A study on the effects of teaching grammar to grade 9 students based on deductive approach versus inductive approach a case study at tu mo rong secondary school

Trang 1 VÕ THỊ NGỌC LỄ A STUDY ON THE EFFECTS OF TEACHING GRAMMAR TO GRADE 9 STUDENTS BASED ON DEDUCTIVE APPROACH VERSUS INDUCTIVE APPROACH: A CASE STUDY AT TU MO RONG SECONDARY SCHOOL F

VÕ THỊ NGỌC LỄ

A STUDY ON THE EFFECTS OF TEACHING GRAMMAR TO GRADE 9 STUDENTS BASED ON DEDUCTIVE APPROACH

VERSUS INDUCTIVE APPROACH:

A CASE STUDY AT TU MO RONG SECONDARY SCHOOL

Field: Theory and Methodology of English Language Teaching

Code: 8140111

Supervisor: TRUONG VAN DINH, PhD

Binh Dinh - 2023

BỘ GIÁO DỤC VÀ ĐÀO TẠO TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC QUY NHƠN

VÕ THỊ NGỌC LỄ

NGHIÊN CỨU HIỆU QUẢ SỬ DỤNG PHƯƠNG PHÁP DIỄN DỊCH VÀ QUY NẠP TRONG GIẢNG DẠY NGỮ PHÁP

CHO HỌC SINH LỚP CHÍN - NGHIÊN CỨU CỤ THỂ TẠI TRƯỜNG THCS TU MƠ RÔNG

Ngành: Lí luận và phương pháp dạy học bộ môn tiếng Anh

Mã số: 8140111

Người hướng dẫn: TS Trương Văn Định

BÌNH ĐỊNH - 2023

DECLARATION

I hereby certify that the thesis entitled ‘A study on the effects of teaching Grammar to Grade 9 students based on deductive approach versus inductive approach: A case study at Tu Mo Rong Secondary School’ is the

result of my own research in the fulfilment of the requirement for the Degree

of Master of Arts

I have not utilized any sources other than those cited in the references Furthermore, I affirm that this thesis has not been submitted in any other institution to obtain a degree

Binh Dinh, 2023

Researcher

Vo Thi Ngoc Le

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Without the support, encouragement, and contributions from my supervisor, colleagues, friends and family, the successful completion of this study work would not have been possible I take this chance to appreciate them for their useful advice and invaluable comments, and time They have always been by my side and helped me enriched my knowledge and made my master thesis graduate journey a memorable chapter in my life

First and foremost, I am grateful to my supervisor, Ph.D Truong Van Dinh, for his amazing supervision His knowledge and profession teaching-related expertise inspired me greatly during my M.A course at Quy Nhon University, and he opened new horizons for me in every field I profoundly appreciate his accommodating guidelines and suggestions, great patience, and strong management skills in helping me resolve the obstacles whenever I had difficulties in my study I am very lucky to have had him support me for my work

Next, I would like to acknowledge all my teachers at Department of Foreign Languages, Quy Nhon University, Binh Dinh, for their interesting lectures which enable me to gain a great deal of theoretical knowledge and practical experience

I am also indebted to all the students and teachers at Tu Mo Rong Secondary School for their cooperation and participation in this study

Last but not least, my heart-felt gratitude goes to my family for their encouragement and support, without which I might face obstacles during the process of implementing the study and completing my thesis

ABSTRACT

An instructional approach that has been proved to be effective in one teaching context might not be appropriate in other pedagogical settings This stresses the vitality of research on instructional strategies and approaches regardless of an abundance of well-established ones With an endeavor to seek an effective approach to teach English grammar in Vietnamese contexts, this thesis reports the results of an empirical study in which the inductive and deductive approach was applied to teach the English present perfect tense to Vietnamese 9th graders in Tu Mo Rong Secondary School, a secondary in Kon Tum province The study employed a quantitative design in which the two approaches were used to teach two different groups of students (a control group and an experiment group) and a pre-test and a post-test were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the two teaching approaches The findings from the participants’ test-based scores revealed that those taught with the deductive approach outperformed their counterparts who were exposed to the inductive approach Besides, no major differences were found with respect to males and female participants’ achievement of the present perfect tense after their learning experience These findings suggest that the deductive approach

to grammar teaching can be more productive in a Vietnamese EFL context in comparison with the inductive approach Considering this study’s context, sample size and participants’ characteristics, suggestions for applying its findings into other similar pedagogical settings are elucidated Besides, the limitations of the study are also discussed, from which suggestions for further studies are provided

