Grammar teaching

This study aimed to investigate the relative effectiveness of consciousness-raising tasks and structure-based production tasks in comparison with the traditional teaching in learning comparative and superlative forms, following a task-based approach to teaching English grammar. To this end, from among 82 female elementary-level high school students having taken a Solutions Placement Test (2010), 72 students being homogeneous regarding their language proficiency were assigned to one control group experiencing traditional grammar learning and two experimental groups that were instructed using consciousness-raising tasks and structure-based production tasks. The study was a quasi-experimental one following a pre-test post-test control group design. All groups took a multiple-choice researcher-made pre-test measuring their knowledge of comparative and superlative forms at the outset, and after six weeks, the three groups took part in the corresponding post-test. At last, the results of ANCOVA indicated that consciousness-raising task group had the best grammar performance, but no significant differences were found between the participants in structure-based production tasks and traditional teaching. Therefore, it is recommended that other EFL teachers consider consciousness-raising tasks as an option in teaching comparative and superlative forms in their high school classes.

While many English language learning textbooks provide exercises on the difference between present simple and present progressive tenses, they often lack meticulous explanations regarding their meaning and contextual usage. Having been inspired by cognitive linguistic studies on English present tense and the theory of Cognitive Grammar, an empirical study was devised to incorporate the elements of cognitive linguistics analysis of English present progressive tense into EFL grammar teaching material. This quasi-experimental study included 53 adult EFL learners being homogenized in terms of their English proficiency based on their scores on Quick Oxford Placement Test, and randomly assigned to three groups. The course of instruction lasted for three weeks during which the groups met 6 times. The cognitive group (N = 18) received cognitive linguistic explanations followed by examples indicating inherited epistemic contingency in English present progressive tense (including, current ongoingness, historical present progressive, future present progressive, temporary validity, duration, iteration, repetition, and modality) and structural construal indicated by present simple. The task-based group (N = 16) received conscious-raising tasks lacking cognitive linguistic explanations. The control group (N = 19) did not receive any explicit instruction. Pretest and posttest scores were used to measure the effectiveness of the types of instruction. The results of paired samples t-test and one-way ANOVA revealed that the cognitive group outperformed the task-based group and the control group showing a higher level of construing usage context of present simple and present progressive tense.