A study on the use of communicative activities in teaching grammar at newstar international language center in Vinh city

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAININGVINH UNIVERSITY  ---TẠ THỊ PHƯƠNG THẢO A STUDY ON THE USE OF COMMUNICATIVE ACTIVITIES IN TEACHING GRAMMAR AT NEWSTAR INTERNATIONAL LANGUAGE CENTER

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

VINH UNIVERSITY



-TẠ THỊ PHƯƠNG THẢO

A STUDY ON THE USE OF COMMUNICATIVE

ACTIVITIES IN TEACHING GRAMMAR AT NEWSTAR INTERNATIONAL LANGUAGE CENTER IN VINH CITY

Major: Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) Code: 60140111

MASTER’S THESIS IN EDUCATION

SUPERVISOR:

LÊ PHẠM HOÀI HƯƠNG, Assoc Prof., Ph.D.

STATEMENT OF AUTHOR

I here acknowledge that this study is mine The data and findings discussed

in the thesis are true, used with permission from associates, and have not beenpublished elsewhere

Author Supervisor

Ta Thi Phuong Thao Assoc.Prof.Dr Le Pham Hoai Huong

First, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor Assoc.Prof Dr Le Pham Hoai Huong for all the friendly support and assistance at allstages of this thesis Her constant guidance has inspired me all through the study.Without her help and careful guidance, this thesis would not have been possible

Second, I am greatly thankful to Dr Tran Ba Tien and all teachers of EnglishDepartment from whom I have received a lot of useful knowledge during the years Istudied here

I would also like to express my sincerest gratitude to all teachers at NewstarInternational Language Center where the investigation was carried out for theirendless enthusiasm, valuable advice and great cooperation

Also, I would like to send my special thanks to all students at Newstarinternational language center for their willingness to participate in my study andtheir valuable input

I wish to express my heartfelt thanks to all of the friends in my class for theirsupport and encouragement during the time this paper was written

Last but not least, I owe a great debt of gratitude to my beloved family whohave constantly supported me in various ways

This paper investigated the perceptions of teachers and students ofcommunicative activities in teaching and learning at Newstar InternationalLanguage Center in Vinh City The participants of this research consist of twogroups: teachers and students The first group includes 40 teachers, and the secondgroup comprises of 100 students chosen from 6 classes at Newstar InternationalLanguage Center

The methods for investigation in the study included student and teacherquestionnaire, interview, and classroom observation The results of the study showthat most of the teachers and students had positive attitudes and motivation to theuse of communicative activities in learning and teaching grammar Many of theEnglish teachers at Newstar international language center recognized theimportance of communicative activities in communicative language teachingbecause they could help students have natural learning and communication, andbecome more self-reliant Furthermore, it is found that if no communicativeactivities were made use of, grammar lesson for students in the center were lesssuccessful In most of English classes observed, the communicative activitiesfacilitated teaching and learning grammar Besides, the results also indicate some ofdifficulties and objective causes that hindered the teachers and students from using

of communicative activities in teaching English grammar

Based on the findings of the study, suggestions were made to enhance the use

of communicative activities in teaching and learning grammar effectively

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

STATEMENT OF AUTHOR i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii

ABSTRACT iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATION vii

LIST OF TABLES viii

LIST OF FIGURES ix

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 RATIONALE 1

1.2 PURPOSES OF THE STUDY 2

1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY 2

1.5 ORGANIZATIONS OF THE STUDY 3

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 4

2.1 Introduction 4

2.2 Definitions of Key Terms 4

2.2.1 What is Grammar Teaching? 4

2.2.2 Issues in Teaching Grammar 5

2.2.3 Goals and Techniques for Teaching Grammar 6

2.2.4 Principles for Grammar Teaching 6

2.2.4.1 The Given-to-New Principle 7

2.2.4.2 The Awareness Principle 11

2.2.4.3 The Real-Operating Conditions Principle 15

2.2.5 Approaches and Procedures for Teaching Grammar 19

2.2.5.1 Two Core Approaches in Grammar Presentation 19

2.3 Communicative Activities (CAs) 22

2.3.1 Definition of CAs 22

2.3.2 Communicative Activities and the Use of Real Context 23

2.3.3 Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Communicative Activities 24

2.3.3.1 Advantages of CAs 24

2.3.3.2 Disadvantages of CAs 24

2.3.4 Characteristics of CAs 24

2.3.5 Examples of Communicative Activities 25

2.3.6 Types of Classroom CAs 26

2.3.6.1 Classification of Littlewood 26

2.3.6.2 Classification of Harmer 30

2.3.7 Using CAs to Teach English Grammar 33

2.3.7.1 The PPP pattern 33

2.3.7.2 Deep-End Approach 35

2.3.8 Prior Studies 37

2.4 Summary 40

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 41

3.1 Introduction 41

3.2 Aims of the Research 41

3.3 Participants 42

3.4 Data Collection 43

3.4.1 Questionnaire 43

3.4.2 Class Observation 43

3.4.3 Interview 43

3.5 Data Analysis 44

3.6 Summary 44

CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 45

4.1 Introduction 45

4.2 Teachers’ and Students’ Perceptions of Using Communicative Activities (CAs) in Teaching and Learning Grammar 45

4.3 Teachers’ Implementation of CAs 55

4.3.1 Sources of CAs Used in Grammar Lessons 55

4.3.2 Types of Communicative Activities Used to Teach English Grammar 56

4.3.3 Roles of the Teachers in Communicative Activities 63

4.5 Teachers’ Procedure to Make Grammar Lessons Become more Communicative and Effective 73

4.6 Summary 75

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS, LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 76

5.1 Conclusion 76

5.2 Implications for Teachers 79

5.3 Implications for Students 80

5.4 Limitations 81

5.5 Suggestions for Further Research 81

APPENDICES 87

Appendix 1: Questionnaire for Teachers 87

Appendix 2: Questionnaire for Students 92

Appendix 3: Questions for Teacher Interview 96

Appendix 4: Questions for Student Interview 97

Appendix 5: Observation Sheet 98

LIST OF ABBREVIATION

CAs: Communicative Activities

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 4.2.4: Teachers’ perceptions towards the aims of CAs 50

Table 4.3.1: Sources of CAs used in grammar lessons 56

Table 4.3.3: Roles of the teachers during the CAs 65

Table 4.5: Ways to promote CAs 75

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 4.2.1: Teachers and students' perceptions of the importance of CAs in

English teaching and learning 45Figure 4.2.2: Grammar lessons without CAs in comparison with those with the 47Figure 4.2.3: CAs help students to perceive the grammar point after the lesson