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii

ABSTRACT iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vi

LISTS OF FIGURES AND TABLES vii

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Rationale 1

1.2 Aim and Objectives of the Study 5

1.2.1 Aim of the Study 5

1.2.2 Objectives of the Study 5

1.3 Research Questions 6

1.4 Scope of the Study 6

1.5 Significance of the Study 7

1.6 Organisation of the Study 7

CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW 9

2.1 Grammar and Language Learning 9

2.1.1 Defining Grammar 9

2.1.2 Roles of Grammar in Language Learning 11

2.2 Present Perfect Tense 13

2.2.1 Forms 13

2.2.2 Meaning and Uses 14

2.3 Grammar Teaching 18

2.3.1 Ups and Downs of Grammar Teaching 18

2.3.2 Approaches to Grammar Teaching 22

2.4 Previous Studies 28

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 31

3.1 Research Design 31

3.2 Research Setting 32

3.2.1 English Teaching and Learning at Tu Mo Rong Secondary School 32

3.2.2 English 9 Textbook and Grammar Teaching 33

3.3 Participants 32

3.4 Materials Development and Teaching Procedures 35

3.5 Data Collection and Analysis 38

3.5.1 Data Collection 38

3.5.2 Pre-test and Post-test 38

3.5.3 Data Analysis 40

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 41

4.1 Effects of teaching PPT Inductively versus Deductively on Student Learning 41

4.2 Effects of Two Teaching Approaches on Student Learning By Gender 49 4.3 Which Instructional Approach Is Better: Deductive or Inductive? 55

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS 63

5.1 Conclusion 63

5.2 Limitations of the Study 64

5.3 Pedagogical Suggestions 64

5.4 Suggestion for Further Research 66

REFERENCES 67 APPENDICES

vi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

EFL English as a foreign language

PPT Present perfect tense

CLT Communicative language teaching

TPR Total Physical Response

L1 First language/mother tongue

L2 Second/foreign language

LISTS OF FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Teaching Activities for Simple Past in English 9 Textbook 3

Figure 1.2 Position of PPT in English 9 Textbook 4

Figure 2.1 Uses of PPT 15

Figure 2.2 Uses of PPT 16

Figure 2.3 Uses of PPT 17

Figure 2.4 Sequence of a Grammar Activity 21

Figure 2.5 Inductive versus Deductive Approaches 27

Figure 3.1 Research Design 34

Figure 3.2 Teaching Activities for PPT in English 9 Textbook 32

Figure 4.1 Comparison of Results of Pre-test and First Part of Post-test 42

Figure 4.2 Comparison of Mean Values of Pre-test and First Part of Post-test 44

Figure 4.3 Description of Results of Pre-test and First Part of Post-test 45

Figure 4.4 Range of Test-based Scores of First Part of Post-test of the Two Groups 46

Figure 4.5 Comparison of Results of Second Part of the Post-test 47

Figure 4.6 Description of Results of Second Part of Post-test 48

Figure 4.7 Range of Test-based Scores of Second Part of Post-test of the Two Groups 49

Figure 4.8 Comparison of Results of First Part of Post-test Between Male and Female Participants 50

Figure 4.9 Description of Results of First Part of Post-test Between Male and Female Participants 51

Figure 4.10 Range of Test-based Score of First Part of Post-test Between Male and Female Participants 52

viii Figure 4.11 Comparison of Results of Second Part of Post-test Between Male

and Female Participants 53 Figure 4.12 Description of Results of Second Part of Post-test Between Male

and Female Participants 54 Figure 4.13 Range of Test-based Score of First Part of the Post-test Between

Male and Female Participants 55 Figure 4.14 Overall Comparison of Participants’ Achievements Between Two

Groups 57 Figure 4.15 Overall Description of Participants’ Achievements Between Two

Groups 59 Figure 4.16 Overall Comparison of Participants’ Achievements Between Male

and Female Participants 60 Figure 4.17 Overall Description of Participants’ Achievements Between Male

and Female Participants 61

TABLES

Table 1.1 Students’ Grammar Test Results at Tu Mo Rong Secondary School 2 Table 3.1 Materials Development and Teaching Procedures 36 Table 3.2 Question Items in Pre-test and Post-test 39

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter introduces the rationale underlying this current study The chapter comprises six parts: rationale, aim and objectives, research questions, scope, significance and organization of the Study

1.1 Rationale

Undoubtedly, teaching grammar holds a crucial role in teaching English

as a foreign language (EFL), as without good command of grammar, the language use will be constrained Despite the changes in the significance attributed to grammar instruction, most of which attach to a particular language teaching method, it is undeniable that grammar instruction leads to high levels of linguistic competence In the case of grammar, apparently, different teachers might have appropriate methods for teaching grammar based

on their experience Some can conduct it inductively whereas others do it deductively Ellis (2006) states that:

Grammar teaching involves any instructional technique that draws learners’ attention to some specific grammatical form in such a way that it helps them either to understand it meta linguistically and/or process it in comprehension and/or production so that they can internalize it (p 84)

Nevertheless, it can be seen that English in both teaching and learning has traditionally been dominated by a Grammar-Translation method Though, very little research has been conducted with regard to teachers’ observation and actual practices regarding grammar, especially at the secondary or high schools where English is one of the compulsory subjects and grammar is a must in language classrooms Hence, it comes to be an indispensable issue to

do research Besides, these two Inductive and Deductive approaches seem to

in Table 1, which presents Tu Mo Rong Secondary School students’ grammar test results in the most three recent years

(Source: Tu Mo Rong Secondary School)

