Impacts of Grammar on Students Writing Skills - Assignment Example

October 29, Teaching Grammar Enhances Writing: Impacts of Grammar on Writing Skills For more than a hundred years, teachers and researchers have not agreed that grammar improves the writing development of students (Andrews et al. 40). Some teachers and researchers believe that teaching grammar is essential to writing abilities, and that several educators have only vilified it because of ineffective traditional grammar teaching beliefs and methods (Myhill 78; Nunan). Others underline that explicit grammar teaching is not effective in contributing to students’ writing development (Micciche; Wyse). The research questions are: Does teaching grammar impact writing? What are the roles of grammar teaching in writing? What are the effective ways of teaching grammar that can enhance writing skills? Teaching grammar positively impacts writing, but it depends on grammar teaching approaches and the knowledge of teachers in teaching it creatively and contextually. Grammar has the roles of providing the basic structure for writing, improving critical thinking, and connecting language to meaning-making in writing. Though there is no one way of teaching grammar effectively to both native and non-native speakers, some effective ways of teaching grammar that can enhance writing skills are teaching grammar with consideration to both form and meaning and finding a process-based approach that fits students’ language knowledge and skills and their communicative needs and purposes. Research Design, Scope, and Limitations This section describes the research design and the scope and limitations of this paper. This research relies on secondary research for its research design. It finds trends, agreements, and disagreements as part of its contribution to the theory and practice of teaching grammar in relation to teaching writing skills. It uses Google, JSTOR, and EBSCO databases in searching for relevant studies. This paper also includes studies that have different cohorts, from grade school to high school to college/graduate students and both native and non-native English speakers. The key words are “grammar”, “writing,” and “teaching.” Moreover, it intends to answer questions about “if” and “when” teaching grammar is important to better writing. This is an informative paper because it does not argue for specific viewpoints about grammar’s effects on the writing abilities of students. Instead, it illustrates and connects studies that support the viewpoint that grammar is good for writing and that its impacts on the latter are products of effective ways of teaching grammar for thinking and writing purposes. Additionally, this paper invites more research and practices in studying the theoretical link between teaching grammar and teaching writing, as Myhill stresses in her article, “Ways of Knowing: Writing with Grammar in Mind.” Hence, the paper intends to study the impacts of teaching grammar on students’ writing in general. Definition of Terms This section defines important terms used in this paper. Several studies define grammar differently, but grammar here focuses on the written form of grammar. Andrews et al. assert that grammar consists of “the study of syntax (word order), clause and phrase structure, and the classification of parts of speech (e.g. noun, verb, predicate, clause, etc.)” (42). They add that it can be descriptive in describing sentence patterns and generative or transformative through rules that create “grammatically acceptable sentences” (Andrews et al. 42). Martinsen adds that grammar is a “conscious knowledge of language” and is in many ways “innate” to native speakers (123). These definitions underscore that grammar has prescriptive and descriptive dimensions and that they have an innate sense for native speakers. Grammar teaching or teaching grammar can include the various instructional techniques that allow learners to focus on specific grammatical forms that can help them understand them metalinguistically, for comprehension, and for production through internalization (Ellis 84). Nunan asserts that grammar teaching involves rhetorical grammar or grammar with a purpose (72). Micciche argues that rhetorical grammar may also be emancipatory because it can be connected to ways of thinking critically and to being freed from delimiting conceptions of grammar and writing (719). These definitions include formal and non-formal or alternative ways of teaching grammar, but emphasize that teaching grammar can only be effective if connected to specific users’/writers’ purposes. Teaching Grammar Affects Writing Abilities? The first research question is: Does teaching grammar impact writing? Several studies answered this question conditionally, where they agreed that traditional ways of teaching grammar are not important in teaching writing, but it does not mean that teaching grammar per se cannot have any meaningful effect on students’ writing skills. Andrews et al. conducted a systematic review that explored different dimensions of teaching grammar to develop the quality and accurateness of English writing for students aged 15 to 16 years old. They compared formal grammar teaching with sentence-combining approach. Sentence-combining is “a range of practical techniques for moving from existing sentences and elements of sentences to compound and complex sentences” (Andrews et al. 48). Sentence-combining simplifies ill-structured sentences and can be practically used in real-life settings (Andrews et al. 48). This study’s findings showed that teaching syntax did not have an effect on writing quality and accuracy, while sentence-combining had a more positive effect on the latter (Andrews et al. 51). They asserted that sentence-combining may be more useful than formal grammar