49Figure 4.2.5: Students' perceptions towards their more active participation in

the grammar lesson with CAs 54Figure 4.3.2: Teachers' favourite communicative activities 57Figure 4.4: Teachers' difficulties in implementing CAs 66

CHAPTER 1:

INTRODUCTION 1.1 Rationale

Due to the fast development of the society, the increasing living standard andthe unceasing demand for broader international cooperation, the communicationamong different nations is necessary day after day Communicative competence hasbecome the major goal of the curricula innovation which has been a burning issue ineducation in recent years

For a long time, the teaching and learning of English in Vietnam has rotatedaround teaching grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation with little concern aboutcommunicative competence Such emphasis on linguistic materials has been thereason for many communication breakdowns between Vietnamese and foreigners,especially English-used communication

Grammar is central to the teaching and learning of languages It is also one

of the more difficult aspects of language to teach as well (Sarwani, 2014) Asteachers, we need to help learners see that effective communication involvesachieving harmony between functional interpretation and formal appropriacy(Halliday, 1985) by giving them tasks that dramatize the relationship betweengrammatical items and the discoursal contexts in which they occur In genuinecommunication beyond the classroom, grammar and context are often so closelyrelated that appropriate grammatical choices can only be made with reference to thecontext and purpose of the communication

If learners are not given opportunities to explore grammar in context, it will

be difficult for them to see how and why alternative forms exist to express differentcommunicative meanings For example, getting learners to read a set of sentences inthe active voice, and then transform these into passives following a model, is astandard way of introducing the passive voice However, it needs to besupplemented by tasks which give learners opportunities to explore when it iscommunicatively appropriate to use the passive rather than the active voice

As a teacher at Newstar International Language Centre, I have a lot ofopportunities to teach English grammar structures I find that we need an approachthrough which learn how to form structures correctly, and also how to use them tocommunicate meaning

All of the above reasons have inspired me to choose “A Study on the Use of Communicative Activities in Teaching Grammar at Newstar International Language Center in Vinh City”.

1.2 Purposes of the study

The main purposes of the study are:

- To raise teachers' awareness of the importance of teaching grammar usingcommunicative activities

- To find out the challenges that teachers and students face in usingcommunicative activities

- To work out common communicative activities used by teachers in helpingtheir students generate ideas in grammatical lessons

- To help teachers find out effective communicative activities to providenecessary ideas for their students in learning grammar

- How are communicative activities used in grammar lessons?

- What difficulties do teacher and students face in using communicative activities in grammar lessons?

1.4 Scope of the study

This study was carried out at Newstar International Language Centre Thestudy mainly focuses on teachers and students' perceptions of teaching and learning

grammar using communicative activities as well as their difficulties in using theactivities.

1.5 Organizations of the study

The study consists of the following parts:

Chapter I Introduction

This part introduces the rationale for carrying the study, purposes, scope, andorganization of the study

Chapter II Literature Review

Theoretical background related to the topic and surveys of articles, booksand other resources relevant to a particular the study topic will be presented in thischapter This part will also provide description, summary, and critical evaluation ofeach work quoted

Chapter III Methodology

This part presents the detailed procedure of the study: the methodology,population selection, data collection and analysis

Chapter IV Findings and Discussion

This part deals with the findings drawn out from the analysis of data Thefindings and discussion are based on describing the data collected through researchinstruments

Chapter V Conclusion, implications, limitations, and suggestions for further study

Main points and contents of the study will be summarized based on theresults of the study The implications of the study and the recommendation forfurther research will be presented

CHAPTER 2:

LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction

This chapter presents some definitions of key terms and an overview ofcommunicative activities It also reviews previous studies related to the study andpoints out the gaps in the literature

2.2 Definitions of Key Terms

Grammar is the way we put words together to make correct sentences andconvey meaning in any language Grammar does not only deal with sentences butalso with smaller units from phrases down to individual words This is easy tounderstand when considering the correct use of "he ran a race" versus the incorrectuse of "he runned a race" Grammar can also include the changing of spelling andpronunciation in different situations

Grammatical structures deal with specific instances in a language, such astenses or gender These structures provide in-depth information and lend nuancesand time value to a language In English, the grammatical concept of gender doesnot exist as opposed to Italian, German and French which have specific rulesconcerning grammar and gender (Piccolo, 2013)

2.2.1 What is Grammar Teaching?

Traditionally, grammar teaching is considered as the presentation andpractice of discrete grammar patterns As illustrated by Cook (1994), the mainstay

of grammar teaching has been the technique of grammatical explanation That is tosay language teacher explains the rules to the learners and give them examples of it

in order that they first get a conscious understanding of it and then start to use it Onthis issue, Ur (1996), gave explanations for presenting and explaining grammar(cited in Ellis, 2006) It is certainly true that grammar teaching can includepresentation and practice of grammatical patterns

Nevertheless, teaching grammar is not always defined in this way Ellis(2006) mentioned two typical kinds of grammar teaching First, some grammar

lessons may include presentation by itself (i.e., without any practice) whereas othermay entail only practice ( i.e., no presentation) Second, students can be involved indiscovering grammatical rules for themselves (i.e.,no presentation and no practice).

The definition of grammar teaching that informs this study is a broad one:

“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 metalinguistically and/ or process it in comprehension and/ orproduction so that they can internalize it” (Ellis, 2006, p.84)

2.2.2 Issues in Teaching Grammar

Grammar is central to the teaching and learning of languages It is also one

of the more difficult aspects of language to teach well (Byrd, 1998) Many people,including language teachers, hear the word "grammar" and think of a fixed set ofword forms and rules of usage They associate "good" grammar with the prestigeforms of the language, such as those used in writing and in formal oralpresentations, and "bad" or "no" grammar with the language used in everydayconversation or used by speakers of non-prestige forms

Language teachers who adopt this definition focus on grammar as a set offorms and rules They teach grammar by explaining the forms and rules and thendrilling students on them This results in bored, disaffected students who canproduce correct forms on exercises and tests, but consistently make errors whenthey try to use the language in context

Other language teachers, influenced by recent theoretical work on thedifference between language learning and language acquisition, tend not to teachgrammar at all Believing that children acquire their first language without overtgrammar instruction, they expect students to learn their second language the sameway They assume that students will absorb grammar rules as they hear, read, anduse the language in communication activities This approach does not allowstudents to use one of the major tools they have as learners: their active

understanding of what grammar is and how it works in the language they alreadyknow