Teaching grammar via the mainly inductive approaches, which have been practised and promoted in Britain, Australasia, and North America (Mallia, 2014), has gained great prestige worldwide, as opposed to the mainly deductive approaches used in other countries, possibly because greater learner motivation and better understanding and retention of language have been said

to be linked to it (Gollin, 1998) In actuality, there may be a disconnect between what Western teachers perceive to be the most appropriate model of teaching, and the preferred and most effective ways in which the learning of English takes place Therefore, Mallia (2014) warned that because the

inductive approach for grammar instruction has been often unquestioningly considered to be superior for ages, teaching materials and methodologies are therefore often similar and used these teaching approaches indiscriminately worldwide This warning is worth considering because there are substantial differences among learning and teaching situations around the world (Swan, 2006), and time constraints, local cultural perceptions on language learning, class sizes and exam-culture mentality may seriously impact on grammar teaching (Mallia, 2014) This practice actually occurs in Vietnam, where the textbooks using language classrooms are mainly inductive For example, in

Unit 1-A Visit from a Pen Pal, English 9 Textbook (p.11), which is currently

used at Tu Mo Rong Secondary School, the simple past tense is suggested to

be taught inductively as follows:

Figure 1.1

Teaching Activities for Simple Past in English 9 Textbook

(Source: Nguyen et al., 2011, p.11)

4

A sizable number of corpus-based studies have noted that the present perfect tense (PPT) enjoys a wider range of uses in the English language (e.g., Lessness, 2009; Hundt & Smith 2009) in various text types (Yao & Collins, 2012) This popularity of PPT is also reflected in English 9 Textbook Figure

1 presents the position of PPT in this textbook, with the bold unit being where the tense is the main focus of the lesson and the others being where the tense appears, or where students need the knowledge of PPT in their learning process

Figure 1.2

Position of PPT in English 9 Textbook

PRESENT PERFECT Unit 1

Unit 5

Unit 6

Unit 7 Unit 8

Unit 10

Write

(p.11)

Read (p.13)

Listen and read (p.17)

Language

focus (p.19)

Read (p.25) Listen and

read (p.32)

Listen (p.35)

Read (p.43)

Language focus (p.45)

Listen and read (p.47)

Listen and read (p.57)

Write (p.66) Language

Figure 1 stresses the significance of the teaching and learning PPT in EFL contexts in general and at Tu Mo Rong Secondary School in particular, where English 9 Textbook has been utilised As Nguyen at al (2013) stated that English 9 Textbook is theme-based, and grammar is introduced in situations and via a variety of listening, speaking, reading, and writing activities; therefore, the failure to master a grammatical point may seriously affect student learning in various parts of the book, which has been clearly shown in Figure 1.2

For all the above analysis and discussion, the author has decided to

conduct a research entitled “A study on the effects of teaching Grammar to Grade 9 students based on deductive approach versus inductive approach: A case study at Tu Mo Rong Secondary School”, which aims to investigate the

effectiveness of using these two opposing approaches on secondary school students’ overall achievement of the English PPT, from which the conclusions about the application of these two teaching approaches will be drawn and pedagogical implications are discussed

1.2 Aim and Objectives of the Study

1.2.1 Aim of the Study

The present study aim to evaluate the effectiveness and gender differences

in using the inductive and deductive approaches to teach the English present perfect tense to secondary school students

1.2.2 Objectives of the Study

To achieve the aim, the present study is intended:

(1) to find out about Tu Mo Rong Secondary School students’ overall achievements of the English present perfect tense when taught with the inductive and deductive approaches;

6

(2) to examine whether there are any differences in Tu Mo Rong Secondary School male and female students’ achievements of the English present perfect tense when taught with the inductive and deductive approaches;

(3) to determine whether the inductive or deductive are beneficial to teach grammar to Tu Mo Rong Secondary School students

1.3 Research Questions

The present study attempts to answer the following research questions:

(1) What is the effectiveness of teaching PPT inductively versus deductively to Tu Mo Rong Secondary School students’ overall achievements of the English present perfect tense?

(2) Are there any differences in Tu Mo Rong Secondary School male and female students’ achievements of the English present perfect tense when taught with the inductive and deductive approaches?

(3) Which instructional approach is better for Tu Mo Rong Secondary School students’ acquisition of the English present perfect tense: deductive or inductive?

1.4 Scope of the Study

Due to the limitations of a minor study, the author only carried out research on a small number of students at a secondary school The study focuses also on the effectiveness of the use of inductive versus deductive approaches to teach the present perfect tense with the contents stipulated in Tiếng Anh 9 coursebook to Tu Mo Rong Secondary School’s grade 9 students

1.5 Significance of the Study

Theoretically, the present study summarized the theory of the English PPT, grammar instruction in general and the deductive and inductive approaches to teaching grammar in particular These sources of information can be useful for other researchers and classroom practitioners, who would like to do further research in this field and who intend to apply these teaching approaches in their classrooms

Practically, the present study provides language teachers with based advice on the use of the deductive and inductive approaches to teaching English grammar to Vietnamese secondary students, based on their grammar achievements The present study also provides language teachers and learners with a number of activities, exercises and teaching and learning frameworks associated with the teaching and learning the English PPT, all of which were listed in Appendix A

evidence-1.6 Organisation of the Study

This thesis is divided into five chapters

The first chapter, Introduction, discusses the rationale for the present

study It also clarifies the scope of the study, its aim and objectives and research questions as well The organization of the study is also included in this chapter and serves as an outline which directs readers to subsequent sections

