FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W88774600> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W88774600 abstract "In the last forty years the role of grammar in the second language (L2) classroom has changedndramatically. Grammar has moved from being of central importance in the grammar-translationnmethod to being almost ignored in the communicative language teaching (CLT)napproach, and then re-emerging as an important focus in more recent work. In the 1980s therenwas widespread discussion among researchers and practitioners concerning whether to evennteach grammar (Celce-Murcia, 1985). But by the 1990s, the grammar debate had shifted fromnwhether to teach grammar to how to provide more effective grammar pedagogy that cannintegrate grammar and communicative language learning (Sheer, 2002, 2003). As part of thisnshift, language teachers were encouraged to search for meaningful ways of approachingngrammar learning and teaching in the communicative classroom (Doughty a Williams,n1998).n In the same way that views in the field concerning the role of grammar have changed, so hasnmy own approach to grammar in my Spanish language teaching practices. In a way, I havenlived the grammar debate in my own personal experience as Spanish as a Second Languagenteacher in Australia. I was initially trained in the early 80s as a Spanish teacher in Spain,nlearning about the importance of grammar in language instruction and studying it in antraditional manner. In the late 80s and early 90s I did graduate study in Teaching English tonSpeakers of Other Languages (TESOL) in England. At this time I learnt about Krashen'sntheories and how grammar teaching might be detrimental to language acquisition. Krashen'snviews in particular, and the CLT approach in general, had a very strong influence on my ownnteaching. I was, in Clyne's term, an qantigrammar language teacherq (Clyne, 1996). Later, innthe mid 1990s, when I started to teach advanced Spanish to University students in Australia,nmy CLT beliefs started to waver in the face of growing demands by my students for grammarninstruction.n This thesis is a narrative account of a grammar teaching journey that began at that time. It is anjourney in which I sought to develop a student-centred approach to grammar learning thatnwould be genuinely communicative, while at the same time meet student needs for thendevelopment of structural knowledge of the language. Described here is my journey over sixnyears from being a communicative anti-grammar teacher to one that seeks to empower students over their own grammar learning process. The early stages of this process werenmarked by a tension I felt between the grammar instruction that my students wanted and thencommunicative language teaching principles in which I believed. As I began to reconcilenthese two forces, my views on grammar teaching and learning changed. I realized thatngrammar learning and communication could not be successfully integrated unless the focus ofngrammar pedagogy shifted from the teaching of grammar to the learning of grammar, that is,nfrom the teacher to the student. I also became aware of how little I really knew aboutngrammar pedagogy, and how limited the grammar teaching options were that were presentednin the pedagogical literature.n The narrative in this thesis stretches from the second semester of 1996 to the first semester ofn2002, spanning ten semesters and the experiences of ten groups of advanced learners ofnSpanish as a foreign language in an Australian University. The development andnimplementation of the different stages of the student-centred grammar learning environmentsnare described here in detail. The process drew heavily on insights from Problem-BasednLearning (PBL), Peer-Assisted Learning (PAL) and Reflective Learning (RL) theories, andnthe roles these play are described. The ongoing development of the grammar learningnenvironment was directly shaped by the participation and feedback of the students. Thisnprocess is documented in detail, as is my response to the student comments and my ownnreflections.n What will be evident in the course of the narrative is the steady movement from teacher-centredngrammar teaching to student-centred grammar learning. At the beginning, whenntrying to respond to student demands for grammar learning, I instinctively used a traditionalnapproach to grammar teaching, in which I was the main decision maker and in completencontrol of the learning process. Over the course of time I continually relinquished more andnmore control, with students coming to take centre stage in their own grammar learning. Thenactive participation of students in their grammar learning was promoted by having them takenthe role of a Spanish grammar 'researcher'. Learners were encouraged to become more awarenof their own grammar needs and the challenges they encountered in learning Spanishngrammar. Central to the creation of the grammar learning environment was the grammarnlearning portfolio in which the students documented their grammar learning experiences andnoutcomes. The creation of the portfolio encouraged students to become more communicativenand autonomous grammar learners. The development of the portfolio also promoted the use ofnproblem-based, peer-assisted grammar learning in and outside the class. This on-goingnprocess of development culminated in the student-centred grammar learning environmentndescribed here that promotes a Communicative Focus on Forms (CoFonFs).n The thesis is an action research case study (Zuber-Skerritt, 1993). This was found to be thenbest research methodology for the undertaking for two reasons. Firstly, because the studynaimed to change grammar learning by approaching it in a communicative and reflective way,nit was a process that was carried out under constant observation and evaluation, which isnaction research. Secondly, because it used data obtained from different groups of studentsnparticipating over a long period of time, it is a