Advertisement

Principles of Instructed Language Learning Revisited: Guidelines for Effective Grammar Teaching in the Foreign Language Classroom

  • Mirosław Pawlak
Chapter
Part of the Second Language Learning and Teaching book series (SLLT)

Abstract

Although there is now a consensus that grammar instruction is facilitative or even necessary in some situations, questions remain as to how it should most beneficially be conducted, with answers to these questions hinging to a large extent upon the contexts in which form-focused instruction takes place. In fact, theorists and researches have put forward a number of principles that should guide practitioners in teaching formal aspects of language, but many of those proposals are general in nature, they are not sufficiently comprehensive and detailed to inform everyday instruction, or they include solutions which may be of questionable utility in foreign language contexts, where limited in- and out-of-class exposure as well as educational traditions dictate that points of grammar are systematically covered. The present chapter represents an attempt to fill this unfortunate gap by offering a tentative model of grammar teaching in the foreign language classroom, which comprises principles that, on the one hand, are grounded in research findings but, on the other, are sensitive to the specificity of this setting.

Keywords

Target Language Explicit Knowledge Implicit Knowledge Corrective Feedback Grammatical Structure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Batstone, R. and R. Ellis. 2009. Principled grammar teaching. System 37: 194-204.Google Scholar
  2. Breen, M. P. 2001. Syllabus design. In The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages, eds. R. Carter and D. Nunan, 151-159. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. DeKeyser, R. M. 1998. Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, eds. C. J. Doughty and J. Williams, 42-63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. DeKeyser, R. M. 2001. Automaticity and automatization. In Cognition and second language instruction, ed. P. Robinson, 125-151. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. DeKeyser, R. M. 2003. Implicit and explicit learning. In The handbook of second language acquisition, eds. C. J. Doughty and M. H. Long, 313-348. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  6. DeKeyser, R. M. 2007. Conclusion: The future of practice. In Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ed. R. M. DeKeyser, 287-304. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. DeKeyser, R. M. 2010. Cognitive-psychological processes in second language learning In The handbook of language teaching, eds. M. H. Long and C. J. Doughty, 119-138. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. DeKeyser, R. M. and A. Juffs. 2005. Cognitive considerations in L2 learning. In Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, ed. E. Hinkel, 437-454. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. Doughty, C. J. 2001. Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In Cognition and second language instruction, ed. P. Robinson, 206-257. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Doughty. C. J. 2003. Instructed SLA: Constraints, compensation and enhancement. In The handbook of second language acquisition, eds. C. J. Doughty and M. H. Long, 256-310. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Doughty, C. J. and J. Williams. 1998. In Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, eds. C. J. Doughty and J. Williams, 197-261. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Dörnyei, Z. 2006. Individual differences in second language acquisition. AILA Review 19: 42-68.Google Scholar
  13. Ellis, R. 1989. Are classroom and naturalistic acquisition the same? A study of the classroom acquisition of German word order rules. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 11: 305-328.Google Scholar
  14. Ellis, R. 1995. Interpretation tasks for grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly 29: 87-105. Google Scholar
  15. Ellis, R. 1997. SLA research and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Ellis, R. 1998. Teaching and research: Options in grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly 32: 39-60.Google Scholar
  17. Ellis, R. 2003. Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Ellis, R. 2001. Introduction: Investigating form-focused instruction. In Form-focused instruction and second language learning, ed. R. Ellis, 1-46. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  19. Ellis, R. 2002. The place of grammar instruction in the second/foreign language curriculum. In New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms, eds. E. Hinkel and F. Fotos, 17-34. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Ellis, R. 2005a. Instructed language learning and task-based teaching. In Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, ed. E. Hinkel, 713-728. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  21. Ellis, R. 2005b. Principles of instructed language learning. System 33: 209-224.Google Scholar
  22. Ellis, R. 2006. Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective. TESOL Quarterly 40: 83-107.Google Scholar
  23. Ellis, R. 2008. The study of second language acquisition. (second edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  24. Ellis, R. 2010. Explicit form-focused instruction and second language acquisition. In The handbook of educational linguistics, eds. B. Spolsky and F. M. Hult, 437-455. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  25. Ellis, R., H. Basturkmen and S. Loewen. 2002. Doing focus on form. System 30: 419-432.Google Scholar
  26. Foster, P. 2001. Rules and routines: A consideration of their role in task-based language production of native and non-native speakers. In Language tasks: Teaching, learning and testing, eds. M. Bygate, P. Skehan and M. Swain, 75-97. London: Longman. Google Scholar
  27. Gass, S. M. 2003. Input and interaction. In The handbook of second language acquisition, eds. C. J. Doughty and M. H. Long, 224-255. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  28. Johnson, K. 1995. Understanding communication in second language classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  29. Johnson, K. 1996. Language teaching and skill-learning. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  30. Johnson, K. 2001. An introduction to foreign language learning and teaching. Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  31. Kellerman, E. 1985. Input and second language acquisition theory. In Input in second language acquisition, eds. S. M. Gass and C. G. Madden, 345-353. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Google Scholar
  32. Lantolf, J. P. 2006. Sociocultural Theory and L2: State of the art. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 28: 67-109.Google Scholar
  33. Lantolf, J. P. and K. Johnson. 2007. Extending Firth and Wagner’s (1997) ontological perspective to L2 classroom praxis and teacher education. Modern Language Journal 91: 877-892.Google Scholar
  34. Larsen-Freeman, D. 2003. Teaching language: From grammar to grammaring. Boston: Thomson & Heinle. Google Scholar