teaching because it indicates “pedagogy of applied knowledge” (Andrews et al. 52). Andrews et al. agree that teaching sentence-combining can improve writing quality and accuracy. In this study, a specific approach to grammar can impact writing. One more study agrees that teaching grammar is good for writing too. Myhill et al. use a mixed-method research design to understand the effect of embedded grammar teaching on students’ writing and metalinguistic knowledge. They conducted the following: randomized controlled trial (RCT), text analysis, student and teacher interviews, and lesson observations. The RCT consisted of 744 student participants from 31 schools in England. Myhill et al. used comparison and intervention groups. Their findings showed that embedded grammar teaching has positive effects on writing skills, but more for able writers. Teacher knowledge has more impact on the metalinguistic learning of their students than grammar teaching. In particular, Myhill et al. learn that explicit and experimental teaching and use of discussion had positive effects on writing abilities and metalinguistic knowledge. Teaching specific forms of grammar can have good effects on writing abilities. Like Myhill et al., Nunan shows from her classroom experiences that grammar affects writing. She does not conduct an RCT like other teacher researchers, but she applies a new approach to teaching grammar through adopting rhetorical grammar. Her examples demonstrate that rhetorical grammar can improve the ways that students express themselves in writing. However, the increase in grammar complexity does not necessarily mean an increase in grammar accuracy too (Nunan 75). Nunan believes that grammar can improve writing as long as students understand what grammatical rules and forms are for. However, she notes that in order for grammar to impact writing, teachers must constantly experiment on how best to teach their students in adopting these rules and forms proactively and consistently in their writing. Another study confirms that grammar teaching affects writing positively for English language learners. Kim and Kim, in “Grammar Correction in a Second Language (L2) Process-Oriented Composition Classroom,” studied the impact of grammar correction on writing composition abilities of English language learners. They compared the effects of grammar correction on two student writing groups: advanced group and novice group. Their findings showed that grammar correction can improve writing through a process-oriented approach. They stressed that some students do not remember some grammatical features, not because grammar teaching is ineffective, but because teaching it must be done in a deep and sustained manner (Kim and Kim 14). They assert that second language learners can also benefit from learning grammar because it can impact their writing abilities. All these mentioned studies underscore that grammar can improve writing but different factors impact this direct relationship between the two. Roles of Teaching Grammar in Writing This section answers the second research question: What are the roles of grammar teaching in writing? These roles answer how grammar impacts writing abilities. Grammar has the role of providing the basic structure for writing. Martinsen, in “The Tower of Babel and the Teaching of Grammar: Writing Instruction for a New Century,” mentions educators who believe that grammar has a role in helping understand language metalinguistically in a purposive manner. Grammar, he says, has innateness that native speakers are already aware of. They only need to become more conscious of how grammar works to improve grammatical accuracy in their writing. Vavra offers a way of applying grammar learning in writing. He says: “but what about inviting students to analyze the structure of any sentence they read or write? Most English teachers can’t do this themselves” (36 qtd. in Martinsen 125). Vavra suggests that students should learn how grammar supports the language system they use in writing. Myhill adds that grammar offers basic communicative purposes for writing. She does not want to divorce grammar from its role of supporting communicative acts in writing (Myhill 92). These authors are saying that grammar may be innate, but it must also be taught explicitly and implicitly in order to help students improve the quality and accuracy of their writing. Grammar also has the role of improving critical thinking. In “Making a Case for Rhetorical Grammar,” Micciche argues that rhetorical grammar in particular is essential to emancipatory teaching. For her, the roles of grammar are to improve critical thinking and to develop students’ abilities for cultural analysis and critique. She believes that grammar can be effectively taught within the context of rhetoric education, and not as a mere proofreading aspect of writing. She says: “The purpose of learning rhetorical grammar is to learn how to generate persuasive, clear thinking that reflects on and responds to language as work, as produced rather than evacuated of imperfections” (Micciche 720). Grammar enhances critical thinking if grammar is taught as a way of thinking about new knowledge and skills (Micciche 720). The effect is writing that is emancipatory because it does not promote social injustice in the status quo system but uses creativity and innovation in creating new discourses in writing. Nunan supports Micciche’s view because she believes that language and thought are closely linked. She argues that teaching grammar should teach high-level thinking through embedding it in relevant contexts and purposes for students (Nunan 73). She stresses that grammar teaching provides the “means to write in more elaborate ways” that “facilitate multifaceted interpretations and analyses of experience” (Nunan 