The communicative competence model balances these extremes The modelrecognizes that overt grammar instruction helps students acquire the language moreefficiently, but it incorporates grammar teaching and learning into the larger context

of teaching students to use the language Instructors using this model teach studentsthe grammar they need to know to accomplish defined communication tasks

There raised a question of importance of teaching grammar in classroom.Some teachers assume that grammar is really vital in teaching English However,others claim that teaching grammar is not necessary in a classroom setting In fact,there are a large number of teachers who are aware of the value of grammar and that

it should not be over-emphasized

Also, there is an argument over the success of communication Many peoplethink that if there is no grammar, communication will fail and there will, as a matter

of fact, no interaction Meanwhile, others believe that with an ungrammaticalsentence, the communication may even succeed Nevertheless, the knowledge ofgrammar can help students to communicate appropriately, which is the goal that thelearners of English aim at

2.2.3 Goals and Techniques for Teaching Grammar

The goal of grammar instruction is to enable students to carry out theircommunication purposes This goal has three implications (Byrd, 1998):

 Students need overt instruction that connects grammar points with largercommunication contexts

 Students do not need to master every aspect of each grammar point, onlythose that are relevant to the immediate communication task

 Error correction is not always the instructor's first responsibility

2.2.4 Principles for Grammar Teaching

The three principles that we describe below are informed by one generalprinciple (R Batstone and R Ellis, 2009)

Effective grammar instruction must complement the processes of L2acquisition.

In discussing the three principles, we will draw on work by a number ofresearchers in second language acquisition (SLA), especially (but not exclusively)

in work undertaken within a cognitive, information-processingframework

2.2.4.1 The Given-to-New Principle

The notion that there is a principled relationship of one sort or another betweengiven and new information is far from new In discourse analysis, for example, it isargued that effective communication is enhanced when new information is preceded

by relevant information which is already known to the hearer (Cook, 1989, p 64–67) Clark and Clark (1977, p 92) discussed this as the ‘Given-New Contract’,pointing out that grammatical choices (such as whether to use active or passivevoice) are frequently motivated by determining what the hearer can reasonably beexpected to know The Given-to-New contract focuses on language use However,our concern is with the ways in which given and new information are aligned in theinterests of language acquisition, which we refer to as the Given-to-New Principle.This principle refers to the idea that the process of making new form/functionconnections involves the exploitation of what the learners already know about theworld – as part of their ‘given’ schematic knowledge This knowledge is used as aresource in order to help them perceive something new: how a meaning they arealready familiar with is expressed by a particular grammatical form This mayinvolve learning to see how a given meaning is signalled by a form with which theyare unfamiliar, or how a form they have already used in relation to one meaning(such as the present progressive tense for actions ‘as we speak’) can also be used tosignal other meanings (such as using the present progressive to talk about plannedfuture events) Batstone (2002a,b) has argued that the significance of the Given-to-New Principle is underrated in communicative approaches to language teaching.Language teaching textbooks frequently introduce new grammatical items andtheir meanings through setting up a context of some sort, for example by using

pictures and/or scripted dialogues, in order to establish the appropriate meaning.Superficially, at least, these contexts set the scene for subsequent explicitexplanation and practice of the grammatical form However, it is much lesscommon for textbooks to provide clear principles for guiding learners from theformer (the meaning) to the latter (the form).

By way of example of the kinds of problem that arise in some materials, wewill consider a sample activity from a popular textbook, Headway Intermediate(Soars and Soars, 1986) The task presents the distinction in meaning between twofuture forms: the going to form to talk about planned future action, and the willform to signal a spontaneous decision The learners are presented with a dialoguebetween Peter and Anne which reads as follows:

Peter: I’m just going to the shops Do you want anything?

Anne: No, I don’t think so Oh hang on We haven’t got any sugar left

Peter: It’s all right It’s on the list I’m going to buy some

Anne: What about bread?

Peter: OK I’ll go to the baker and buy a loaf

(Soars and Soars, 1986, p 24)

This is followed by a section headed ‘Grammar Question’:

– Why does Peter say:

I’m going to buy some (sugar); but

I’ll go to the baker

– What’s the difference between ‘will’ and ‘going to’ to express a futureintention?

Alongside the dialogue and the grammar question, the learners are also shown

a picture of a handwritten piece of paper It is headed ‘shopping list’, and it consists

of the following list of items: ‘sugar, tea, coffee, cheese, biscuits, cornflakes, tin ofbeans, yoghurt’

In principle, at least, it is possible to see how the Given-to-New Principlemight work here If the learners already have a schema for shopping lists, they will

have the related concept of planned future action as a ‘given’ The dialogue seeks tomake these concepts salient by providing certain textual cues The notion ofspontaneity (necessary for making sense of the ‘will’ form) is cued by its contrastwith the plan to buy sugar: bread is not on the list, and so is not planned but a spur-of-the moment decision The notion of planned future action is cued by Peter’scomment that bread is ‘on his list’, suggesting that he had already thought about it.But if we turn to consider how salient this procedure might be from thelearners’ perspective, it is not at all clear that the ‘given’ meanings here aresufficiently well established The only indication in the dialogue that will is beingused to make a spontaneous decision is a cue (‘what about bread? OK I’ll ’) This

is so implicit that it is hard to see how the learners could possibly interpret itappropriately (in discourse the phrase ‘OK’ is highly ambiguous and can mean avariety of different things) The cue for signalling planned action is certainly moreexplicit than this (‘‘It’s on the list I’m going to buy some”), but even here thelearners only get a single example from which to draw the requisite inference It isvery hard, in short, to see how the learners can easily pick out the appropriate givenmeanings here, and they could be forgiven for drawing entirely the wrong kind ofconclusion (even a seemingly absurd hypothesis, along the lines that will is used totalk about bread but that going to is used to talk about sugar, is not beyond therealms of possibility!)

How might this problem be remedied? What would be required, perhaps, is atext where the cues to prompt the given meanings are much more explicit So forinstance, we might cue the notion of spontaneity by amending the last part of thedialogue as follows:

Anne: What about bread?

