Pondering Grammar...

TESL 0110
Unit 1 Reflection

In order to teach English as a second language, does a teacher have to be a "Grammar Expert?" I think it is important for teachers to have a strong foundation in grammar, but I would not say that they need to be "experts." The purpose of grammar is to provide structure and patterns for how we communicate our thoughts and ideas to others, both in speech and in writing. An ESL teacher needs to know what sounds right or how we say something in English, but I don't think it is necessary for them to know the name of every single verb tense and part of speech. Being able to "name" these items of knowledge is not the same as being able to apply them in the context of speaking or writing or to understand them in listening or reading. 

When I think back to my own schooling, I do have some memories of grammar instruction. I can remember identifying and labeling parts of speech in sentences, such as subject, verb, and object. I also remember lessons on spelling patterns and punctuation. English has always been my favorite subject and I  knew that I wanted to be a teacher from a very young age, so I was interested and engaged in these activities. Many of my classmates, however, dreaded grammar activities and didn't see their point. Teaching grammar in isolation was not useful or valuable to them.

When I learned French as a second language in public school, we focused most of our time on conjugating verbs and memorizing vocabulary lists and some common expressions. We spent a lot of time on reading and writing activities, and also did some listening exercises from cassette tape recordings. (That may give you some indication of how old I am...) Very little time was spent on actually speaking the French language. I think I could still conjugate most French verbs, as the rules and patterns were drilled into my brain. However, I would not be able to carry on a conversation in French much further than basic small talk or asking to go to the washroom or get a drink of water! I could probably list the names of articles of clothing, foods, and actions, but would not be able to put them into context in a conversation. Focusing almost entirely on grammar was not an effective strategy to prepare students such as myself to communicate in French.

 I do not think that focusing primarily on grammar or teaching it in isolation is effective, nor should it be completely neglected: it should be interwoven within the context of a communicative task. A classmate of mine, Iryna, came up with an analogy that makes the idea very clear: "Grammar is like notes in music...you can't play a nice piece of music without knowing how to read notes." Therefore, you cannot be an effective speaker or writer without some knowledge of the grammatical structures. In an article that I recently read, (Is Grammar Really Important for a Second Language Learner?) the author used a different analogy to explain the need for grammatical knowledge.  She stated that grammar "is the railway through which your messages will be transported. Without it, in the same way as a train cannot move without railways, you won't be able to convey your ideas to their full extension without a good command of the underlying grammar patterns and structures of the language." This comparison made the need for a strong base in grammar crystal clear to me. This article also describes a procedure for incorporating grammar instruction within a communicative situation that is similar in fashion to how I would approach it. 

 I think that the most effective way to teach grammar is through an integrated approach, within a communicative context, and that is how I would address it in my classroom.  Once a communicative task has been introduced and the purpose and meaning has been established, I would touch on the grammar that is needed for that particular context. I would describe it as a mini-lesson or a tangent, where the necessary structures are introduced or reviewed. The students would then be able to add the structural knowledge to the meaning knowledge and apply it in context. Rote rule teaching independent of a situational context to apply it in seems pointless to me. I feel that grammar should be mixed into a lesson on reading, writing, listening and/or speaking, rather than taught on its own. Students need to have a purpose for learning the grammar and should then be able to apply it in a realistic context. Prior to the class I would do research on the grammatical structures that would be explained and used, if needed. If a student has a specific question about a grammatical structure or wants to know what a certain structure is called in English, a teacher can do the necessary research and prepare a more detailed explanation of a structure as needed. It's okay for a teacher to say, "I don't know." The teacher should not be expected to be able to recite grammatical terms and rules at will. 

Reference:

Foppoli, Julio. (2018) Is Grammar Really Important for a Second Language Learner? Esl base. Retrieved from: https://www.eslbase.com/teaching/grammar-important-second-language-learner