possible for them to use the most
suitable language structures in various kinds which have been used in language teaching for a
long time and they are especially useful for grammar work.
Example: Noughts and Crosses/ tic-tac-toe
This game is very popular in the classroom – as it is in real life. The class is divided
into teams. Team A uses the nought (0) and team B uses the cross (X). The teacher draws a

19