Peter: Oh my goodness! I never thought about that OK, yes, definitely, I’ll go

to the baker and I’ll buy a loaf

It might be objected that the kind of text which would result from this sort ofadditional cueing would be very inauthentic, peppered with cumbersome phrases

with a decidedly uncommunicative quality But processing language using theGiven-to-New Principle frequently involves paying attention to linguistic cueswhich would be regarded as redundant from a communicative perspective, butwhich nonetheless provide an essen tial pathway towards making new discoveriesabout language Contrivance, we would argue, is often essential to ensure theoperation of the Given-to-New-Principle See Cook (2001) for additional arguments

in favour of contrived grammar teaching materials

There are other ways in which learners can exploit the Given-to-NewPrinciple Van Patten (1996, 2004) and others propose an approach to grammarteaching known as Processing Instruction Processing Instruction prompts learners

to make new connections between form and meaning whilst preventing them fromtaking short cuts which by-pass the grammar Because the sentences are constructed

to avoid the use of lexical cues, it is argued that Processing Instruction effectively

‘forces’ learners to process the grammar more deeply than they otherwise wouldthrough input that has been especially structured to provide exemplars of the targetfeature

Various types of processing instruction activities are examined in theliterature, but the type we will examine here consists of sentence-level activitiessuch as those that involve identifying the roles of noun phrases, i.e who is the agent

or instigator of an action and who is the patient or experiencer of an action (see thereview in Van Patten, 1996, pp 71–81) A typical procedure for this type of activityinvolves providing a series of sentences targeting a specific syntactic structureknown to be problematic for learners The learners are invited to inspect thesentences in relation to various pictorial representations of the events they refer to,and then to make decisions about which sentence is best represented by whichpicture Imagine, then, that the learners are given the sentence ‘The dog was bitten

by a snake’ They are asked to examine this sentence and to decide which of twoaccompanying pictures most accurately represents it Picture one shows a dog with

a snake in its mouth, whilst picture two shows a snake with its jaws round the neck

of a dog (the correct option) The learners’ first instinct might well be to assumethat the first picture is the correct choice, particularly if they pay rather moreattention to the lexis than to the grammar and assume that this is a prototypicalsubject–verb–object structure where the first noun (the dog) is both subject and theinstigator of the action, and where the second noun (the snake) is both object andexperiencer of the action (see Van Patten, 2004, pp 14–18) They would then opt,incorrectly, for picture one, and would be told that this was the wrong choice, with

no further explanation provided This procedure may be repeated a number of times,until eventually they are prompted to look further into the grammar in order todiscover how the passive form is undermining their expectations about who is likely

to be doing what to whom

Although Van Patten does not say so, we would argue that such an account ofwhat this process involves needs to acknowledge the role of the Given-to-NewPrinciple By engaging with the picture prompts, the learner can achieve a necessaryreconnection with context and with ‘given’ meaning The pictures of the snake andthe dog, for example, point to a situation of the most conceptually fundamentalkind, involving transparent relations between protagonists and victims, agents andpatients It is hard to imagine a group of learners, whatever their culturalbackground, who would not find this kind of representation readily meaningful Inshort, such pictures potentially serve a vital pedagogic function in establishing

‘given’ meaning It is at this point that the feedback in processing instructionbecomes so central It is the process of providing repeated feedback about thecorrectness or incorrectness of each choice which ultimately motivates learners touse the pictures as a resource for making sense of the sentence, and which thereforesets in train a form of given-to-new processing The Given-to-New Principle, then,makes an important contribution to the theoretical basis of Processing Instruction

2.2.4.2 The Awareness Principle

According to R Batstone and R Ellis (2009), the Awareness Principle isdirected at making learners aware of how a particular meaning is encoded by a

particular grammatical form It is possible of course that learners are able to makethe connection between meaning and form implicitly (i.e without awareness) and,

to some extent, this probably does take place but, as Schmidt (2001, p 30) hasconvincingly argued, “people learn about the things they attend to and do not learnmuch about the things they do not attend to”

Following Schmidt, it is necessary to distinguish different senses of

‘awareness’ This is useful because it also enables us to identify different kinds ofinstructional activities to develop awareness at different levels At one level,learners pay conscious attention to specific grammatical forms that arise in theinput However, even features that are highly frequent in the input (such as Englishdefinite and indefinite articles) may not be attended to if the learner’s currentinterlanguage does not contain a representation of this feature and/or if the learner’sL1 does not contain an equivalent feature In other words, the ‘given’ obstructsattention to the ‘new’ This suggests a clear role for instruction – to direct learners’conscious attention to grammatical features that normally they would fail to notice.The starting point should be to establish a basis for the acquisition of agrammatical feature in meaning Ellis and Gaies (1999) offer a sequence ofactivities, the first of which requires students to listen to a short text which containsexemplars of the target structure and answer a number of questions to establish ageneral understanding of the text For example, in the unit focusing on the use of theEnglish indefinite and definite articles to perform the functions of first and secondmention, they ask students to listen to a text about ‘a tamagochi’ and answerquestions like:

What is a tamagochi?

What does an owner of a tamagochi have to do?

The next activity is a listening cloze exercise that requires the students to listen

to the same text again, this time focusing on the use of a and the They are asked tocomplete the text as they listen:

_ tamagochi is a computerized toy invented in Japan The name means acute little egg _ tamagochi has become very popular all around the world Thegadget hatches _ chick _ chick makes a chirping sound every few minutes. _ owner has to push buttons to feed, play with, clean up and discipline _ chick.

If _ owner stops caring for the chick, it dies

Such exercises have two essential features First, the specific grammaticalfeature the learners are to attend to is made explicit in the instructions Second,completion of the text does not depend on learners’ knowing which form to enter ineach blank (although of course they may make recourse to this knowledge) but ontheir ability to detect the correct form in the input as they listen Such an exerciserequires ‘intentional attention’ to specific exemplars of the grammatical feature and,

as Schmidt argues, this may be essential for the learning of some grammaticalfeatures (e.g when the learner’s L1 does not contain an equivalent feature) Animportant feature of the cloze listening activity is that it gives salience togrammatical features (such as articles) which often lack salience in morecommunicative contexts

A second level of awareness is awareness at the level of ‘understanding’ That

is, learners need to recognize that the forms they have attended to encode particulargrammatical meanings The forms that learners notice are exemplars of higher-orderand abstract categories, and learning grammar involves discovering the connectionbetween the exemplars and these categories Again, it is possible that this can beachieved without awareness, but there seems little doubt that learning will beenhanced if learners (especially adult learners) develop a conscious representation

of the form-meaning mapping

It follows, then, that instructional materials need to go beyond encouragingnoticing of linguistic forms and guide learners to construct an explicit rule toaccount for the form-meaning mapping Activities that have this purpose have beenreferred to as ‘consciousness-raising tasks’ (Sharwood Smith, 1981; Ellis, 1991) Aconsciousness-raising task is ‘a pedagogic activity where the learners are provided

with L2 data in some form and are required to perform some operation on or with it,the purpose of which is to arrive at an explicit understanding of some regularity inthe data’ (Ellis, 1991, p 239) That is, consciousness-raising tasks constitute a form

of discovery learning

The example of a consciousness-raising task below builds on the noticingactivity from Ellis and Gaies (1999) It constitutes the third activity in theirinstructional sequence The students’ answers to the noticing activity are firstchecked to make sure that they have filled in the blanks correctly with ‘a’ and ‘the’

to refer to first and subsequent mention They are then asked to perform twooperations on the data – (1) to complete a table and (2) to answer two questionsabout the use of ‘a’ and ‘the’ The intention is to guide the students to discover that

