Revisiting the Role of Language Teachers’ Metalinguistic Knowledge in Classroom
محورهای موضوعی : Journal of Teaching English Language Studies
Azam Pourmohammadi Kharrati
1
,
firooz sadighi
2
,
Mohhamadjavad Riasati
3
1 - Department of English Language,Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran
2 - Department of English, Language, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran
3 - Department of English Language, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran
کلید واژه: Teacher language awareness, Metalinguistic knowledge, Explicit knowledge, EFL teacher development,
چکیده مقاله :
One area that has not gotten much attention in the professional literature on teaching second languages is the function of teacher metalinguistic knowledge in the classroom. Because it has historically been associated with formal grammar teaching, metalinguistic knowledge has been disregarded or even abandoned as an essential part of pedagogical practice in many L2 classrooms. Nonetheless, new studies have shown how important it is to give form and meaning equal weight when teaching languages. This essay reviews studies on the value of teachers’ metalinguistic knowledge and how it relates to learners' improvement of language comprehension and proficiency. It also takes into account a number of potential benefits of possessing and using metalinguistic knowledge in L2 teaching especially teaching grammar in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classrooms. It is concluded based on this discussion that teachers' metalinguistic knowledge deserves a place in L2 classrooms. The study offers some implications for teachers and teacher educators, too.
One area that has not gotten much attention in the professional literature on teaching second languages is the function of teacher metalinguistic knowledge in the classroom. Because it has historically been associated with formal grammar teaching, metalinguistic knowledge has been disregarded or even abandoned as an essential part of pedagogical practice in many L2 classrooms. Nonetheless, new studies have shown how important it is to give form and meaning equal weight when teaching languages. This essay reviews studies on the value of teachers’ metalinguistic knowledge and how it relates to learners' improvement of language comprehension and proficiency. It also takes into account a number of potential benefits of possessing and using metalinguistic knowledge in L2 teaching especially teaching grammar in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classrooms. It is concluded based on this discussion that teachers' metalinguistic knowledge deserves a place in L2 classrooms. The study offers some implications for teachers and teacher educators, too.
References
Andrews, S. (1997). Metalinguistic awareness and teacher explanation. Language Awareness, 6(2-3), 147-161.
Andrews, S. (1999a). The metalinguistic awareness of Hong Kong secondary school teachers of English. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Southampton, England.
Andrews, S. (1999b). Why do L2 teachers need to 'know about language'? Teacher metalinguistic awareness and input for learning. Language and Education, 13(3), 161-177.
Andrews, S. (1999c). All these like little name things: A comparative study of language
teachers' explicit knowledge of grammar and grammatical terminology. Language
Awareness, 8(3-4), 143-159.
Andrews, S. (2001). The language awareness of the L2 teacher: Its impact upon pedagogical practice. Language Awareness, 10(2-3), 75-90.
Andrews, S. (2003). Teacher language awareness and the professional knowledge base of
the L2 teacher. Language Awareness, 12(2), 81-95.
Andrews, S. (2005). Professional standards in TEFL: A challenge for Asia. The journal of Asia TEFL, 2(2), 1-22.
Andrews, S. (2007). Teacher language awareness. Cambridge University Press.
Andrews, S. (2008). Teacher language awareness. In J. Cenoz (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and education (pp. 287-298). Springer.
Andrews, S., & McNeill, A. (2005). Knowledge about language and the good language teacher. In N. Bartels (Ed.), Applied linguistics and language teacher education (pp. 159-178). Springer
Bartels, N. (2005). Applied linguistics and language teacher education. Springer.
Berry, R. (2009). EFL majors’ knowledge of metalinguistic terminology: A comparative
study. Language Awareness, 18(2), 113-128.
Borg, S. (1999a). The use of grammatical terminology in the second language classroom: A quality study of teachers' practices and cognitions. Applied linguistics and language teacher education, 20(1), 95-142.
Borg, S. (2003a). Teacher cognition in grammar teaching: A literature review. Language
Awareness, 12(2), 96-108.
Borg, S. (2003b). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what
language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36(2), 81-109.
Borg, S., & Burns, A. (2008). Integrating grammar in adult TESOL classrooms. Applied
Linguistics, 29(3), 456-482.
Carter, R. (1995). How aware should language-aware teachers and learners be? In D. Nunan, R. Berry, & V. Berry (Eds), Language awareness in language education, Department of Curriculum Studies, University of Hong Kong.
Doughty, C. (1991). Second language instruction does make a difference. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 431–69.
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press.
Edge, J. (1988). Applying linguistics in English language teacher training for speakers of
other languages. ELT Journal, 42(1), 9-13.
Elder, C., Erlam, R., & Philp, J. (2007). Explicit language knowledge and focus on form: Options and obstacles for TESOL teacher trainees. In S. Fotos & H. Nassaji (Eds.), Form-focused instruction and teacher education: Studies in honour of Rod Ellis (pp. 225-240). Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2002). Methodological options in grammar teaching materials. In E.Hinkel and S. Fotos (Eds.), New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp. 155–79). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford University Press.
