CC BY
9METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS IN TEACHING GRAMMAR OF SCHOOL PUPILS
Madina Abdullayeva
2nd year master student of Uzbekistan State World Languages University https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10827387
Abstract. This paper examines the historical roots of conventional perspectives on grammar, tracing them back to prescriptive grammarians of the eighteenth century and distinguishing them from descriptive approaches. It explores the influence of Latin grammar on English grammar rules and challenges the effectiveness of prescriptive grammar instruction, particularly in modern language learning contexts. In the context of teaching grammar, specifically adverbs, in secondary classes, the paper discusses the implementation of CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) methodology. Strategies for integrating adverb instruction within subject-based lessons using CLIL include selecting relevant content, providing language support, encouraging active participation, fostering critical thinking, and assessing language and content knowledge. Moreover, the paper explores the role of Computer-Aided Instruction (CAI) in enhancing grammar instruction in secondary classes. It discusses various CAI tools and strategies, such as interactive grammar exercises, grammar games, online quizzes, tutorials, and writing tools, to create dynamic and interactive learning environments. The benefits of CAI, including personalized learning, immediate feedback, engagement, accessibility, visual and multimedia support, differentiated instruction, and progress tracking, are outlined.
Keywords: grammar, content and language integrated learning, computer-aided instruction, innovative method, methodology.
Аннотация. В данной статье рассматриваются исторические корни традиционных взглядов на грамматику, они восходят к прескриптивным грамматикам XVIII века и отличаются от дескриптивных подходов. В работе исследуется влияние латинской грамматики на правила английской грамматики и ставится под сомнение эффективность предписывающего обучения грамматике, особенно в условиях современного изучения языка. В контексте преподавания грамматики, в частности наречий, в средних классах в статье рассматривается внедрение методики CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning). Стратегии интеграции обучения наречиям в предметные уроки с использованием CLIL включают отбор релевантного содержания, обеспечение языковой поддержки, поощрение активного участия, развитие критического мышления и оценку знаний языка и содержания. Кроме того, в статье рассматривается роль компьютерного обучения (Computer-Aided Instruction, CAI) в повышении эффективности обучения грамматике в средних классах. В ней обсуждаются различные инструменты и стратегии САI, такие как интерактивные грамматические упражнения, грамматические игры, онлайн-викторины, учебные пособия и инструменты для письма, позволяющие создать динамичную и интерактивную среду обучения. Описываются преимущества CAI, включая персонализированное обучение, немедленную обратную связь, вовлеченность, доступность, визуальную и мультимедийную поддержку, дифференцированное обучение и отслеживание прогресса.
Introduction
According to Maksumov: For teachers The practical objectives of Grammar are:
• the learner must acquire the notion of morphology, its objects and constituent parts, i.e. the parts of speech and their individual properties;
• learn properly the definitions of morphological units: the morpheme, its types and allomorphs;
• learn classification principles of morphemes from different points of view.
• define the grammatical categories of morphology, i.e. their form, meaning and use;
• define the grammatical words: their number, nature and behavior;
• define the nature of syntax, its constituent parts, their classification principles and tasks;
• define the rules of how the words can be (or can not be) combined in phrases, clauses and sentences
The ideas underlying the conventional perspectives on grammar taught in schools originated with the prescriptive grammarians of the eighteenth century, particularly Lindley Murray and Robert Lowth. By dictating precise rules for proper usage, they attempted to "fix" the language and implied that language was static and that any variation from this was corrupted or mistaken. It is important to distinguish between the descriptive or analytical approach to grammar and this prescriptive tradition. The latter can be traced back to grammarians from the 18th century like William Ward, and then to Otto Jespersen and other scholars in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and finally to the work of contemporary descriptive linguists like Michael Halliday, whose findings are currently influencing the language curricula in Australia and Britain. Despite the fact that English and Latin language patterns differ greatly, the majority of these recommendations and the regulations that accompanied them (such as "It is wrong to split infinitives") were founded on analogies with Latin. In contrast to Latin, English's infinitive ('to go') obviously contains more than one word; hence, adding a related word scarcely constitutes "splitting" the infinitive. Additionally, the phrase "It is I" is based on the Latin custom of following the verb "to be" with "nominative" or Subject forms. This is true even though English is mostly an uninflected language and does not often designate Objects with "accusative" ends, much less create an exception for the verb "to be." Similar to the preceding rule, the rule on avoiding prepositions at sentence endings originated from Latin's stylistic preference for verbs at sentence ends. Numerous activities involving sentence correction reinforced these rules about English grammar by asking students to identify the "correct" form of usage—which was often the one they did not use in everyday conversation! Even in more formal situations, these principles frequently seem to go against the normal usage of the language, at least in the somewhat less formal and Latinate English that the majority of us today write. Furthermore, it appears strange to prioritize students' ability to use these excessively formal usages when, even in proper contexts, they may have a very weak grasp of Standard English as a whole.