‘a’ is for first mention of an object/person and ‘the’ for subsequent mentions Thestudents are then able to consult a pedagogical description of this rule to check iftheir understanding is correct In this inductive approach to consciousness-raising,guided discovery of the rule precedes presentation of it on the grounds that such anapproach involves greater depth of processing than is the case with traditionaldeductive pedagogy

Read the complete story Fill in the table

Answer the questions:

1 When is ‘a’ used? When is ‘the’ used?

2 Look through the story again Study the other phrases with ‘a’ and ‘the’ (e.g

‘a computerized toy’; ‘the gadget’) Can you see why ‘a’ is used in some nounphrases and ‘the’ in others?

Schmidt also identifies a third sense of awareness – awareness at the level ofcontrol The controlled use of grammatical forms is most clearly evident in

‘monitoring’ – the process by which learners utilize their explicit knowledge of theL2 grammar to edit their production for accuracy and appropriateness We would

like to suggest therefore that grammar teaching materials can usefully includeactivities that encourage learners to monitor their own output These activities arelikely to focus on contrived sentences that illustrate the target structure The fourthstep in ‘Ellis and Gaies’ sequence of activities consists of what they call ‘checking’.This is achieved either by asking learners to judge whether sentences aregrammatical or ungrammatical or by using their explicit understanding of thestructure to decide which form is needed to complete a gapped sentence, as in theexample below:

Read the following descriptions of other toys Fill in the blanks with a(n) orthe 1 Tuggles is cuddly pet with a leash When you pull on leash, pet walks by itself

Another more contextualized approach to encouraging monitoring is Lynch’s(2001) transcribing activity Lynch suggests that students be invited to transcribetheir performance of an oral communicative task and then to edit the transcription.The teacher then takes away their corrected transcripts and reformulates them Thenext day the students compare their own edited transcript with the teacher’sreformulated version Lynch reports that the students he asked to complete such atranscribing activity co-operated in transcribing, made a number of changes, andengaged effectively in both self- and other-corrections

2.2.4.3 The Real-Operating Conditions Principle

We can distinguish two broad types of grammar teaching activities – those thattreat grammar as an object to be studied and analyzed and those that treat it as a toolfor engaging in effective communication The former type typically involvescontrived examples and inauthentic operations, while the latter strives to achieveeither situational or interactional authenticity (Bachman and Palmer 1996) Ourposition is that both types of activity are needed – and, indeed, that the former canserve to guide learner performance in the latter The activities illustrating the Given-to-New Principle and the Awareness Principle in the previous sections haveencouraged learners to view grammar as an object, and have been directed at

noticing and developing explicit knowledge of form-meaning mappings We willnow consider the case for treating grammar as a communicative tool and suggestways in which this can be accomplished.

Johnson (1988, 1996) noted that cognitive theories of language acquisitionemphasize the need for practice in the context of ‘real-operating conditions’ That

is, learners need the opportunity to practise language in the same conditions thatapply in real-life situations – in communication, where their primary focus is onmessage conveyance rather than on linguistic accuracy Johnson emphasises theimportance of feedback in the learning process, suggesting that the instructionalsequence is best seen as one of ‘learn ? perform ? learn’ rather than the traditionalsequence of ‘learn ? perform’ During the ‘perform’ stage learners must have theopportunity to receive feedback Johnson emphasises that for feedback to beeffective learners ‘need to see for themselves what has gone wrong in the operatingconditions under which they went wrong’ (1988, p 93) He suggests that this canprobably be best achieved by means of extrinsic feedback (i.e feedback from anoutside source) that shows the learner what is wrong by modelling the correct formwhile they are attempting to communicate

The key question in our view is how learners can be guided to attend to aspecific form-meaning mapping in the context of communication that simulatesreal-operating conditions Two general positions can be identified The first (which

we consider problematic) draws on Long’s (1996) Interaction Hypothesis.According to this, learner’s attention to form will arise naturally as a result of thecommunication problems they experience while performing a meaning-focusedactivity The second rests on the assumption that learners need to develop anexplicit (conscious) representation of the structure either prior to engaging in thecommunicative activity or during it We will briefly consider these two positions.According to the Interaction Hypothesis, learners become aware of form-meaning connections through engaging in meaning-focused interaction (either withthe teacher or with another learner), and specifically at points where communication

breakdown leads to corrective feedback, a process known as ‘negotiation formeaning’ According to Long, learners will be able to find the mental resources topay attention to the teacher’s linguistic correction because ‘the intended message is(already) clear to the learner ’ (1996, p 452), thus reflecting the Given to-NewPrinciple That is, if the learners are already clear within themselves about themeaning they are struggling to express, then this meaning can be taken as a ‘given’,and the ensuingcorrection should enable them to make the connection between thisgiven meaning and the corrected version of the grammar offered by the teacher oranother learner.

But negotiation for meaning is a form of communicative interaction whichposes a number of problems for grammar learning For one thing, as we havealready noted, when learners are strongly focused on understanding and conveyingmeaning, they may fail to notice that the teacher is trying to draw their attention togrammar (as shown in Mackey et al., 2000) In other words, the stronger thecommunicative focus on meaning, the less salient or noticeable certain criticalaspects of the grammar might be As a result, learners may fail to connect meaning

to form This is more likely to be the case if the negotiation of meaning is conducted

by means of recasts, as a number of researchers (e.g Lyster, 1998; Ellis and Sheen,2006) have rightly noted that recasts may not be perceived as corrective by students

in a classroom context with the result that the grammatical forms lack saliency andare not noticed

The alternative position is based on the claim that learners will need to develop

an explicit understanding of the target structure This can be achieved either prior tolearners’ attempt to process the structure in real-operating conditions or during it.Skill-Acquisition Theory is premised on the assumption that students shouldfirst engage in activities directed at awareness raising of the target feature (i.e theyexplore grammar as the explicit aim of the activity) and then participate in focusedtasks designed to provide opportunities for them to use the target feature under real-operating conditions (i.e in what DeKeyser (1998) calls ‘communicative

behaviour’) Vygotskian sociocultural theory also lends support to the need forestablishing an explicit understanding of a grammatical feature prior to use Lantolfand Johnson (2007), for example, proposed an approach to grammar teaching called