Ellis, M. (2016). Metalanguage as a component of the communicative classroom. Accents Asia, 8(2), 143-153.
Folse, K. S. (2016). Grammar in student books vs grammar that students need. In Hinkel, E. (Ed.). Teaching English grammar to speakers of other languages (pp. 128-150). Routledge.
Gordon, E. (2005). Grammar in New Zealand schools: two case studies. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 4(3), 48-68.
Harun, H., Abdullah, N., Ab Wahab, N. S., & Zainuddin, N. (2017). The use of metalanguage among second language learners to mediate L2 grammar learning. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction (MJLI), 14(2), 85-114.
Johnston, B., & Goettsch, K. (2000). In search of the knowledge base of language teaching: Explanations by experienced teachers. Canadian Modern Language Review, 56(3), 437–68.
Khatib, M., & Vaezi, M. N. (2017). An investigation of Iranian EFL teachers and learners’ preferences in the selection of different types of direct and indirect oral corrective feedback. Applied Research on English Language, 6(4), 473-498.
Halliwell, S., (1993). Grammar matters. Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research.
Long, M. (1983). Does second language instruction make a difference? A review of the research. TESOL Quarterly, 17(3), 359–82.
Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. De Bot, R. Ginsberg & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-Cultural perspective (pp. 39–52). John Benjamins.
Myhill, D. (2000). Misconceptions and difficulties in the acquisition of metalinguistic knowledge.
Language and Education, 14(3), 151-162.
Myhill, D. (2015). Conceptualizing metalinguistic understanding in writing/Conceptualización de la competencia metalingüística en la escritura. Culturay Educación, 27 (4), pp. 839-867.
Myhill, D. A., Jones, S. M., Lines, H., & Watson, A. (2012). Re-thinking grammar: The impact of
embedded grammar teaching on students’ writing and students’ metalinguistic
understanding. Research Papers in Education, 27(2), 139-166.
Myhill, D., Jones, S., & Watson, A. (2013). Grammar matters: how teachers' grammatical knowledge impacts on the teaching of writing. Teaching and Teacher Education, 36, 77- 91.
Myhill, D., Watson, A., & Newman, R. (2020). Thinking differently about grammar and metalinguistic understanding in writing. Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature, 13(2), e870-e870.
Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2001). Does the type of instruction make a difference? Substantive findings. Oxford University Press.
Lines, H., Myhill, D., & Jones, S. (2019). The relationship between metalinguistic understanding,
student writing and teaching. Knowing Writing: Writing Research across Borders, 113.
Roehr, K. (2008). Metalinguistic knowledge and language ability in university-level L2 learners. Applied Linguistics, 29 (2), 173-199.
Rosa, E. M., & Leow, R. P. (2004). Awareness, different learning conditions, and second language development. Applied psycholinguistics, 25(2), 269-292.
Sanz, C. & Morgan-Short, K. (2005). Explicitness in pedagogical interventions: Input, practice, and feedback. In Sanz, C. (Ed.) Mind and context in adult second language acquisition (pp. 234-266). Georgetown University Press.
Sanchez, H. S. (2014). The impact of self-perceived subject matter knowledge on pedagogical decisions in EFL grammar teaching practices. Language Awareness, 23(3), 220-233.
Savignon, S. J. (1972). Communicative competence: An experiment in foreign-language teaching. Marcel Didier.
Sanosi, A. B. (2022). Correlation of EFL learners’ metalinguistic knowledge and grammatical
accuracy. Studies in English Language and Education, 9(3), 908-925.
Schoonmaker, A., & Purmensky, K. L. (2019). The case for grammar: What preservice teachers
need to know about metalinguistic awareness. Journal of English Learner Education, 9(1),
1-17.
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2013). The role of metalanguage in supporting academic language
development. Language learning, 63, 153-170.
Schulz, R. A. (2001). Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA-Colombia. The Modern Language Journal, 85(2), 244-258.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57 (1), 1-23.
Shulman, L. S. (1999). Foreword. In L. Darling-Hammond and G. Sykes (eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. xi-xiv). Jossey-Bass.
Simard, D., French, L., & Fortier, V. (2007). Elicited metalinguistic reflection and second language learning: Is there a link? System, 35(4), 509-522.
Spada, N. (1986). The interaction between types of content and type of instruction: Some effects on the L2 proficiency of adult learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 8, 81- 99.
Svalberg, A. M.-L. (2012). Language awareness in language learning and teaching: A research learning and memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 4, 232–43.
Thornbury, S. (1997). About language: Tasks for teachers of English. Cambridge University Press.
Tsang, W. L. (2011). English metalanguage awareness among primary school teachers in Hong Kong. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 11(1), 1-16.
Wright, T., & Bolitho, R. (1993). Language awareness: A missing link in language teacher education? ELT Journal, 47, 292–304.
