Developing Concepts of Grammar Teaching : Mfls Student Teachers on the PGCE Secondary Course

Developing concepts of grammar teaching : MFLs student teachers on the PGCE Secondary Course

Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference

11-14 September 1997, University of York

Gee Macrory

Valerie Stone

The Didsbury School of Education

The Manchester Metropolitan University

Developing concepts of grammar teaching : MFLs student teachers on the PGCE Secondary Course

Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference

11-14 September 1997, University of York

Introduction

In this paper we aim to present the results of a small-scale research project, carried out with a group of MFL students on the one year PGCE Secondary Course at the Manchester Metropolitan University during the academic year 1996-97. We aim also to consider the implications of our findings for a number of issues pertinent to initial teacher education, as well as to the more subject specific issue of grammar teaching in MFLs classrooms.

Our initial interest in this topic arose from an already existing interest in the teaching and learning of grammar in MFLs classrooms, and we had in an earlier research project investigated the relationship between knowledge of grammatical rules and ability to use these with a small group of pupils whom we followed through from Year 10 to year 11. The findings of the first year of this project are in Macrory & Stone, (1996). Our findings over the two years (in preparation) highlighted the developmental nature of learning and the timescale implications for teaching, and thus inevitably raised the issue of the extent to which teachers' beliefs and expectations about grammar and language learning were consistent with these findings. Our attention therefore turned to this issue of teachers' beliefs and practices in this area.

It would appear that there is limited research into this question. Nevertheless, Mitchell & Hooper (1992: 47) found that the MFLs teachers they interviewed believed there to be 'a clear positive relationship... between explicit knowledge about language and the development of practical language proficiency'. Similarly, Cross (1995) argues that whether teachers believe in inductive or deductive methods of teaching, they share the view that learning is facilitated by knowing rules. As teacher educators, however, we were curious to know how such views were formulated and our interest grew in how our students in initial teacher education came to hold particular views of grammar teaching and learning. As such we wanted to know what beliefs our students came with and how these changed over the year.

However, we need to acknowledge that beliefs about the relationship between knowledge of grammatical rules and the ability to use the language are only part of a broader controversy over the place of grammar in the MFLs classroom. While there is insufficient space here to discuss this in detail, we ought perhaps to separate two issues, namely the extent to which grammar is seen as important for communication, and what grammar teaching might consist of.

While the initial interest was grammar and also a concern with how best to prepare our students for the classroom, we could not but be aware that any changes the students' beliefs underwent during the year were necessarily related to the broader issue of becoming a teacher (Furlong & Maynard, 1995). We thought therefore that our findings might throw some light upon this more general process; in addition, we aimed, in examining that process, to try to identify some of the factors that influence students' development as they become teachers, which in turn might allow us to address the broader issue of the roles that mentors and tutors play in initial teacher education(see for example Furlong & Smith, 1996).

The context of the research/methodology

The research was carried out with a group of MFLs students on the one year PGCE course at the Manchester Metropolitan University during the academic year 1996-97. We collected data from the students via a questionnaire in the first week of the course, before they had taken part on any sessions or discussions about grammar and grammar teaching, and again towards the end of the PGCE course, in May. In June, we also interviewed eight students, for approximately half an hour each. In the group of interviewees we included two native speakers of French and several who had work experience between university and the PGCE Course, as well as a late entrant to the profession who was older that the others.

We have adopted a qualitative approach as appropriate for the purposes of this study. The different backgrounds of the students, the different school contexts and mentors with whom they had been involved and also our personal knowledge of the students and their mentors meant that each student was responding very much on the basis of individual experience. However, although we were keen to find out what individuals had to say, we were also interested in whether there was picture emerging of the group of students as a whole. In order, then, to try to consider issues of progression and development in the students' thinking, we concentrated initially on the responses of the group of sixteen students from whom we had successfully obtained responses at both points in the year; we then looked at the responses of other students on the course, who had filled in only one of the two questionnaires, to see whether the views of the sixteen were in step with the views of other students. We then looked at the more detailed information from the interviewees, who were drawn from the group of sixteen students.

