| Summary: | 碩士 === 銘傳大學 === 應用語文研究所碩士班 === 90 === For decades, researchers argued over controversy between form-based and meaning-oriented instructions. Since students in Taiwan have to take part in form-oriented entrance examinations, some teachers maintain adopting traditional ways of teaching, while some are willing to try new and more meaning-based approaches. However, when adopting a meaning-oriented approach, many teachers failed to develop learners’ grammatical competence and thus went back to a traditional way of English teaching.
While communicative approaches have been greatly promoted in language teaching, research has suggested that planned and timely Communicative focus on form (FonF) can work better than the communicative language teaching (CLT). Therefore, the purpose of the study was to develop a grammar pedagogy which helps develop both accuracy and fluency. In addition, the study examined learner perceptions and perceived effects toward two diverse grammar teaching approaches: FonF vs. Traditional Grammar Instruction (TGI). I also hope to make contributions to the improvement of current grammar teaching and therefore, gearing English language teaching toward the mainstream, CLT.
The present study examines the effect of teaching three target structures to eighth graders in a junior high school in Yi-lan County, using two different instructional approaches. Forty five participants were randomly assigned to two groups, with one given FonF and the other, TGI. A grammaticality recognition test was conducted to the learners in each group one week before and immediately after a six-week period of instruction. One month after the posttest, the other delayed posttest was administered to examine the retention phenomenon between two groups. Beth test raw scores and gain scores, however, were analyzed by two sample t-test and paired t-test. In addition, to survey learner perceptions and perceived effects, questionnaires were given to two groups before and after the instruction as well.
Results showed that the total mean score in the FonF group outperformed those in the TGI group in the posttest, though statistically insignificant. As results in the delayed posttest suggested, the retention phenomenon existed in both groups. Findings also showed that both groups liked the approach they had experienced, within which most TGI participants perceived such a traditional way of grammar teaching effective. FonF participants, however, are uncertain if the approach is effective for them even though they performed better than TGI participants in the posttest.
The implication is that secondary EFL teachers in Taiwan are provided with an alternative: Communicative Focus on Form. The most salient advantage of adopting this approach is that teachers do not have to sacrifice accuracy for fluency anymore. Moreover, FonF may serve as a turning point while teachers are coping with English innovations toward a communicative approach. Further research, such as the investigation of the FonF effects on different language skills, and studies testing different target structures are needed for complete understanding of the effects of Communicative Focus on Form.
|
|---|