The second chapter, Theoretical Background and Literature Review,

states the fundamentals of grammar, grammar instruction, and the English PPT and provides a brief overview of the deductive and inductive approaches

to grammar teaching, which establishes the theoretical background for the

8 design of the present study The previous studies related to this study is also listed and discussed here to figure out unsolved problems in the fields

The third chapter, Methodology, includes information relating to the

methods and procedures employed in the study That is, the research design, treatment stage, data collection and data analysis for implementing the thesis are discussed in this chapter Thus, this chapter provides the framework for generating the result in the subsequent chapter

The fourth chapter, Results and Discussion, represents the results and

discussed the findings It focuses on answering the research questions on the effectiveness of the use of the deductive and inductive approaches to teach the English PPT, from which teaching English grammar to Vietnamese secondary students can be drawn

The last chapter, Conclusion and Implications, summarizes the main

points discussed in the previous parts of the study and the major findings of the research, which provides the ground for the discussion of the implications for learning and teaching English grammar with the deductive and inductive approaches Besides, the limitations of the study and suggestions for further study is also mentioned in this chapter

CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND

Grammar instruction played no role in acquisition, a view based on the conviction that learners (including classroom learners) would automatically proceed along their built-in syllabus as long as they had access to comprehensible input and were sufficiently motivated Grammar instruction could contribute to learning but this was of limited value because communicative ability was dependent on acquisition (p 85)

Sharing this view, Harmer (1987) adds:

Without some understanding of grammar, students would not be able to

do anything more than utter separate items of language for separate functions The expression of functional language is only possible through the use of the Grammar of the language (p 12)

10 The term “grammar” has continually been a controversial subject of research due to the fact that it helps students understand how the language works in every utterance It has been placed in a central position in the context of language teaching and the concept of grammar has been variously defined from the original viewpoints to the current perspectives Despite its common usage, there are multiple definitions of Grammar with the corresponding scholars At the end of the 20th century, Harmer (1987)

presents the expression of Grammar in numerous languages “The grammar of

a language is what happens to words when they become plural or negative, or what word order is used when we make questions or join two clauses to make one sentence” (p.1)

Crystal (2004) defines grammar as follows:

Grammar is the structural foundation of our ability to express ourselves The more we are aware of how it works, the more we can monitor the meaning and effectiveness of the way we and others use language It can help foster precision, detect ambiguity, and exploit the richness of expression available in English And it can help everyone- not only teachers of English, but teachers of anything, for all teaching

is ultimately a matter of getting to grips with meaning (p 24)

Higgs (1985) defines grammar as “a system for converting meaning into language” (p.13) Tonkin (1994) furthers this definition by distinguishing

between descriptive grammar, pedagogical grammar, and psycholinguistic grammar Seliger (1979) points out that the goal of pedagogical grammar rules is to cause someone to produce a language form Rutherford and Smith (1988) depict pedagogical grammar as follows:

Instructional strategies which draw the attention of learner to specifically structural regularities of the language, as distinct from the

message content, will under certain specified conditions significantly increase the rate of acquisition over and above the rate expected from learners acquiring that language under natural circumstances where attention to form may be minimal or sporadic (p 4)

Descriptive grammar refers to the structure of a language as it is actually used by speakers and writers Specialists in descriptive grammar study the rules or patterns that underlie our use of words, phrases, clauses, and sentences Meanwhile, psycholinguistic grammar represents the grammar in the minds of language users

2.1.2 Roles of Grammar in Language Learning

The central role of grammar in language teaching and learning has ups and downs; it first dominated and then lost its dominance and subsequently retrieved a position of renewed importance over the history of language teaching and learning (Celce-Murcia, 1991) When and to what extent one should teach grammar to language learners have always been controversial issues Rutherford (1987) stresses the importance of grammar in language learning by claiming that the teaching of grammar is synonymous with foreign language teaching This importance is emphasized by Radilova (1997,

p.1) who notes that “Knowledge of grammar is the central area of the language system around which the other areas resolve; however important the other components of language may be in themselves, they are connected

to each other through grammar”

Nassaji and Fotos (2004) argue that there are at least four reasons for the re-evaluation of grammar as a necessary component of language instruction Firstly, the hypothesis that language can be learned without some degree of consciousness has been found theoretically problematic Schmidt (2001) suggests that conscious attention to form, or what he calls “noticing” is a

12 necessary condition for language learning A second reason for the renewed interest in L2 grammar instruction is evidence that L2 learners pass through developmental sequences as a result of grammar instruction While certain developmental sequences are fixed and cannot be altered by grammar teaching, other structures can benefit from instruction any time they are taught (Penman, 1999) Thus, it is possible to influence sequences of development favourably through instruction if grammar teaching coincides with the learner’s readiness to move to the next developmental stage of linguistic proficiency (Lightbown, 2000) Third, there exists a large body of research pointing to the inadequacies of teaching approaches where the focus is primarily on meaning-focused communication, and grammar is not addressed Research on learning outcomes in immersion programs showed that, despite substantial long-term exposure to meaningful input, the learners did not achieve accuracy in certain grammatical forms (Lapkin, Hart, & Swain, 1991) Communicative language teaching by itself was found to be inadequate in terms of accuracy in the target language (Ellis, 2002) The last reason for the reconsideration of grammar teaching in the L2 classroom is evidence for the positive effects of grammar instruction, which comes from a large number of laboratory and classroom-based studies as well as extensive reviews of studies on the effects of instruction Studies of the effects of instruction on the development of specific target language forms (Lightbown