case study. Moreover, evocative narrative hasnbeen used to describe the research findings, as it as it permits the participant teacher to bringnall the components of this longitudinal educational experience together (Rener, 2001).nNaturalistic elicited data were gathered through various methods. The data comes from twonprimary sources consisting of student questionnaires and student interviews, and twonsecondary sources in the form of student grammar learning portfolios and articles related tonthe historical development of grammar teaching approaches.n The thesis begins with a discussion of grammar teaching and learning theories in Chapter 2.nHere I identity key issues including the role that grammar might play in the development ofnsecond language (L2) proficiency, and the role that grammar learning might play in thenlanguage class. Chapter 3 discusses student-centred learning approaches to learning andnassessment, specifically PBL, PAL, RL and Student Learning Portfolios. Here, I introducenthe eight learning conditions that Egbert, Chao a Hanson-Smith (1999) believe supportnoptimal classroom learning, e.g. qLearners have opportunities to interact and negotiatenmeaningq (p.3). These conditions will serve as the framework for discussing the student-centrednapproach developed here. The development of the student-centred grammar learningnenvironment is described in Chapters 5 to 14, with each chapter covering one semester. Forneach semester I describe the process, procedures, and materials used to create a student-centredngrammar learning environment. Student responses to the unit are elicited throughnquestionnaires and, in several semesters, by interview. These responses are presented andndiscussed in each chapter. Where needed, modifications to the approach are made in light ofnstudent feedback and my own experience. Finally, in Chapter 15, I pull together the findingsnusing the Egbert et al (1999) framework. The original eight conditions are expanded toninclude two new ones, with the ten conditions providing a better framework for describing thenstudent-centred grammar learning approach I have developed. I believe this study advancesnour knowledge of L2 grammar pedagogy and establishes a basis for further research intonCoFonFs pedagogy to promote meaningful and autonomous grammar learning inncommunicative classrooms. Even though the approach has been developed in a foreignnlanguage learning context with advanced language tertiary students, I believe the student-centredngrammar learning environment developed here has the potential to be implemented innother learning and teaching contexts.n" @default.
• W88774600 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W88774600 creator A5022527280 @default.
• W88774600 date "2005-09-27" @default.
• W88774600 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W88774600 title "Exploring grammar learning and teaching as a student-centred process" @default.
• W88774600 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
• W88774600 type Work @default.
• W88774600 sameAs 88774600 @default.
• W88774600 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W88774600 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W88774600 hasAuthorship W88774600A5022527280 @default.
• W88774600 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W88774600 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W88774600 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W88774600 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W88774600 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W88774600 hasConcept C199360897 @default.
• W88774600 hasConcept C26022165 @default.
• W88774600 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W88774600 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W88774600 hasConcept C98045186 @default.
• W88774600 hasConceptScore W88774600C138885662 @default.
• W88774600 hasConceptScore W88774600C144024400 @default.
• W88774600 hasConceptScore W88774600C145420912 @default.
• W88774600 hasConceptScore W88774600C15744967 @default.
• W88774600 hasConceptScore W88774600C19417346 @default.
• W88774600 hasConceptScore W88774600C199360897 @default.
• W88774600 hasConceptScore W88774600C26022165 @default.
• W88774600 hasConceptScore W88774600C41008148 @default.
• W88774600 hasConceptScore W88774600C41895202 @default.
• W88774600 hasConceptScore W88774600C98045186 @default.
• W88774600 hasLocation W887746001 @default.
• W88774600 hasOpenAccess W88774600 @default.
• W88774600 hasPrimaryLocation W887746001 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2081752506 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2148241997 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2183400960 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2341689655 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2346149537 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2348568719 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2350067379 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2361273471 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2365315863 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2366817301 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2380234341 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2803601215 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2947057714 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W3033039573 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W3164415790 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W3174219267 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W575269625 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2747956738 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W2977789185 @default.
• W88774600 hasRelatedWork W3152137523 @default.
• W88774600 isParatext "false" @default.
• W88774600 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W88774600 magId "88774600" @default.
• W88774600 workType "article" @default.