‘concept-based instruction’, arguing that instruction needs to first ensure aconceptual understanding of a form-function mapping and, from there, affordopportunities for learners to experience use of the structure in what they call

‘concrete practical activity’ Lantolf and Johnson’s notion of ‘conceptualunderstanding’ corresponds to Dekeyser’s ‘declarative knowledge’, with the provisothat Lantolf and Johnson emphasize the importance of linguistically sophisticateddescriptions of grammatical phenomena – what they call ‘scientific concepts’ –rather than simple rules-of-thumb Their ‘concrete practical activity’ correspondsclosely to Johnson’s idea of real-operating conditions and DeKeyser’s

‘communicative behaviour’

Both Concept-Based Instruction and Skill-Acquisition Theory assume that it isdesirable to develop learners’ explicit knowledge of the target feature before theystart trying to process it in communication There are a number of problems withthis approach One is that it ignores the well-attested fact that the acquisition ofgrammatical structures is a gradual process involving transitional stages (see Ellis,

2008, chapter three) This makes it unlikely that learners can achieve automatization

of a new form-meaning mapping in the relatively short period of time assumed byboth DeKeyser and Lantolf and Johnson A second problem is that if students aremade aware that the purpose of an activity is to use a specific grammatical featurethen it is difficult to see how the task designed to afford opportunities for practicingthe target structure communicatively will result in real-operating conditions Suchconditions, we argue, can only be achieved if students’ primary orientation ismessage-centred, directed at communicating meaning, not form-centred, directed atperforming a pre-determined feature accurately

An alternative way of developing students’ explicit understanding is to makethe target feature explicit to the students in the course of their performing a

communicative task Focused tasks can be devised that make it essential, useful ornatural for the students to use the target feature (Loschky and Bley-Vroman, 1993),although this is no guarantee that they will actually use it The teacher can employvarious focus on form strategies to encourage students to pay attention to the feature(Ellis, 2002) These strategies involve timeouts from the business of communicatingbut need not seriously disrupt the flow of communication They can be pre-emptive

as, for example, when a teacher advises students about the use of a particular form

or asks a question about a student’s choice of form and/or they can be reactive, aswhen the teacher elects to negotiate form We have discussed a number of ways inwhich the real-operating conditions principle can be implemented While we seeobvious advantages to, not of integrating explicit attention to, not for a form-function mapping into a communicative activity, we do not wish to be prescriptive

We prefer to emphasize two points: (1) to ensure that students engage the processesneeded to acquire a form-function mapping, they need opportunities to experiencethe mapping in real-operating conditions and (2) to achieve this it will frequently benecessary to guide them towards the consolidation of a form-function mapping sothey can apply it in real-operating conditions Precisely how this guidance is to beachieved remains a matter of some controversy We have argued that it mustnecessarily involve the Given-to-New and Awareness Principles That is theguidance must seek to ensure that what is new is based on what is given and thatstudents pay conscious attention (and possibly develop metalinguisticunderstanding) of the target feature as a basis for using the feature in real-operatingconditions We will now illustrate how these three principles can be implemented in

a task-based grammar lesson (Batstone, ellis, 2008)

2.2.5 Approaches and Procedures for Teaching Grammar

2.2.5.1 Two Core Approaches in Grammar Presentation

 Deductive Approach

A deductive approach is derived from the notion that deductive reasoningworks from the general to the specific In this case, rules, principles, concepts, or

theories are presented first, and then their applications are treated In conclusion,when we use deduction, we reason from general to specific principles (Thornbury,2000).

* Advantages of the Deductive Approach to Teaching Grammar

Firstly, the deductive approach goes straightforwardly to the point andcan, therefore, be time-saving of the deductive approach to teaching grammar.Secondly, a number of rule aspects (for example, form) can be more simply andclearly explained than elicited from examples Next, a number of directpractice/application examples are immediately given Moreover, the deductiveapproach respects the intelligence and maturity of many adult learners inparticular and acknowledges the role of cognitive processes in languageacquisition Last but not least, It confirms many learners’ expectations aboutclassroom learning particularly for those who have an analytical style

* Disadvantages of the Deductive Approach to Teaching Grammar

It is clear that beginning the lesson with a grammar presentation may be putting for some learners, especially younger ones Besides, younger learners maynot able to understand the concepts or encounter grammar terminology given.Furthermore, grammar explanation encourages a teacher-fronted, transmission-styleclassroom, so it will hinder learner involvement and interaction immediately Itcan be seen that the explanation is seldom as memorable as other forms ofpresentation (for example, demonstration) Moreover, the deductive approachencourages the belief that learning a language is simply a case of knowing the rule

off- Inductive Approach

An inductive approach comes from inductive reasoning stating that areasoning progression proceeds from particulars (that is, observations,measurements, or data) to generalities (for example, rules, laws, concepts ortheories) (Felder & Henriques, 1995) When we use induction, we observe a number

of specific instances and from them infer a general principle or concept

* Advantages of the Inductive Approach to Teaching Grammar

Learners are trained to be familiar with the rule discovery; this couldenhance learning autonomy and self-reliance Besides, learners’ greater degree ofcognitive depth is “exploited” Moreover, the learners are more active in thelearning process, rather than being simply passive recipients In this activity, they

will be motivated Especially, he approach involves learners’ pattern-recognition

and problemsolving abilities in which particular learners are interested in thischallenge Futhermore, if the problem-solving activity is done collaboratively,learners get an opportunity for extra language practice

* Disadvantages of the Inductive Approach to Teaching Grammar

Firstly, the approach is time and energy-consuming as it leads learners tohave the appropriate concept of the rule Secondly, the concepts given implicitlymay lead the learners to have the wrong concepts of the rule taught Thirdly, theapproach can place emphasis on teachers in planning a lesson Next, it encouragesthe teacher to design data or materials taught carefully and systematically.Lastly, the approach may frustrate the learners with their personal learning style,

or their past learning experience (or both) would prefer simply to be told the rule(Widodo, 2006)

The deductive approach is related to the conscious learning process in whichthis approach tries to place a great emphasis on error correction and the presentation

of explicit rules (Krashen, 2002) Such an approach is applied for the reason that it

is an efficient and elegant way to organize and present the rule that is alreadyunderstood The deductive approach is often used with adult learners Through thedeductive approach, a teacher tries to teach the rule explicitly to the learners so thatthey are ready to cope with exercises given The explicit rule presentation canenhance the learners’ confidence in doing certain tasks To be successful inapplying the approach, the teacher needs to provide numerous exercises

