The Comparative Effect of Teaching Grammar through Interpretation Tasks and Pictorial Clues on EFL Learners’ Writing Accuracy
محورهای موضوعی : language teachingNacim Shangarffam 1 , اعظم پرهیزکاری 2
1 - Department of English, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 - Department of English, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
کلید واژه: grammar, Interpretation tasks, pictorial clues, Writing Accuracy,
چکیده مقاله :
The focus of this study is to investigate the comparative effect of teaching grammar through interpretation tasks and pictorial clues on EFL learners’ writing accuracy. The participants were 60 female intermediate EFL learners with age range of 21-35 who were divided into two experimental groups after being homogenized by a piloted PET test. In the piloted researcher-made pre-test, the researcher required the participants to write a narration and also complete another narration with some blanks with provided words using grammatical points they were going to be taught. After the treatment phase, another researcher-made parallel form of the pre-test was administered as the post-tests. To investigate the research question of the study, an ANCOVA was conducted. The results revealed that there was not any significant difference between the performances of either group. In other words, the mentioned ways of teaching grammar had equal effect on the learners’ writing accuracy.
هدف این پایان نامه بررسی مقا یسه ای تاثیر تدریس گرامر از طریق تمرینهای تفسیری و نشانه های تصویری بر درستی نوشتار زبان آموزان بوده است.زبان آموزان این تحقیق شامل 60 خانم با رنج سنی 21-35 بوده است که در موسسه علوم و فنون کیش در حال تحصیل زبان انگلیسی بودند. این زبان آموزان بعداز گذراندن امتحان آزمایش شده PET در دو گروه آزمایشی سی نفره قرار گرفتند. Pre-test شامل یک امتحان نوشتاری طراحی شده توسط محقق بوده است که در آن زبان آموزان یک متن درباره موضوع داده شده نوشتند و متن دیگری با جاهای خالی را با کلمات داده شده که شامل نکات گرامری بودند تکمیل کردند.بعد از دوره آموزشی، post-test که امتحانی مشابه pre-test بوده اجرا شد. داده های آماری از طریق ANCOVA موردبررسی قرار گرفتند.نتیجه حاکی ازآن بود که تفاوتی بین تدریس گرامر از طریق تمرینهای تفسیری و نشانه های تصویری بر درستی نوشتار زبان آموزان وجود ندارد.به بیان دیگر هر دو روش تدریس ، تاثیر یکسانی بر نوشتار زبان آموزان دارد.
Bivin, T. H. (2005). The Basics of Grammar to Accompany Public Relation Writing: The Essentials of Style and Format, Fifth Edition. MC. Graw Hill Companies, INC.
Brod, Sh. (1998). ABC's for tutors: 26 teaching tips. Retrieved November 27, 2014, from http://www.springinstitute.org/Files/26tips1.pdf
Butcher, K., &Aleven,V. (2007). Integrating visual and verbal knowledge during classroom learning with computer tutors.Learning Research & Development Center, Human-Computer Interaction Institute (pp.137-142).
Ellis, R. (1995). Interpretation Tasks for Grammar Teaching.TESOL Quarterly, 29, 87-105.
Ellis, R. (2002a). Does form-focused instruction affect the acquisition of implicit knowledge? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 223–236.
Ellis, R. (2002b). The place of grammar instruction in the second/foreign curriculum. In E. Hinkel& S. Fotos (Eds.), New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp. 17–34). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ellis, R. (2003). Tasks-Based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fotos, S. & Ellis, R. (1991).Communicating about grammar: a task-based approach. TESOL Quarterly 25,605–28.
Frodesen, J. (2001). Grammar in writing.In Celce-Murcia, M. (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 233-248).USA: Heinle&Heinle.
Hancock, M. & McDonald, A. (2008) English Result: Intermediate Student’s book. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2003). Teaching language: From grammar to grammaring. Canada: Heinle.
Matthews, P. H. (1997). The concise Oxford dictionary of linguistics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Mayer, R. E., & Sims, V. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of dual-coding theory of multimedia learning.Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 389-401.
Miller, K. (2006). Visual aids.Retrieved November 18, 2014, from http://www.uwc.fac.edu.
Moeser, S.D., &Bregman, A.S. (1973).Imagery & Language Acquisition.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 91-98.
Moreton, W. (2006) Total English: Intermediate student’s book. England. Pearson longman.
Murphy, R. (1995). English in Use:Intermediate student’s book. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (2003), Practical English Teaching. NewYork: McGrow Hill.
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representation: A dual-coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
Solman, R.T. & Wu, H.-M.(1995). Pictures as Feedback in Single-Word Learning.Educational psychology, 15 (3), 227-244.
Spada, N. (1997). Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language teaching, 29, 1–15.
Wang, G. H. & Wang, S. D. (2014) Explicit Grammar Instruction for EFL Writing and Editing: An Exploratory Study at Korean University Linguistics and LiteratureStudies. 2(2):65-73.
http://www.hrpub.org DOI: 10.13189/lls.2014.020204
Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, C.C. (2000). Practical aspects of using video in foreign language classroom.TESL Journal. 6(11), 5-20, Retrieved November 13, 2014 from http://iteslj.org/Articles/Canning-Video.html.
Wong, C. Y., &Marlys, M. B. (2012). The Role of Grammar in Communicative Language Teaching: An Exploration of Second Language Teachers’ Perceptions and Classroom Practices. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching.9, No. 1, pp. 61–75 Essentials of Style and Format, Fifth Edition. MC. Graw Hill Companies, INC.