Two fundamental presumptions underpinned these prescriptive attitudes:
• that there is a proper standard form of the language that is often exclusively used in
writing
• that students' ability to write in English depends on receiving clear instruction in this grammar and practice using it.
Modern policy and practice, which now more than ever focus on the characteristics of spoken English and how it differs from Standard written English, challenge the first of these presumptions. The second assumption—that writing proficiency is dependent on formal grammar instruction—was seriously questioned by the results of several studies (Macauley 1947; Harris,
1963, for example); more recently, Elley and his colleagues' (1999) work appears to provide unquestionable evidence in support of the argument. English grammar instruction, whether traditional or transformational, "has virtually no influence on the language growth of typical secondary school students," according to a longitudinal study that included traditional grammar, modern transformational grammar (connected to Chomsky), and a control group. (Elley, W.B. et al. 1975, 'The role of grammar in a secondary school English curriculum'. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies 10: 26-42. Quoted in Elley, 1999.) The early prescriptive method made the mistake of assuming that the forms and structure required to characterize English grammar are straightforward, comprehensive, and basically constant. Without attempting to adapt the system to fit English or represent the intricacy of the language, it adopted the eight "parts of speech" from Latin and used roughly the same syntax. The serious grammarians of the 19th and 20th centuries, like Curme, Poutsma, and Jespersen, attempted to describe language in detail, and the linguists of the 20th century, like Chomsky and Halliday, created new systems to explain language in all its complexities. Some 18th-century philosophical grammarians did make an attempt to accurately describe language and developed analytical systems to do so. However, the prescriptive, dogmatic approach has dominated grammar instruction in schools and continues to shape the opinions of many people who speak as amateurs when they discuss the topic. Of course, it still has an impact on many instructors' attitudes and even methods today, but since the 1970s and 1980s, several educators in Australia, America, and Britain have begun introducing their pupils to a more inquiry-based approach to language, including grammar. While the latter view sees grammar theory as a complex, speculative endeavor constantly being refined by grammarians striving to accurately describe the complexity of the English language as it changes over time and space (into American or Australian or even Scottish English), the former view sees grammar theory as simple, comprehensive, and unchanging.