& Spada, 1990) as well as corrective feedback on learner errors (Nassaji & Swain, 2000) indicate that grammatical instruction has a significant effect on the attainment of accuracy

Similarly, Norris and Ortega (2000), who reviewed 49 studies on the effectiveness of grammar instruction, conclude:

In general, focused L2 instruction results in large gains over the course

of an intervention Specifically, L2 instruction of particular language forms induces substantial target-oriented change, whether estimated as pre-to-post change within experimental groups or as differences in performance between treatment and control groups on post-test measures even when the control group is exposed to and interacts with experimental materials in which the L2 form is embedded (p 500)

From English language teachers’ perspectives, Burgess and Etherington’s (2002) study, which aimed to explore the beliefs of language teachers about the role of grammar in English language teaching in both state schools and private language institutes, revealed that English language teachers from both settings claimed that they appreciate the value of grammar and its role in language teaching

So far, it is safe to conclude that the teaching of grammar is beneficial and has positive impacts on students’ language learning The question now is which type of grammar instruction facilitates second language acquisition better: explicit or implicit?

2.2 Present Perfect Tense (PPT)

2.2.1 Forms

The English PPT is formed with the present tense forms of the auxiliary

have and the past participle of the main verb The past participle of regular

verbs is equivalent to the simple past form, while that of irregular verbs does not follow this rule but varies in its form Examples of affirmative sentences

in PPT are (Aitken, 1992, pp.22-23):

(1) I have worked in an office before

(2) He has been to London

14

PPT’s negative sentences are formed by adding ‘not’ to the auxiliary verb, i.e., have or has For instance,

(4) I have not worked in an office before

(5) He has not been to London

Questions in PPT are formed with the conversion of the position of the

subject and auxiliary of the sentence Thus, a sentence like ‘He has been to London’ becomes ‘Has he been to London?’ In a negative question, ‘not’ is

inserted after the subject

In spoken or in informal written contexts, the subject and the auxiliary

verb in affirmative sentences may be abbreviated, e.g., I’ve and he’s, while the auxiliary verb in negative sentences might be contracted as haven’t and hasn’t

2.2.2 Meaning and Uses

Regarding meaning, it is generally agreed that PPT “shows the present situation in relation to past action, that is, how the past is relevant to now” (Aitken, 1992, p.23) Thus, PPT is often described as referring to “past with present relevance”, or “past involving the present” (Leech, 2005, p.36)

Scholars and linguists offer different classifications of the uses of PPT Leech (2005, p.36) describes the uses of PPT based on the verbs which may

be used with the tense, including ‘state’ and ‘event’ verbs Examples of the first category are be, have, know, live, or believe, and those of the other are

do, go, come, leave, or start (Leech, 2005, p 9) He claims that there are one

‘state’ use, and three ‘event’ uses (Leech, 2005, p.36), which are labelled and illustrated in Figure 2.1:

PPT can also be used to indicate that one or more than one event took place “at-least-once-in-a-period-leading-up-to-the-present” (Leech, 2005, p.38) This use is termed the ‘indefinite past’ use as the number of events may remain unmentioned and the time when the event(s) happened is indeterminate The use of adverbials, especially adverbs of frequency and

time is typical in this use Popular adverbs include just, already, recently, still, and yet These adverbs narrow down the period in which the event(s)

16 occurred, and so they locate the event closer to the present moment and thereby can be defined as a sub-category of the indefinite past meaning,1 namely “recent indefinite past” (Leech, 2005, p.38) Together with those adverbs indicate recency, those adverbs that refer to an unspecific point of

time in the past such as always, never, ever and before also often occur with

the ‘indefinite past’ use (Leech, 2005, pp 37-39)

The last use, i.e., the ‘resultative past’ use, expresses the present relevance and significance of the consequences of a past event This use is usually used

with ‘transitional event verbs’, such as arrive, recover, or break, and without

any adverbs The only difference between the ‘recent indefinite’ and the

‘resultative past’ use is the “additional resultative inference”, so the

‘resultative past’ use is actually a variant of the ‘recent indefinite’ one (Leech, 2005, pp 39-40)

Quite similarly, Greenbaum and Quirk (1995) state that PPT “is used to refer to a situation set at some indefinite time within a period beginning in the past and leading up to the present” (p.51) They classified into two categories:

‘stative’ and ‘dynamic’, and distinguish four uses of PPT in Figure 2.2:

Figure 2.2

Uses of PPT

Greenbaum and Quirk’s four uses are largely equivalent to the ones Leech (2005) mentions Precisely, their ‘state present perfect’ and ‘habitual present perfect’ correspond to Leech’s ‘state-up-to-the-present’ and ‘habit-up-to-the-present’ uses Meanwhile, the ‘event present perfect’ with its subtypes is comparable to the ‘indefinite past’ use with its subcategory ‘recent indefinite past’ The only divergence between Leech’s and Greenbaum and Quirk’s classification is the absence of the ‘resultative past’ use, but this use seems to

be subsumed under the ‘recent past event’ use

Close (1995) suggested a simplified classification of the uses of PPT, diagrammed in Figure 2.3:

Figure 2.3

Uses of PPT

From Close’s (1995) perspective, PPT is used to express an activity or state that “begins in the past and continues up to the moment of speaking or occurs at some unspecified time within the pre-present period” (Close, 1995, pp.247-248) It seems that Close’s two categories basically include the first three uses described by Leech In other words, the ‘activity/state continuing until now’ category subsumes Leech’s ‘state and habit’ use, while the

‘activity/state in a period continuing until now’ use corresponds to the

‘(recent) indefinite past’ and the ‘resultative past’ uses Additionally, Close (1995) adds that PPT is also used when ‘present evidence’ is missing, as it

(1) ‘accomplishment with relevance to the present’,

(2) ‘continuing from the past to the present’,

2.3 Grammar Teaching

2.3.1 Ups and Downs of Grammar Teaching

2.3.1.1 Grammar Translation Method: Flourishing of Grammar Teaching

This traditional method is rooted in the belief that the centrality of language is its grammar, and that the core of language learning is grammatical competence In this approach, grammatical rules are taught one-by-one, explicitly, to the learner; metalanguage is used to talk explicitly about the grammar Learners are expected to learn the rules and to practise using them

to construct sentences Learners are assumed to be able to use the rules automatically with practice Grammatical structures or rules are sorted into a

sequence, assumed to progress from 'easy' to 'difficult', and the sequence forms a syllabus

The grammar-translation method benefits the learners who have been academically successful to reach higher levels of language proficiency Teaching and learning grammar rules explicitly are likely to be difficult and inappropriate for primary learners Of course, the explicit teaching of grammar patterns can have a role in primary classrooms, but it appears to be occasionally appropriate With primary learners, the teaching of grammar better goes together with meaningful language use, in which pupils notice patterns as they make sense of the language without the need of complicated technical metalanguage Actually, metalanguage is beneficial in more advanced language learning and so can have a place in the language classroom The introduction of metalanguage across the primary years, if done meaningfully and through discourse contexts, can give pupils a solid foundation for later study of languages

2.3.1.2 Communicative Language Teaching: Downgrading of Grammar Teaching

Underpinning this method is the argument that one’s ability to talk about

a language does not mean that they can talk in that language A central tenet

of CLT is that language learning is facilitated by communicating in the target language In its strongest form, L2 learning was supposed to resemble L1 acquisition, where it all just happens without any direct or explicit teaching Whether such a strong form of CLT was ever adopted in practice or not is, however, questionable More likely is that various weaker forms were taken

up, with attempts to make language practice activities more realistic The drive for communicative competence of CLT led the teaching of grammar to a downgrading of its importance in L2 classrooms

20 Total Physical Response (TPR) is one of CLT variants which is still of great value today, particularly in young learner classrooms (Lightbown & Spada, 1999) TPR reflects the acquisition of L1 where parents and carers are physically involved in imparting language; learners listen to a piece of language and respond to this with appropriate movement and action In other words, language learning takes place through acting out the language

2.3.1.3 Focus on Form: Revival of Grammar Teaching

Immersion programs emerged in the 1970s set the context for the theory that L2 learning could follow the same route as L1 acquisition (Dulay, Burt,

& Krashen, 1982) - language learning takes place through communicating in the target language However, recent evaluations of immersion programs

show mixed results as to learners’ success (Harley, Howard & Hart, 1995)

Immersion classes did benefit learners’ L2 accents and listening skills as the result of extensive L2 exposure, but learners had problems even with basic grammar structures because of lack of attention to form (Lightbown & Spada, 1990) In these classrooms, the focus on meaning allows learners to bypass aspects of grammar, and grammatical inaccuracies are maintained and reinforced when all learners are L2 ones

It thus appears that communicating through a language and learning a language cannot go well together, and that focusing on meaning in classrooms does not automatically, as assumed with CLT, guarantee continuing language development on all fronts This contradiction has led to the re-emergence of grammar instruction, with the assumption that learners collaboratively develop their grammatical competence through the teacher’s skilled planning

of tasks and lessons and explicit teaching (Van Patten, 1996) An attempt to address this was made by Batstone (1995), who suggested the sequence of a grammar learning activity shown in Figure 2.4:

Figure 2.4

Sequence of a Grammar Activity

Noticing: Learners actively participate in the learning process to notice

the structure and connections between form and meaning, but do not themselves manipulate language Successful noticing activities will usually:

• support meaning as well as form;

• present the form in isolation, as well as in a discourse and linguistic context;

• contrast the form with other, already known, forms;

• require active participation by the learner;

• be at a level of detail appropriate to the learners - a series of noticing activities may 'zoom in' on details;