73). In doing so, teachers are helping their students reach Vygotsky’s concept of “zone of proximal development,” where they can “think and express deeper thoughts” (Nunan 73). These authors underline that grammar can tap and enhance students’ abilities to think more deeply and critically because of their innate understanding of how their language works and why it works that way. Grammar has the role of improving thinking levels if teachers teach students how to use it purposively and in connection to meanings they want to express in their writing. In connection to enhancing critical thinking, grammar connects language to meaning-making in writing. Jones, Myhill and Bailey, in “Grammar for Writing? An Investigation of the Effects of Contextualised Grammar Teaching on Students Writing,” assert that grammar has a role in facilitating and improving meaning-making in writing. They study the impacts of contextualized grammar teaching on students’ writing. Their findings showed positive effects but more for the able group of writers because grammar can be a “meaning-making resource” and because if offers connectivity in instructional approaches (Jones, Myhill and Bailey 1258). Myhill agrees that grammar enhances meaning-making by helping readers create relationships between grammatical forms and meanings in their writing (92). Grammar can improve how students perceive grammatical forms and rules in connection to their communicative purposes. These authors show that grammar may improve students’ ability to think about writing metalinguistically because of better self-awareness of the meanings involved in language and thinking. Effective Grammar Teaching Approaches to Writing Development This section provides studies that answer the third research question: What are the effective ways of teaching grammar that can enhance writing skills? Some studies show that corrective feedback in different methods can enhance the contribution of grammar teaching to writing quality and accuracy. Baleghizadeh and Gordan, in “Academic Writing and Grammatical Accuracy: The Role of Corrective Feedback,” conduct an experimental study on 45 graduate university students to determine the role of corrective feedback on writing quality and accuracy. They divided the students into three groups: no feedback, direct feedback, and student-teacher conferences. The study lasted for 12 weeks. Their findings show that student-teacher conference feedback is more effective than direct feedback and no feedback in improving writing. Written feedback on grammatical errors, for instance, do not help students understand the meaning of this feedback to their writing process and outcomes (Baleghizadeh and Gordan 171). A conference involves social interaction that may enhance how students think about their grammar and thinking processes in writing. Kim and Kim agree that corrective feedback can improve writing quality. The approach must be process-oriented, however, and combines explicit and implicit grammar teaching in its methods. In relation to explicit and implicit grammar teaching, several scholars assert the value of both in language learning and writing. Kim and Kim explain that for English language learners (L2), they need to learn both explicit and implicit grammar because they are important to the basics of L2 learning. Though explicit grammar may not be effective on its own, embedding it in meaningful linguistic uses can improve how L2 students apply grammar to their writing process (Kim and Kim 14). Kim and Kim are particularly exploring how learning a second language’s grammar is not innate to non-native speakers, so it is essential to learn explicit and implicit grammar in connection to language learning and writing processes. Ellis confirms this view in “Current Issues in the Teaching of Grammar: An SLA Perspective.” He argues that teaching grammar is important to writing if language acquisition is sufficient enough to understand grammar. He suggests teaching grammar through extensive and intensive approaches. He believes that explicit knowledge can assist the learning of implicit knowledge (96). He adds that grammatical forms must be taught with respect to meanings (101). In the context of L2 learners, grammar teaching involves implicit and explicit approaches that are meaningful and provide meaning to learners. Grammar teaching may not have any positive effect on writing if absent of functions and meanings. Foltz-Gray, in “Responses to Error: Sentence-Level Error and the Teacher of Basic Writing,” disagrees with Ellis on the explicit teaching of grammar. He believes that bad workbooks sometimes teach more explicit grammar errors than teach proper grammar (22). Furthermore, Foltz-Gray is concerned of how explicit grammar teaching has led to “neurotic marking” for English teachers (24). He asserts that numerous marking for incorrect grammar can be discouraging for students, especially when poorly explained (Foltz-Gray 25). Foltz-Gray argues that explicit grammar teaching is overused and overabused and that it has not lead to any positive writing improvements. Instead, he calls for implicit grammar teaching that focuses on the purpose of grammar in writing and the purpose of grammar in making meaning out of writing (26). Foltz-Gray believes in the power of rhetorical grammar in improving writing more than drill-and-practice exercises can. Wyse agrees with Foltz-Gray in “Grammar for Writing? A Critical Review of Empirical Evidence.” Wyse reviews the “Grammar for Writing” initiative and its effects on student writing outcomes. He uses secondary research to show that explicit instruction of grammar does not largely improve secondary students’ writing. He does not find evidence that the “Grammar for Writing” initiative can improve writing, although he notes