The inductive approach relates to subconscious learning processes similar tothe concept of language acquisition According to this approach, learners learn the

system of language (for example, grammar or sentence rules) in the same way aschildren acquire their first or second language In this regard, meaningful interaction

in the target language (that is, natural communication) is more important than theform of the language For this reason, error correction and explicit teaching of therule are de-emphasized Importantly, utterances are easily understood In otherwords, when the inductive approach is applied, the learners learn the ruleunconsciously

Of the two approaches above, which is best? This question relates to a standing debate among language teachers in the context of EFL/ESL, since the twohave their own significances for particular learner progress For example, a study ofvarious language learners shows that some learners achieve better in deductivelanguage classes; on the other hand, others perform better in more inductive classes.This difference in cognitive styles may be associated with different neurologicalmechanisms in learners (Eisenstein, 1987)

long-Whether grammatical rules are taught inductively or deductively relies uponcertain structures, since some are more amenable to a deductive approach, whileothers can be learned very well by an inductive approach To sum up, both deductive andinductive presentations can successfully be applied depending on the cognitive style ofthe learner and the language structure presented (Eisenstein, 1987; Brown, 2000)

Nevertheless, whether a teacher employs a deductive or inductive approach,s/he should consider the notion that language learning, particularly in the context ofEFL (for example, grammar) is a largely conscious process that involves formalexposure to rules of syntax and semantics followed by specific applications of therule, with corrective and encouraging feedback reinforcing correct usage anddiscouraging incorrect usage

2.3 Communicative Activities (CAs)

2.3.1 Definition of CAs

Communicative activities, as they are defined by Littlewood (1981), arethose which exhibit the characteristics of the communicative activities and

continuum Students are involved in the activities that give them both the desire tocommunicate and the purpose which involves them in various use of language Suchactivities are vital in language classrooms in which students can try their best to useand apply the target language at degree of language autonomy and keep the balance

of focus between language forms and meanings Littlewood also gave an example

of dialogues that learners had to start from a specific functional meaning andproduce acceptable language With such an activity, it is impossible to state whether

an individual learner sees his purpose as being primarily to communicate meaningsintelligibly, to produce correct language or to do both at the same time in equalproportion The results will depend a lot on how the teacher presents the activityand whether the learner expects his performance to be evaluated according to itscommunicative effectiveness, its grammatical accuracy, or both Similarly, in aquestion-and-answer activity designed for students to practice a specific structure,the teacher may often have students perceive the interactions as morecommunicative if he responds to the content of what they say as well as to itslinguistic form

The outstanding point here is that communicative activities can beconsidered to help students practice in a free way as practical as real communicationwith various uses of language

2.3.2 Communicative Activities and the Use of Real Context

The communicative approach method was developed by teachers andlinguists as a response to the shortcomings of the audio-lingual and grammartranslation method that is an old method which was originally used to teach deadlanguages which explains why it focuses more on the written form than on the oralform One of the distinctive points of communicative language teaching is the focus

on communicative activities that promote language learning These activities usereal life situations to trigger communication They encourage and require a learner

to speak with and listen to other learners Communicative activities have real

purposes such as finding and exchanging information, breaking down barriers,talking about oneself, and learning about culture (Kayi Hayriye, 2006)

2.3.3 Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Communicative Activities 2.3.3.1 Advantages of CAs

In her article, “Teaching Speaking”, (Kayi Hayriye, 2006) includes severaladvantages that the use of communicative activities in an EFL classroom has Some

of them are listed below

Learning is maximined when students are engaged in relevant tasks within adynamic learning environment instead of traditional teacher-centered classes.Moreover, real life communication is the target Learners are trained not only to belinguistically competent but also communicatively and sociolinguisticallycompetent Besides, communicative activities are motivating Learning is achievedwhile learners are having fun

2.3.3.2 Disadvantages of CAs

There are some disadvantages of communicative activities It is felt that there

is not enough emphasis on the correction of pronunciation and grammar error It isbecause too much focus on meaning at the expense of form Furthermore,communicative activities focus on fluency but not accuracy in grammar andpronunciation Besides, communicative activities are great for intermediate studentsand advanced students, but for beginners some controlled practice is needed Onemore disadvantage is that the monitoring ability of the teacher must be very good.Moreove, grammar teaching practices make application of communicative activitiesdifficult (Citra Abadi, 2013)

2.3.4 Characteristics of CAs

The communicative activities also have certain characteristics that mightmake them appropriate to be applied to any kind of students Kayi Hayriye (2006)includes the next ones

 The success of a communicative activity can be determined by the extent

to which learners are dependent on the teacher Tasks should be devised in a mannerthat learners gain autonomy and independence while learning

 The role of the teachers is to give clear and to the point instructions andprovide the appropriate environment for learners to interact and exchangeinformation

 Communicative activities are motivating Learners should be at ease andhave fun while doing the communicative tasks

 Communicative tasks are realistic Real communication situations should

be the focus instead of isolated structures with no real-life reference

 While in teacher-led classrooms learners were expected to be quiet andlisten to the teacher and then, when asked, to respond to the teacher in unison withthe one correct answer, communicative tasks require learners to take initiatives andprovide their responses ( instead of a response) to contribute to the success oflearning

 Communicative activities are meaningful: they are carried out to fulfilspecific purposes such as booking a plane, hotel ticket, inviting somebody to aparty, answering an invitation letter, shopping…

 Performance in communicative tests reflects an underlying competencethat is linguistic, sociolinguistic, pragmatic, strategic…Communicative activitiesshould consider this multi-dimensional nature of language

2.3.5 Examples of Communicative Activities

Kayi Hayriye (2006) also includes several communicative activities Someare listed below

 Note taking: Students are involved in a listening activity in which theyhave to take notes and, for example, write a report

 Guessing Games: In this activity the lead student or teacher has an object the others can't see, and students must ask questions to guess what it is (What color isit?; How big is it?; What country is it in?, etc.) This works well as a group activity

 Information Gap: Students work in pairs to create a communicative need Each has different information and has to exchange this information.Anything from opinions on films to parts of a story make this work well

 Exchanging Personal Information: This is an extension of the informationgap activities They ask questions and record the partner‟s information on a table or

a grid As every student has slightly different experiences, there is a naturalinformation gap

Example: Find out about your partner’s daily routine

 Find someone who: Students use a checklist as they walk around theroom trying to find a person who has a certain characteristic

 Sorting and classifying: In pairs or groups, students sort objects intovarious categories (which may be determined by you or by the student) and justifytheir classification