Nowadays, methodological science presents many approaches teaching grammar, they are all the result of various theories in the field of learning foreign languages: the contrastive hypothesis, the hypothesis of identity, cognitive theories, the interlanguage hypothesis. All of them pose the question of choosing a teaching method to the teacher. Answering this question: it is important to say about the limitation of grammatical material and its selection for certain communicative objectives grammatical minimum should be as a passive grammatical minimum (forms and constructions which students must learn for receptive language skills), as well as an active grammatical minimum (necessary for expressing their thoughts). The increased attention to teaching English grammar is evidenced by the recent appearance of theoretical and practical grammars, methodological manuals and appendices, articles devoted to problems of teaching grammar, affecting the study of grammatical phenomena. In these works:
1) The main grammatical features of English are described language in comparison with the Russian language (Shubin E.P., Sytel V.V. [Shubin, 1975], Arkhipov V. [Arkhipov, 2007]);
2) There are groups of tests that allow you to independently control the assimilation of grammatical material (Khudyakov A.A.) [Khudyakov, 2005], Galskova N.D. [Galskova, 1987], Larina E. [Larina, 2001];
3) The grammatical features of English colloquial speech are revealed in detail, attention is paid to the structural and communicative types of sentences and individual parts of speech, really functioning in the sphere of everyday everyday communication (V.V.Buzarov [Buzarov, 2003]);
4) the complex grammatical phenomena of the English language, such as modern forms, are considered separately (Dragunkin A. [Dragunkin, 2006], phrasal verbs of Mizinina I. [Mizinina, 2006]);
5) drawings, situations, diagrams, and storylines are used to interpret grammatical rules (Dubrovin M.I. [Dubrovin, 1992]);
6) the presentation of the material is simplified and humor is used to explain complex grammatical material (Eckersley K.E., Macaulay M.);
Teachers and scholars invent, discover or adapt great number of innovative methods, techniques and activities in order to teach grammar and their purposes are to teach grammar effectively, to promote grammatical rules in real life, to create a confident L2 user and many others by analzing , comparing various works and ideas .If it comes to teaching adverbs there are various teaching tools which are based on information technology . They can be whiteboards, Artificial Intelligence tools In modern curricula . CLIL method also getting popular in the 21st century as a new trend in the process of teaching and learning English as a second language. In the Republic of Uzbekistan teaching English is connected with CLIL method in secondary classes. In particular , our chosen class to observe is 6th grade learners and their English coursebook has special attention for CLIL method . "CLIL stands for Content and Language Integrated Learning and it has officially been around since the 1990s. It is an educational approach that originally stems from Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and has been used mostly by language teachers." David Marsh is frequently given credit for the idea. CLIL combines the teaching of content with the study of a foreign language, usually English, though it can also involve teaching any language The 2006 EURYDICE publication "Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at schools in Europe" showed that CLIL programms had been started in most EU member countries both at primary and secondary levels and as part of mainstream school education or within pilot projects. When we think of content, we typically associate it with academic subjects like science, geography, or history. However, content can also refer to any other type of content, including less academic and, some would argue, more enjoyable subjects like fashion, cooking, photography, or film. There are various advantages of CLIL method in secondary classes which we decided to consider. First of all It helps to enhanced language proficiency: CLIL provides students with opportunities to practice and improve their language skills in a natural and authentic context. By engaging with subject content in a foreign language, students are exposed to a wide range of vocabulary, grammar structures, and language functions that are directly relevant to the topics they are studying. This helps them develop their language skills in a meaningful and practical way, leading to increased proficiency in both the target language and the content area. The second profitable segment of this method is Increased motivation: CLIL fosters student motivation by making language learning more relevant and interesting. By connecting language learning to real-world subjects and topics that students are passionate about, they are more likely to be engaged and motivated to learn. This can lead to higher levels of participation, active involvement in lessons, and a greater willingness to take risks and make mistakes in order to improve their language skills." ...this kind of approach has a number of positive effects on learning, including increased motivation (4) an improvement in language skills and a deep processing of the subject matter or both the subject matter and language skills".Third advantageous side of using CLIL method can be Improved cognitive skills: CLIL requires students to process information in two languages simultaneously, which can enhance cognitive skills such as critical
thinking, problem-solving, and analytical reasoning. By engaging with complex content in a foreign language, students are challenged to think critically, make connections between different concepts, and draw conclusions based on evidence. This can help develop their cognitive abilities and prepare them for academic success in other areas.The forth beneficial side that should be admitted cultural awareness: CLIL exposes students to different cultures and perspectives through the study of content subjects in a foreign language. By exploring topics from a global perspective and interacting with materials from diverse cultural backgrounds, students can develop a greater understanding and appreciation of other cultures. This can promote intercultural communication, empathy, and tolerance, helping students become more open-minded and respectful individuals. The last not least, Preparation for higher education and careers: CLIL equips students with the language skills and academic knowledge necessary for success in higher education and future careers that require proficiency in multiple languages. By developing strong language skills and content knowledge through CLIL, students are better prepared to pursue further studies in a foreign language or work in international settings where multilingualism is valued. This can open up a wide range of opportunities for students in terms of academic and professional growth. According to Mehisto et al.(2008), some key features are crucial to create an effective, CLIL oriented learning environment, such as:
- Grade-appropriate levels of academic achievement in subjects taught through the CLIL language;
- Grade-appropriate functional proficiency in listening, speaking, reading and writing in the CLIL language; - Age-appropriate levels of first language competence in listening, speaking, reading and writing;
- An understanding and appreciation of the cultures associated with the CLIL language and the student's first language;
- The cognitive and social skills and habits required for success in an ever-changing world (Mehisto et al. 2008:12).