• lead into, but not include activities that manipulate language

Structuring: Controlled practice around form and meanings is used to

bring the new grammar pattern into learners’ internal grammar and/or reorganise their internal grammar Learners must be actively involved in constructing language to convey precise meaning In structuring activities:

(RE)NOTICING

(RE)STRUCTURING

PROCEDURALIZING

• there will be limited impact on spontaneous use - most of the results

of structuring work are still internal

Proceduralising: This stage makes the new grammar ready for instant and

fluent use in communication and requires practice in choosing and using the

form to express meaning To avoid the possible conflict between communicative pressure and accuracy, tasks used for proceduralisation must require attention to grammar as well as effective communication As the grammar forms are becoming automatised, teachers can help push proceduralisation forwards

2.3.2 Approaches to grammar teaching

In accordance with the aforesaid thesis, there are many various concepts about teaching English Grammar However, there has been a transformation

in the preceding teaching classroom methods that mainly paid attention to the forms More specifically, for instance, in the Grammar – Translation Method

or Audio Language Method, the patterns are not chiefly emphasized in such previous teaching approaches, it has gradually changed to functional language communicative contexts This is in line with what Huang (2010) states that grammar instruction has moved from its central position in traditional language teaching approaches to playing virtually no role in communicative approaches (p 29)

Consequently, teachers have applied varied approaches to teach grammar

so that students can absorb these rules and exceptions better and can use them efficiently in everyday conversations Ellis (2006) stresses finding an

appropriate method for the lecturers to educate their students has been a subject of debate Also, students can achieve their best performance by applying their techniques for studying Larsen-Freeman (2015) investigates:

Whether students learn language rules best by giving them information deductively or by reading textbooks, or if students are better off being given examples from which they find out the rules inductively by themselves One learning approach would favor induction, with the added benefit that students learn how to figure out the rules on their own (p 97)

The two instructional approaches for teaching grammar mentioned in this paper are Inductive and Deductive In simple words, a deductive approach is a technique that works from general to the specific while an inductive approach

is a technique that works from specific to general

On the one hand, Thornbury (1999) thinks that students will save their time and get straight to the main point in the deductive classroom However, he also reckons that it is not a good idea if the teacher teaches grammar rules by starting the lesson with a grammar presentation, especially for young learners

On the other hand, Bourke (1996) states the deductive approach tends to focus

on form rather than meaning It encourages learners’ passiveness compared to activeness with reference to students’ involvement in the learning process

If grammar instruction is concerned in language teaching and learning, how the forms will be presented should be concerned In order to do this, there are two common ways: deductive and inductive

2.3.2.1 Deductive Grammar Teaching

According to Sriraman and Adrian (2004), deductive reasoning usually starts with the general and advances to the specific The Advance Organizer is a

24 deductive methodology that can be used to create presentations that establish a scaffold of significant topics at the start of a class A docent using an Advance Organizer to structure a tour in an art environment is one example Joyce, Weil

and Calhoun (2015) define the model as “a powerful concept used by art historians This organizer has many subordinate ideas that can be linked to the particular characteristics of the art objects being viewed” (p 198) Besides, advanced organizers support the goal of learning subject matter by “improving presentational methods of teaching” (p 199) A meaningful learning classroom

takes place when teachers address three concerns:

(1) how knowledge is organized (curriculum content)

(2) how the mind works to process new information (learning)

(3) how teachers can apply these ideas about curriculum and learning when they present new material to students (instruction)

In line with this view, Thornbury (1999) highlights that a deductive lesson starts with the presentation of a grammar point provided by the teacher in order that the grammar pattern will be highlighted through examples That is

to say, in the deductive classroom, the instructor teaches grammar by presenting grammatical rules and gives some examples later If the students have understood, they are asked to apply the rule and make some sentences by themselves That helps to explain why Erlam (2003) states that in a deductive approach classroom, the analysis of the targeted grammar patterns will come first accompanied by the drills and activities To put it another way, deductive principles are available for classrooms where the Grammar-Translation method is applied, so students are able to get acquainted with the structure first (Nunan, 1991) Subsequently, their own examples are produced based on their acquisition towards the represented pattern According to Fortune

(1992), Deductive Approach is defined as “the bread and butter of language

teaching around the world and still enjoys a monopoly in many course books and self-study grammar books” (p.79)

Deductive approaches are associated with grammar translation and cognitive code teaching are deductive (Krashen & Seliger, 1975) Deductive approaches are based on the top-down theory in which the presentation and explanation of grammar rules take precedence over teaching (Anani, 2017) Grammar is taught from the whole to parts, so learners understand the grammar rules and structures first Following this, they see the examples provided by their teacher and finally they begin to produce their own examples As such, these instructional approaches entail the teacher’s presentation of the grammar rule at the beginning of class through examples, which is then followed by the students’ application of the rule Thus, deductive approaches for grammar instruction are teacher-centred

Deductive approaches for grammar instruction have been criticised in terms of learner passivity (Shaffer, 1989) as it is argued that the integration of new knowledge requires deep processing and active engagement by learners