  35. Larsen-Freeman, D. 2010. Teaching and testing grammar. In The handbook of language teaching, eds. M. H. Long and C. J. Doughty, 519-542. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar
  36. Lightbown, P. M. 1998. The importance of timing in focus on form. In Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, eds. C. J. Doughty and J. Williams, 177-196. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Loewen, S. 2011. Focus on form. Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning. Volume II, ed. E. Hinkel, 577-592. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Long, M. H. 2000. Focus on form in task-based language teaching. In Language policy and pedagogy. Essays in honor of Ronald Walton, eds. R. Lambert and E. Shohamy, 181-196. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar
  39. Long, M. H. 1991. Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective, eds. K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg and C. Kramsch, 39-52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  40. Long, M. H. 2007. Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  41. Long, M. H. and G. Crookes. 1992. Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly 26: 27-56.Google Scholar
  42. Long, M. H. and P. Robinson. 1998. Focus on form: Theory, research and practice. In Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, eds. C. J. Doughty and J. Williams, 15-41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Marton, W. 2003. A maximum-efficiency model for the teaching of L2 grammar in a foreign language, non-intensive context. Paper presented during the 34th Poznań Linguistic Meeting, Poznań, May 1st-3rd. Google Scholar
  44. Mitchell, R. 2000. Applied linguistics and evidence-based classroom practice: The case of foreign language grammar pedagogy. Applied Linguistics 21: 281-303.Google Scholar
  45. Nassaji, H. and S. Fotos. 2011. Teaching grammar in second language classrooms: Integrating form-focused instruction in communicative context. London and New York.Google Scholar
  46. Norris, J. M. 2010. Task-based teaching and testing. In The handbook of language teaching, eds. M. H. Long and C. J. Doughty, 578-594. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  47. Norris, J. M. and L. Ortega. 2001. Does type of instruction make a difference? Substantive findings from a meta-analytic review. In Form-focused instruction and second language learning, ed. R. Ellis, 157-213. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  48. Ortega, L. 2010. Sequences and processes in language learning. In The handbook of language teaching, eds. M. H. Long and C. J. Doughty, 81-105. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  49. Ortega, L. 2011. Second language acquisition. In The Routledge handbook of applied linguistics, ed. J. Simpson, 171-184. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. Pawlak, M. 2006. The place of form-focused instruction in the foreign language classroom. Poznań – Kalisz: Adam Mickiewicz University Press. Google Scholar
  51. Pawlak, M. 2007. An overview of focus on form in language teaching. In Exploring focus on form in language teaching. Special issue of Studies in Pedagogy and Fine Arts, ed. M. Pawlak, 5-26. Poznań – Kalisz: Adam Mickiewicz University Press. Google Scholar
  52. Pawlak, M. 2012a. Error correction in the foreign language classroom: Reconsidering the issues. Poznań – Kalisz – Konin. Adam Mickiewicz University and State School of Higher Professional Education in Konin Press.Google Scholar
  53. Pawlak, M. 2012b. Grammar learning strategies: State of the art. In Learning and teaching English: Insights from research. eds. L. Pedrazzini and A. Nava, 69-90. Monza-Milano: Polimetrica.Google Scholar
  54. Pienemann, M. 1989. Is language teachable? Psycholinguistic experiments and hypotheses. Applied Linguistics 10: 52-79.Google Scholar
  55. Pienemann, M. 1998. Language processing and second language development: Processability theory. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  56. Prabhu, N. S. 1987. Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Richards, J. C. and C. Lockhart. 1996. Reflective teaching in second language classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  58. Robinson, P. 2010. Syllabus design. In The handbook of language teaching, eds. M. H. Long and C. J. Doughty, 294-310. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  59. Robinson, P. 2011. Task-based language learning: A review of issues. Language Learning 61. Supplement 1: 1-36.Google Scholar
  60. Samuda, V. 2001. Guiding relationships between form and meaning during task performance: The role of the teacher. In Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing, eds. M. Bygate, P. Skehan and M. Swain, 119-140. Harlow: Pearson Education. Google Scholar
  61. Schmidt, R. 2001. Attention. In Cognition and second language instruction, ed. P. Robinson, 3-32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Sheen, Y. and R. Ellis. 2011. Corrective feedback in language teaching. In Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning. Volume II, ed. E. Hinkel, 593-610. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  63. Skehan, P. 1998. A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Spada, N. 1997. Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching Abstracts 30: 73-87. Google Scholar
  65. Spada, N. 2011. Beyond form-focused instruction: Reflections on past, present and future research. Language Teaching 44: 225-236.Google Scholar
  66. Stenhouse, L. 1975. An introduction to curriculum research and development. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  67. Stern, H. H. 1992. Issues and options in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Swain, M. 1995. Three functions of output in second language learning. In Principles and practice in applied linguistics. Studies in honor of H. G. Widdowson, eds. G. Cook and B. Seidlhofer, 125-144. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Swain, M. 2005. The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, ed. E. Hinkel, 471-483. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  70. Ur, P. 2011. Grammar teaching. In Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning. Volume II, ed. E. Hinkel, 507-522. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  71. VanPatten, B. 1996. Input processing and grammar instruction. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
  72. VanPatten, B. 2002. Processing instruction: An update. Language Learning 52: 755-804.Google Scholar
  73. Wilkins, D. 1976. Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Williams, J. 2005. Form-focused instruction. In Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, ed. E. Hinkel, 671-691. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  75. Willis, D. and J. Willis. 2007. Doing task-based teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Willis, J. 1996. A framework for task-based learning. Harlow: Longman. Google Scholar
  77. Yuan, F. and R. Ellis. 2003. The effects of pre-task planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity and accuracy in L2 oral production. Applied Linguistics 24: 1-27. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Adam Mickiewicz University, KaliszKaliszPoland

Personalised recommendations