We were aware that our approach to analysing the data was inevitably a subjective one, whereby each successive step is guided by issues that arise from the previous one. Nevertheless, the students responses have raised for us a number of interesting questions.

Student teachers' views of grammar at the beginning of the PGCE Course

In the initial questionnaire, we sought information about a number of things, including the way in which the students themselves had been taught grammar at school, their views on whether knowlege of grammar rules helps learners to communicate, the relative importance of fluency and accuracy and their views on how grammar should be taught in MFLs classrooms. When we looked at the responses of the group of sixteen, it appeared that they had all experienced grammatical rules being made explicit to them, either before or after being asked to use these. Most mentioned teachers' explanations, referred to traditional grammatical categories, such as noun and verb, and doing grammatical exercises to learn, practise or revise the grammatical structure being taught. Only two students mentioned context being a feature, and although responses varied from "grammar was not taught in a rigid way" to "specific grammar lessons", it was clear that the formulation of the grammatical rules had played a significant part in their learning.

There was a general view that knowledge of the grammatical rules could assist communication; indeed many described it as important or essential, making the point that it aided creativity and independence of language use, offering comments such as : "It's important to know the grammar rules of a foreign language to be able to formulate a sentence without having learnt it by heart". All were of the view that it was more important for written than for spoken language. There was acknowledgement from several people that communication of the 'message', or initial communication, could take place without knowing the rules; one person mentioned the possibly negative effect on confidence, motivation and consequently on communication, of overt correction. Nevertheless, the following comment is illustrative of the importance attached to grammar:

"The importance of grammar should not be underestimated. Learners should realise that knowledge of grammar rules will lead them to a much more interesting use of the language. They will be able to express exactly how they feel or what they want to say through the use of grammar rules...... Grammar should be taught in such a way that the learner realises how important it is for communication and for building new sentences according to a set pattern".

When asked explicitly about the teaching of grammar many referred to clarity of presentation, the need for examples and exercises, and the opportunity to practise. A number, however, also mentioned the need to contextualise it or to make it interesting through games or other activities; overall the message appeared to be that grammar was important, with some students reiterating this point when answering the question about teaching, with comments such as:

"Grammar is important and a good grounding means a familiarity with the language. A combination of rote exercises (made fun!), written exercises and roleplay situations to reinforce the rules learnt."

Not all the replies stated this so explicitly. Yet the following two comments, although different in approach, suggest a concern with grammar :

"I think there should be a combination of formal grammar teaching and more 'natural' situations eg oral work that shows the grammar in action and as part of a working language. Formal teaching is important though to make sure that pupils understand the basics of the language they are using and often 'traditional' methods are the only way of doing this..."

"Grammatical points should be related to language already being taught...... If the new structure is practised orally, at least partially absorbed as a result, then an explanation (probably in English) can build upon an understanding which has hopefully been created."

This general concern or belief that grammar was important was also reflected in the comments of other students who filled in the same questionnaire. They also tended to reiterate the importance of grammar per se when asked about the teaching of it.

Student teachers' views towards the end of the PGCE Course

Any account of the views of the students at this stage of the course has to be contextualised in terms of the opportunities and experiences they had between September and May. At the university, they engaged in workshops and discussions on the topic of grammar, underpinned and supported by reading; they also spent time engaged in linguistic analysis, which also forms part of their planning for every unit of work. The issue of grammar was therefore a relatively prominent one on this part of the course. By May all the students had been in a minimum of two schools, and most in three schools, which meant that they had all worked with a variety of pupils across the age and ability range. They had also worked with mentors in two or three schools, as well as attending a morning's session on grammar with their mentors at the university in March. They had thus had the chance to formulate - or perhaps to reformulate - their own view of grammar and grammar teaching.

In May, then, the students completed a second questionnaire similar to the first one, although we included here a question about whether they thought their views had changed and to what they attributed any changes. What was immediately evident about the responses was that for many if not all the students, their belief that grammar was important had been confirmed and possibly even reinforced, as illustrated by the following comments:

"Knowledge of grammar rules is essential for future communication to take place. If the pupils can manipulate the language they will be able to produce authentic communicative language rather than just reproducing set phrases which is not communicative at all."

