Lesson 4

I believe students don't need to memorise the grammar rules but they should have a rough idea on when to use a particular grammar items. By that I mean they should know it but they don't need to be able to tell me with the exact words as in the grammar book. I think just because you are able to recite the rules doesn't mean you can use the grammatical items coorectly.

I think that drills are useful in teaching grammar in a sense that it can help with the accuracy of students using that grammar items. It may not be useful for improving the fluency of students using that grammar items though. Therefore, I think it depends on what your goal is when it comes to drilling. For instance, I think the most common "gap-filling" exercises are not very effective in improving the fluency of students but may be helpful in helping with their accuracy - to help them focus on the form of the grammar item.

I think whether or not to use deductive or inductive approach depends on the level of students. I think it is more difficult to use deductive approach.

留言

張貼留言

這個網誌中的熱門文章

I think L2 teaching methodologies are not entirely science. First, I do agree that the researches of L2 teaching methodologies adopt a rather scientific approach. the selection of participants, a controlled group, and even the analysis of data are very much like a science experiment. Moreover, the design of the research methodology and the analysis require meticulous mind. For this reason, I think L2 teaching methodologies are the results of "scientific" research. However, I believe science is indisputable truth, at least not yet refuted until now. If we are looking at whether or not L2 teaching methodologies are science or not, i think we ought to be looking at whether or not it is indisputable. Of course, we cannot say the methodology doesn't exist. Yet, I don't think there is any way to prove the methodology wrong. I believe there's no one methodology that is better than the other. Thus, I don't think L2 methodologies are science.
閱讀完整內容
When I was a student in secondary school, my teacher always used the PPP method. They presented the form and the usage of the target grammar item and then we would do lots of drilling, finishing all the exercises in the grammar book, and also had some quizzes. They always told us some vague grammar rules like the difference between using present continuous tense, simple future tense, and be going to. Therefore, I didn't really enjoy the process. I think this way of teaching makes students (at least it is boring for me) lose interest in learning grammar. However, when I am a teacher now, I found it difficult to strike a balance between getting the correct form and conveying the meaning.
閱讀完整內容