that grammar teaching can improve writing by improving sentence-combining knowledge. These scholars stress that explicit grammar is ineffective in writing development. Grammar teaching, nevertheless, requires some form of explicit teaching to help understand implicit grammar. The form of grammar is important in understanding its substance to writing. Ellis talks about the importance of explicit grammar in making and monitoring meanings in messages (96). He also mentions several hypotheses that support the connections between explicit and implicit grammar. In support of the interface position, DeKeyser asserts that “explicit knowledge becomes implicit knowledge if learners have the opportunity for plentiful communicative practice” (qtd. in Ellis 97). The weak interface position states that “explicit knowledge can convert into implicit knowledge if the learner is ready to acquire the targeted feature and that this conversion occurs by priming a number of key acquisitional processes, in particular noticing and noticing the gap” (Schmidt qtd. in Ellis 97). Explicit grammar can change to implicit knowledge with enough practice. In addition, Ellis believes that extensive and intensive grammar teaching has its pros and cons. Like Jones et al., Ellis suggests that balancing these approaches is important and that they are effective if connected to students’ English skills and writing needs and preferences. Explicit grammar teaching is ineffective if not directed to students’ learning needs and concerns. Conclusion These scholars generally agree that grammar in itself is not useful to writing if not embedded in meaning-making and if not taught in learner-centered ways. Teaching grammar positively affects students’ writing, but it depends on grammar teaching approaches and the knowledge of teachers in teaching it imaginatively and contextually. Several scholars admit that teachers have a role in teaching grammar in ways that impact writing more positively when they are open to experimentation and when they engage the value of grammar to metalinguistic learning. Furthermore, grammar has the roles of providing the basic structure for writing, improving critical thinking, and connecting language to meaning-making in writing. Grammar helps students understand how its forms and rules can be applied meaningfully to their writing needs and preferences. Finally, some effective ways of teaching grammar that can improve writing skills are teaching grammar with consideration to both form and meaning and pursuing a process-based approach that fits students’ language knowledge and skills. Teaching grammar can teach writing effectively too when it emphasizes meaning-making and communicative acts and purposes that are relevant to students, not only for learning grammar, but more importantly, for learning how to meaningfully express themselves in empowering ways. Works Cited Andrews, Richard, Torgerson, Carole, Beverton, Sue, Freeman, Allison, Locke, Terry, Low, Graham, Robinson, Alison, and Die Zhu. “The Effect of Grammar Teaching on Writing Development.” British Educational Research Journal 32.1 (2006): 39-55. DOI: 10.1080/01411920500401997. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. < http://ibatefl.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/The-effect-of-grammar-teaching-on-writing-development.pdf>. Baleghizadeh, Sasan, and Yahya Gordan. “Academic Writing and Grammatical Accuracy: The Role of Corrective Feedback.” Gist Education and Learning Research Journal 6 (2012): 159-176. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. . Ellis, Rod. “Current Issues in the Teaching of Grammar: An SLA Perspective.” TESOL Quarterly 40.1 (2006): 83-107. JSTOR. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. Foltz-Gray, Dan. “Responses to Error: Sentence-Level Error and the Teacher of Basic Writing.” Research & Teaching in Developmental Education 28.2 (2012): 18-2. Education Source. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. Jones, Susan, Myhill, Debra, and Trevor Bailey. “Grammar for Writing? An Investigation of the Effects of Contextualised Grammar Teaching on Students Writing.” Reading & Writing 26.8 (2013): 1241-1263. DOI: 10.1007/s11145-012-9416-1. JSTOR. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. Kim, Kyung, and Kioh Kim. “Grammar Correction in a Second Language (L2) Process-Oriented Composition Classroom.” National Teacher Education Journal 4.4 (2011): 5-16. Education Source. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. Martinsen, Amy. “The Tower of Babel and the Teaching of Grammar: Writing Instruction for a New Century.” The English Journal 90.1 (2000): 122-126. JSTOR. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. Micciche, Laura R. “Making a Case for Rhetorical Grammar.” College Composition and Communication 55.4 (2004): 716-737. JSTOR. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. Myhill, Debra. “Ways of Knowing: Writing with Grammar in Mind.” English Teaching: Practice & Critique 4.3 (2005): 77-96. Education Source. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. Myhill, Debra A., Jones, Susan M., Lines, Helen, and Annabel Watson. “Re-Thinking Grammar: The Impact of Embedded Grammar Teaching on Students Writing and Students Metalinguistic Understanding.” Research Papers in Education 27.2 (2012): 139-166. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. < http://ro.uow.edu.au/edupapers/1209/>. Nunan, Susan Losee. “Forgiving Ourselves and Forging Ahead: Teaching Grammar in a New Millennium.” The English Journal 94.4 (2005): 70-75. JSTOR. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. Wyse, Dominic. “Grammar for Writing? A Critical Review of Empirical Evidence.” British Journal of Educational Studies 49.4 (2001): 411-427. JSTOR. Web. 20 Oct. 2014. Read More