"I strongly believe in teaching grammar to children of all ability levels and feel that it is of benefit to learning a language effectively. It is essential to know the grammar of a language in order to be able to apply and transfer knowledge."

"From my experiences I would offer the view that grammar is a very important basis for learning any language."

In one sense, there was no obvious change in their views. Indeed, as we will discuss further later, a number claimed not to have changed their views at all. Yet, their comments suggested that for many of the students, their views of teaching grammar had shifted, as suggested by this comment:

"My personal view has evolved to the point where I believe grammar to be essential in content but presented in a non-traditional format".

The issue of appropriate presentation was one raised by most of the students, many referring much more explicitly to the importance of presenting grammar in context or as part of a topic; and several people favoured inductive approaches and/or games. In terms of what we might call methodology, not all had moved towards a more inductive approach - several also favoured a more explicit, 'formal' approach to presentation.

In one sense, it is hardly surprising that their views of teaching grammar had developed, given that the emphasis on methodology within the course as a whole. However, while the views of the students varied in the extent to which they reflected the content of sessions and workshops on the course, what became clear from the students' replies was an increased awareness of the pupils had been instrumental in determining the approach to teaching grammar which they had adopted. Reference was made by many to age and ability and to the pupils' reactionsto particular approaches and the problems that pupils encountered in the classroom. The following comment illustrates several of these concerns at once:

"The extent/depth to which a grammar point should be made depends upon the age and ability of the pupils being taught. Although lower ability pupils appear to enjoy the challenge of conjugating verbs they react differently to complicated structures."

Learner style was also referred to :

"Some pupils do not understand the importance of some rules (such as agreement), but grammar does allow pupils who like to learn rules to extend themselves.....It is important to sometimes do an intensive lesson on grammar to allow for pupils' preferred learning methods."

There was also reference to the need for the pupils to have time and repeated opportunity to assimilate the new grammar, eg:

"Basic patterns should be used over and over again until they are assimilated instead of moving on to another point."

An overall greater awareness of the pupils' learningwas suggested by numerous comments, such as the following :

"It's easy to think they've all grasped it just because it seems straightforward to you."

"I think the most important thing is to respond to their needs and present it in a way they can understand and apply."

"I prefer teaching implicit grammar as pupils feel more involved in the learning process."

The raised awareness suggested by the comments quoted above is also echoed by the comments of those other students who completed the questionnaire in May, who again and again referred to pupils in the classroom and their reactions and responses. They too made comments such as the following :

"There is not one way to teach grammar 'best' - a lot depends on the ability and attitudes of the pupils."

"It depends upon the specific structure being taught, and the children. But I would favour a combination of inductive and deductive methods to cater for learning styles through all four MFL skills."

"I personally feel that teaching grammar should vary according to the ability of the pupils to cope with implicit and explicit teaching of grammar of varying degrees."

In examining where this apparent shift in concern might have come from, we were interested to see how aware the students were of the change.

"I think I'm more aware of the necessity to teach grammar but also the difficulties for the pupils to understand grammatical rules because they aren't taught grammar in their first language."

"Having been taught myself in a very grammar-oriented manner I have had to consciously revise my views on methodology because I have found that, in schools, grammar is a very contentious issue. It pays to be flexible and and be prepared to be willing to look at every viewpoint about grammar - an open-minded view is essential to avoid arguments and for the benefit of pupils' learning".

Where did students themselves think change had come from? The most frequently cited sources were, perhaps unsurprisingly, the pupils themselves. Although some students mentioned discussions and sessions at the university, the joint meeting at the university for students and mentors, and also background reading, there was a recurrent theme of the pupils' attititudes, responses and needs as well as reference to the experience of assessing pupils:

"My views have changed ... mainly because of the very positive response I had from my classes. "

"Assessing pupils' work made me realise that they hadn't understood certain grammar points because they hadn't been explained well enough or were too vague."

The same theme was evident in the response of the other students at this point in the year, who, like our group of sixteen talked about classroom experience and observation, assessing work and the varying needs of their pupils.