2.3.2.2 Inductive Grammar Teaching

In contrast, in an inductive approach, Thornbury (1999) indicates that learners themselves have to find out the grammar rule in a conversation or a text rather than an isolated sentence He (2000) continuously asserts that with the inductive approach, the learner first studies via examples in which the grammatical structure is used, without having known the rule, and from those examples he/ she has developed his/ her understanding of the rule (p 55) Inductive approaches for grammar instruction are associated with audio-lingual, silent way, and total physical response (Krashen & Seliger, 1975) Communicative language teaching is also essentially inductive as its focus is

26

on functions rather than grammatical structures (Mallia, 2014)

Inductive approaches are underpinned by the bottom-up theory which accepts the view that language learners tend to focus on parts rather than the whole (DeKeyser, 2003) In this approach, the teaching process begins with a text, audio or visual in a context; students work on the material to find the rules themselves Subsequently, they give their own examples Accordingly, inductive approaches for grammar teaching are student-centred

Like deductive approaches for grammar instruction, critics of inductive approaches have argued that learners may fail to discover rules or misinterpret them (Ellis, 2012) Inductive approaches are also criticised for lack of teacher assistance which places an overwhelming load on the learner’s working memory (Kirschner et al., 2006)

2.3.2.3 Deductive versus Inductive Grammar Teaching

The ways in which the deductive approach and its counterpart – the inductive approach deals with grammar is clearly opposing (bottom-up versus top-down), so a deductive grammar class definitely greatly differs from an inductive grammar class Some of the most obvious disparities between these two approaches are the techniques in which meaning, and grammar are presented, the focus of learning, and the role of the learner and the teacher in the teaching and learning process Kolat (2009) contrasts these two approaches illustrated in Figure 2.5:

Figure 2.5

Inductive versus Deductive Approaches

1 The focus is on the use; the use

of language is over its rules

The focus is on the rules; the rules

of language are over its use

2 Students are active; learner

autonomy is encouraged

Students are passive; they are just listeners

3 More effective for young

learners at low levels

More effective for adults

terminology are introduced at

first

Goes from easy to difficult

5 The rules are introduced after

their use

The rules are introduced first, followed by their use

6 Learner-centred: learners are

encouraged to figure out the

rules of language themselves

Teacher-centred: teachers formally present the rules and completely control student learning

7 This instruction encourages

more communication in the

learning process

This instruction reduces student interactions and so makes students more passive

8 This instruction brings

students something new and

radical

Students’ learning experience is quite repetitive and similar to previous learning

28

9 The learners may make

incorrect assumptions for

forming rules

Misunderstanding is avoided as teachers control the level of input language

10 Requires more time More efficient use of a time

11 Syllabus structures are quite

The gap between the authentic uses of PPT and those presented in ELT textbooks has been also investigated Charoen and Wijitsopon’s corpus-driven

study (2020) indicates ELT textbooks tend to under-present a core meaning and highlight only a few uses of PPT Basing on this finding, they stress the significance of revising PPT in ELT textbooks

Researchers also interested in L2 learners’ obstacles with the learning and application of PPT Rochman (2003) found that most Indonesian students had difficulties in applying the present perfect into sentences appropriately and that their failure of using the English PPT was strongly associated with the L1 interference, especially the overgeneralization of the application of the Indonesian equivalents

Unsurprisingly, there is a vast body of studies on the instruction of PPT in

EFL contexts Using games to teach PPT, Nguyen et al (2018) found that the

gamification of teaching and learning PPT encouraged student engagement in the teaching process and most students presented quite positive attitudes towards the teaching approach In an attempt to teach PPT to eighth graders with English songs, Ludhiana (2019), basing on the students’ pre-test and post-test results, stated that the use of English songs improved students’ mastery of the tense

Erfe and Lintas (2012) employed an innovative instructional strategy to teach PPT to young-adult Filipino learners They investigated the effects of a teaching technique called ‘Processing Instruction’, a “psycholinguistic Ally-motivated” intervention, versus traditional instruction in teaching PPT, and their findings revealed significant gains in post-production and delayed production tests for both groups, but the ‘Processing Instruction’ group performed better than the traditional instruction group

The explicitness and implicitness in teaching PPT has also been addressed Based on a contrastive analysis between the English PPT and its Japanese present perfect equivalent, Imamura (1994) concluded that Japanese

30 students would have difficulties understanding the significance or the role of the English PPT, so the teacher should explain the essence of the English PPT

to Japanese students explicitly Similarly, Finger and Vasques (2010) found that teaching the English PPT explicitly is beneficial to Brazilian EFL university students as suggested by their test results Besides, Liu (2020) discussed the utilisation of deductive and inductive approaches to teach PPT and the present perfect continuous tense in association with English pedagogical grammar and concluded that both deductive and inductive approaches are helpful in language teaching and learning if used appropriately with pedagogical grammar

As discussed above and to the best of the researcher’s knowledge, an abundance of studies have been done on PPT and especially on the teaching

of the tense, but there is lack of empirical studies addressing the use of deductive and inductive approaches to teaching PPT in Vietnamese contexts,

in which there is a clear transition from teaching grammar deductively to teaching grammar deductively Obviously, those studies in this area of English teaching are needed and definitely benefit Vietnamese classroom practitioners and policy-makers as well