As we are investigating teaching grammar in the material of adverbs in secondary classes we should clarify implementation of CLIL method to educate adverbs . While utilizing the CLIL method to teach adverbs, we can integrate language learning with content learning by incorporating adverbs into subject-specific lessons. Here are some strategies to effectively teach adverbs using the CLIL method:
1. Select relevant content: Choose a subject area that naturally lends itself to the use of adverbs, such as science experiments, historical events, or literary analysis. This will help students see the practical application of adverbs in real-world contexts.
2. Integrate language and content: Embed adverb exercises and activities within the content lesson. For example, when discussing a science experiment, highlight how adverbs are used to describe the speed, manner, or frequency of actions. Encourage students to identify and analyze adverbs in the context of the subject matter.
3. Provide language support: Offer scaffolding and support for students to understand and use adverbs effectively. Provide examples, explanations, and practice exercises that help students grasp the concept of adverbs and how they modify verbs, adjectives, or other adverbs.
4. Encourage active participation: Engage students in hands-on activities that require them to use adverbs in meaningful ways. For instance, have students write sentences describing a
historical event using adverbs to convey time or place. Encourage group discussions where students can practice using adverbs in conversation.
5. Foster critical thinking: Challenge students to think critically about how adverbs enhance communication and convey nuances of meaning. Encourage them to reflect on the impact of different adverbs on the overall message or tone of a sentence.
6. Assess language and content knowledge: Evaluate students' understanding of adverbs through both language and content assessments. Include tasks that require students to demonstrate their ability to use adverbs accurately in writing, speaking, and analyzing subject-specific materials.
By integrating adverbs into subject-based lessons using the CLIL method, teachers can help students develop their language skills while deepening their understanding of academic content. This approach not only enhances language proficiency but also promotes meaningful learning experiences that connect language learning with real-world applications.
The future curriculum of teaching English language has been witnessed in well-developed countries and it is connected with WEB 3.0 tools, CAI ( computer -aided - instructions) without human resource. At that time learner autonomy strategy will develop. Instructing and assessing steps might be provided by computers or other kind of innovative technological devices . If we discuss effectiveness of computer aided- instruction for teaching English in particular, grammar and teaching adverbs we should mention the general description of these tools by analyzing ideas of professional scholar and instructors. CAI refers computer aided instruction or computer assisted instruction originally created in America in 1960 and it has been becoming one of the main tool for modern curriculum as it has crucial role to play. Stanford University began computer assisted instruction research as early as 1963 and successfully developed the IBM1500 teaching system with the cooperation of BIM company in 1966. The teaching system is used in many teaching courses, including foreign language courses (Zhao, 2006). It is a self-learning technique, usually offline/online, involving interaction of the student with programmed instructional materials. Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) is an interactive instructional technique whereby a computer is used to present the instructional material and monitor the learning that takes place. CAI uses a combination of text, graphics, sound and video in enhancing the learning process. The computer has many purposes in the classroom, and it can be utilized to help a student in all areas of the curriculum.CAI refers to the use of the computer as a tool to facilitate and improve instruction. CAI programs use tutorials, drill and practice, simulation, and problem solving approaches to present topics, and they test the student's understanding.Tambade and Wagh (2011) claimed that computer-aided instruction packages quickly achieved the educational goal of the lesson when properly used in the classroom. For best practice, C.A.I. is most effective when used as a supplement, incorporated in instruction, and encourages students' reflections when used appropriately.A teacher at Xiangfan College in Hubei's department of foreign languages named Shi Huifeng conducted experimental research on "the application of multimedia in British and American literature teaching" in 1999 (Shi, 2003). The results demonstrated that using the courseware can enhance students' study effects and foster their interest in Get over your fear of foreign literature by reading English and American literature. Under the umbrella term of CAI, Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL)concerns the use of computers in assisting second or foreign language instructional activities. CALL is traditionally described as a means of presenting, reinforcing and testing particular language items. The learner is first presented with a
rule and some examples, and then answers a series of questions which test her or his knowledge of the rule and the computer gives appropriate feedback and awards a mark, which may be stored for later inspection for the teacher (Gunduz, 2005).
There are some breakdown of how we can use computer-aided instruction (CAI) to enhance grammar instruction in secondary classes:
1. Interactive Grammar Exercises:
- Choose CAI programs that offer a variety of interactive grammar exercises, such as fill-in-the-blank activities, drag-and-drop exercises, and multiple-choice questions.
- Ensure that the exercises cover a range of grammar topics, including parts of speech, sentence structure, verb tenses, punctuation, and more.
- Provide immediate feedback to students after they complete each exercise, highlighting any errors and explaining the correct answers.
2. Grammar Games:
- Explore online platforms that offer grammar games tailored to secondary students. These games can be designed as quizzes, puzzles, word scrambles, or interactive challenges.
- Incorporate competitive elements into the games to motivate students and make learning grammar more engaging.
- Encourage students to work collaboratively in groups to solve grammar-related challenges and compete against their peers.
3. Online Grammar Quizzes:
- Create custom online grammar quizzes using CAI tools or platforms that allow you to design and administer assessments based on specific grammar skills.
- Include a mix of question types, such as multiple-choice, true/false, and short answer questions, to assess students' understanding of various grammar concepts.
- Review the quiz results to identify common areas of difficulty among students and tailor your instruction accordingly.
4. Grammar Tutorials:
- Integrate grammar tutorials into your lesson plans to provide additional support for students who struggle with certain grammar topics.
- Select CAI programs that offer comprehensive tutorials with clear explanations, examples, and practice exercises for each grammar concept.
- Encourage students to explore the tutorials independently or as part of guided instruction to reinforce their understanding of grammar rules and principles.
5. Writing Tools:
- Introduce students to writing tools that incorporate grammar checkers, spell checkers, and proofreading software to help them improve their writing skills.
- Teach students how to use these tools effectively to identify and correct grammar errors, punctuation mistakes, and spelling issues in their written assignments.
- Encourage students to apply what they learn from using these writing tools to enhance the overall quality of their writing.
By implementing these strategies and incorporating CAI into your grammar instruction, you can create a dynamic and interactive learning environment that supports students in developing their grammar skills effectively.
Computer-aided instruction (CAI) offers several benefits when used to teach grammar in secondary classes:
1. Personalized Learning: CAI programs can adapt to individual students' learning styles and pace, providing personalized instruction tailored to their specific needs. This personalized approach allows students to progress at their own speed and receive targeted support in areas where they may be struggling.
2. Immediate Feedback: CAI tools can provide instant feedback to students on their grammar exercises, quizzes, and writing assignments. This immediate feedback helps students identify and correct errors in real-time, facilitating a deeper understanding of grammar rules and concepts.
3. Engagement and Motivation: Interactive grammar exercises, games, and quizzes offered through CAI platforms can make learning grammar more engaging and enjoyable for students. The interactive nature of these activities can increase student motivation and participation in grammar lessons, leading to improved learning outcomes.
4. Accessibility and Flexibility: CAI resources are accessible anytime, anywhere, allowing students to practice grammar skills outside of the classroom. This flexibility enables students to review grammar concepts at their own convenience and reinforces learning through independent study.
5. Visual and Multimedia Support: CAI programs often incorporate visual aids, multimedia elements, and interactive features to enhance students' understanding of grammar concepts. These visual and multimedia resources can make abstract grammar rules more concrete and engaging for students, facilitating better retention and application of knowledge.
6. Differentiated Instruction: CAI tools can support differentiated instruction by offering a variety of activities and resources to accommodate diverse learning needs and preferences. Teachers can use CAI programs to provide additional support or challenge for students based on their individual proficiency levels and learning goals.
7. Progress Tracking: Many CAI platforms include features that allow teachers to track students' progress, monitor their performance on grammar exercises, and assess their mastery of specific grammar skills. This data-driven approach enables teachers to identify areas of improvement, tailor instruction accordingly, and provide targeted intervention as needed. Overall, the use of computer-aided instruction in teaching grammar can enhance the learning experience for secondary students by promoting personalized learning, providing immediate feedback, increasing engagement, and supporting differentiated instruction. By leveraging the benefits of CAI tools, teachers can help students develop strong grammar skills and improve their overall language proficiency effectively.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Maksumov's delineation of the practical objectives of grammar for teachers highlights the fundamental components necessary for effective language instruction. Descriptive linguists like Halliday have advocated for a more analytical approach to grammar, acknowledging the diversity and fluidity of language usage. This shift in perspective underscores the need for educators to adopt innovative teaching methods, such as Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) and Computer-Aided Instruction (CAI), to meet the evolving needs of learners. Overall, the future of grammar instruction lies in the innovative integration of pedagogical approaches that embrace the complexity and variability of language while leveraging technology
to enhance learning outcomes. As educators continue to adapt their methods to meet the needs of
diverse learners in a rapidly evolving linguistic landscape, the quest for effective grammar
instruction remains a dynamic and ongoing endeavor.
REFERENCES
1. https://www.teacheracademy.eu/blog/clil/Introduction to CLIL: Sheila CorwinHow to Get 2 for 1. 30 JUNE 2023
2. Alimova E N,Yuldasheva M.B. The Implementation Of Clil At Uzbek Secondary Schools As An Educational Approach THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIALSCIENCEAND EDUCATION INNOVATIONS JULY 2020[TAJSSEI] 163ISSN (e): 2689-100XDOI: https://doi.org/10.37547/tajssei/Volume02Issue07
3. Dalton-Puffer, C., &Nikula, T. (2014). Guest editorial: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Language Learning Journal, 42, 117-122
4. L. Cinganotto, F Benedetti and others Stud Guidelines on CLIL methodology, Project number: 2019-1-PL01- KA201-065027
5. Mehisto P., Marsh D., Frigols M.J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL, Macmillan
6. Xiaojun He . CAI and Its Application in Rural Junior English Class. English Language Teaching; Vol. 8, No. 11; 2015 ISSN 1916-4742 E-ISSN 1916-4750 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
7. Tambade, P. S., & Wagh, B. G., (2011). Assessing the effectiveness of computer-assisted instructions in physics at undergraduate level. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Education, 3(2), 127-136
8. Effectiveness of Computer-Aided Instruction on Students' Conceptual Understanding in Life Science Alvin M. Mahawan*, Milagros A. Celedonio. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTIDISCIPLINARY: APPLIED BUSINESS AND EDUCATION RESEARCH 2023, Vol. 4, No. 2, 388 - 401 http://dx.doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.04.02.06
9. Shi, J., & Shuai, P. (2010). English Writing. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. The Ministry of Education, China. (1993). English Syllabus for Nine-Year Compulsory Education in Full-Time Junior Secondary School. Beijing: People's Education Press.
10. Gunduz,N. (2005). Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL). Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 1(2), 193-214.