2.3.6 Types of Classroom CAs

There are different classifications of communicative activities It is not easy

to decide how many types of communicative activities there are However, we cancome to the classifications of the two authors Littlewood (1981) and Harmer (1991)

2.3.6.1 Classification of Littlewood

Littlewood (1981, p 20-21) offered two main categories of CAs which are

“functional communicative activities” and “social interaction activities” Theactivities of this type mainly emphasize the functional aspect of communication.The main purpose of the activity is that students should use the target language toget meanings across as effectively as possible through the sharing and processing ofinformation The effectiveness of the activity will be measured primarily according

to whether students can cope with the communicative demands in the immediatesituation Social interaction activities place focus on social as well as functionalaspects of communication Students must pay greater attention to the social context

in which the interaction and communication take place Besides, communicationmust be suitable for the variety of social situations and relationships outside the

classroom “Success is now measured not only in terms of the functionaleffectiveness of the language, but also in terms of the acceptability of the forms thatare used” (Littlewood, 1981, p.21).

a Functional Communicative Activities

According to Littlewood (1981), the principle of functional communicativeactivities is that situations are structured so that learners have to overcome aninformation gap or solve a problem He groups these activities into four types: sharinginformation with restricted cooperation, sharing information with unrestricted co-operation, sharing and processing information, processing information

 Sharing information with restricted cooperation

In this kind of activities, information is known by one student (or group) and theother have purpose to discover the unknown information In order to keep the interactionforward, the knower is not allowed to cooperate fully and he has to respond toinformation appropriate to cues The participants complete the task of communication bysharing the information These activities are often identifying pictures, discoveringidentical pairs, discovering missing information, missing features or secrets

 Sharing information with unrestricted co-operation

These activities aim to reduce the conventions that restrict the cooperation ininteraction among students The result is many realistic patterns of interaction areused and they produce a wider variety of communicative functions Learners uselanguage not only to ask and answer but also for describing, suggesting, asking forclarification, helping each other and so on

 Sharing and processing information

In these activities, learners seem to have successful communication whenthey gains the facts possessed by others By discussing and evaluating theinformation, learners can widen the range of communicative functions.Furthermore, these activities increase the unpredictability of the interaction.Gradually, learners will develop their performance in communication in order toexpress ideas for which they have not been prepared These activities also lead to

more scope for disagreement and negotiation Some activities in this type arereconstructing story-sequences, pooling information to solve a problem.

 Processing information

Learners have access to all the relevant facts which stimulate them tocommunicate in order to discuss and evaluate these facts, in pairs or groups Theynow can solve a problem or reach a decision In these activities, in order to reach acommon decision, learners have to analyze information, argue, justify and persuadewith each other They therefore develop skills in managing the interaction atinterpersonal level

We can see how learners benefit from functional communication activitieswhen they use language to solve communication problems However, the situationsthat they practice in the classroom sometimes they hardly meet outside theclassroom such as finding, matching pictures or sorting out jumbled sentences Inaddition the learners’ social role is unclear and irrelevant to the functional purpose

of the interaction Litterwood (1981) therefore suggests the wider range of CAswhich is called ‘social interaction activities’

b Social Interaction Activities

Classroom is often seen as an artificial environment for learning and usingforeign language According to Littlewood (1981), however, the classroom is also areal social context in its own right, where learners and teachers enter into equallyreal social relationships with each other He offers four approaches to exploit the

classroom environment as a social context for foreign language use as follows:

 Using the foreign language for classroom management

One problem we often find in language teaching is that many teachers usethestudents’ mother tongue in management work in the classroom in order to makethe lesson organization clearly and efficiently However, this will reduce thevaluable opportunities for well- motivated foreign language use In other words, ittends to reduce motivation for using the target language as a means ofcommunication in the classroom It is therefore important for the teacher to

provide the students as soon as possible with the language needed for classroomaffairs, in order to establish the foreign language as the medium for organizinglearning activities.

- Using the foreign language as a teaching medium

Littlewood (1981, p.45-46) argued that “ For the young school learner, it isgenerally true the foreign language lessons are more concerned than any other withthe development of communicative ability…Their syllabus contains the leastamount of concrete, nonlinguistic subject matter which might give them themotivation to communicate” Therefore, it is necessary to introduce into languagelessons the element that they lack: nonlinguistic subject matter which must be learntand explored through the foreign language

 Conversation or discussions sections

The conversation sessions can be regarded as a source or relief from moreserious language work This can be help to develop communicative ability Forexample, as Littlewood (1981) mentioned in his study, it provides a rich stimulusfor communicative interaction with varied experiences, interests and opinions of thestudents; it widens the range of communicative functions and domains of meaning;and it provides students with more opportunities to express their own personalityand experience through using the foreign language as a means of handling their ownsocial relationships In the activity, the teacher must perform role as “co-communicator” rather than “director”

 Basing dialogues and role-plays on school experience

The aim of using activities in the classroom is to help students to understandtheir environment and cope with its problems For this, the aspects of experience arediscussed in class through the activities, and may become the theme of dialoguesand role- playing activities in the classroom However, it cannot avoid some certainlimitations in the different classroom situations So, to prepare students to cope withthese wider functional and social needs, we must look for ways of extending thepossibilities for communicative interaction in the classroom

According to Littlewood (1981), some social interaction activities we can applyare simulation and role-playing with a variety of techniques: role- playing controlledthrough cued dialogues, role-playing controlled through cues and information, role-playing controlled through situation and goals, role-playing in the form of debate ordiscussion, and large-scale simulation activities With simulation and role play,students are prepared for real context outside the classroom These activities can bewell-organized for organizing controlled, pre-communicative language practice.

2.3.6.2 Classification of Harmer

Harmer (1991) classified communicative activities into oral communicativeactivities and written communicative activities

a Oral Communicative Activities

This kind of activities is designed in order to provoke communicationbetween students and maybe between the students and the teacher The authordivides the activities into seven categories: reaching a consensus; discussion;relaying instructions; communication games; problem solving; talking aboutyourself; simulation and role play

For these activities, we can see that the organization seems quite complicatedand the teaching stages have been included Now we try finding out two of theactivities, discussion and communication games, as example

 Discussion

According to Harmer (1991), for this kind of activity, on one hand, manyteachers can be heard complaining that their students have nothing to say, that theyhave no ideas or are not prepared to discuss anything On the other hand, somediscussions can develop spontaneously during the lesson, in which one studentreacts to something said out, another student also joins in, and soon the whole class isalso involved in the discussion Such discussions are often the most successful sessionsthat the teacher and students ever have together but they can be unplanned to them Tohelp to organize effective discussions, Harmer (1991) gave us some useful hints: