A Case Study: An ESL Teacher s Beliefs and Classroom Practices in Grammar Instruction

Transcription

1 A Case Study: An ESL Teacher s Beliefs and Classroom Practices in Grammar Instruction A thesis submitted to Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts By Hsiao-Chuan Lin December, 2010

2 Thesis written by Hsiao-Chuan Lin B.A., Minghsing University of Science and Technology, 2008 M.A., Kent State University, 2010 Approved by Klaus Gommlich, Advisor Ronald J. Corthell, Chair, Department of English John R.D. Stalvey, Dean, College of Arts and Sciences ii

3 Acknowledgements I would first like to express my deepest gratitude to Dr. Klaus Gommlich, my thesis advisor. I heartily thank him for patiently and professionally instructing me in the writing of this thesis during the past year. Without his guidance, I certainly would not have been able to complete it successfully. I also truly appreciate my other committee members, Dr. Karl Uhrig and Dr. Kristen Precht-Byrd, who provided their insightful suggestions and sincere comments to improve my thesis. Next, I greatly appreciate the teacher and the students who participated in this study. They provided me with so much precious data and perhaps contributed the most to this research. Particularly, observing the teacher s grammar instruction will enable me to play a better role as an instructor of English in the future. Furthermore, many special thanks go to my editors, Ms. Brianna DeSanto, Mr. Jason Csehi, Mr. Nicholas Miller, and Mr. Matthew Myers, who sacrificed their precious time to help me proofread my writing. Without their invaluable assistance and keen eyes, this thesis would never have been possible. Finally, I am thankful to my family and my friends who blessed me with their iii

4 persistent love and trust, especially my roommate, Chia-Chin (Tina) Wang, who gave me a great deal of support and encouragement during this difficult time. For those who have given me support and help, I would like to give my fullest and sincerest, heartfelt gratitude. I thank you, and am eternally indebted to each of you. iv

5 Abstract This case study aims to investigate a teacher s beliefs and actual practices regarding the instruction of grammar in ESL classrooms. The purpose of this research was three-fold: explore the relationship between the teacher s perceived beliefs and classroom practices; compare the interaction between the teacher and the two classes of students; and survey the students learning satisfaction. The participating teacher was from the United States and had taught ESL classes for two years. The participating students were enrolled in the teacher s two sections of the same grammar course. Both classes consisted of lower-advanced level students. The first class had 28 male and 5 female students, while the second class had 22 male and 7 female students. The data collection included semi-structured interviews, participant observation, field notes, and questionnaires. The research revealed that twelve different beliefs were arranged from the concept of grammar to the ideal classroom practice. These beliefs include the role of grammar, the role of the instructor in grammar teaching, the methodology of grammar teaching, feedback, strategies between the two classes, and the teacher s difficulties in class. v

6 Most of the beliefs were transferred into the actual classroom practices, which were then categorized into nine approaches. The primary consistencies of teaching methodologies and the inconsistencies of techniques between the two sections were also defined and reflected in the students satisfaction after the grammar course. The researcher discovered three possible factors that lead learners to successful grammar learning. One is the consistent relationship between the teacher s beliefs and classroom practices. Another is the consistency of the teacher s and the learners beliefs and that his classroom practices have affected their learning motivation and beliefs. The last is how the teacher adjusted his classroom practices, which in turn helped the learners attain satisfaction. vi

7 Table of Contents Acknowledgements... iii Abstract... v Table of Contents... vii List of Tables... x Chapter One: Introduction Background and Motivation Purpose of the Study Research Questions Overview of the Study... 5 Chapter Two: Literature Review The Evolution of Grammar Teaching Grammar Translation Method Claims against Grammar Teaching Communicative Language Teaching Reasons in Support of Grammar Teaching Form-Focused Instruction Explicit versus Implicit Teaching and Learning Deductive versus Inductive Teaching Beliefs vii

8 2.4.1 Teachers Beliefs The Relationship between Beliefs and Practices Teachers Beliefs on Grammar Teaching Relationship between Teachers and Students Beliefs Chapter Three: Methodology Background of Participants The Participant Teacher The Two Observed Classes A Case Study Data Collection Instruments and Procedure Semi-Structured Interview Participant Observation Questionnaire Data Analysis Chapter Four: Results and Discussion Beliefs The Role of Grammar The Role of the Teachers in Grammar Teaching Methodology of Grammar Teaching Feedback Strategies between the Two Classes The Difficulties in Class viii

9 4.2 Classroom Practice Different Practices in Two Classes Different Techniques Grades Students Feedback and Satisfaction Background Information of Respondents Students Responses to the Questionnaire Statements Chapter Five: Conclusion Summary of the Study Comparison of Findings with Literature Review The Influences of the Teacher s Instruction Pedagogical Implications Limitation and Reflections Suggestion for Future Research References Appendices Appendix A: Semi-Structured Interview Appendix B: Student Satisfaction Questionnaire ix

10 List of Tables Table 3.1 The number of students in two classes (N=62) Table Comparison of teacher s beliefs and practices Table The amount of time of exercise and activities in two classes (N=2592 minutes) Table The amount of time on different exercises and activities Table The grades in two classes (N=32, 29) Table Questionnaires from the first class and the second class Table Descriptive statistics of learner s background Table The students beliefs on grammar Table The students satisfaction with the instructor Table The students satisfaction with the course Table The students satisfaction with methods and materials Table The students self- reflection Table 5.1 The congruity between the literature and the teacher s beliefs and practices123 x

11 Chapter One Introduction 1.1 Background and Motivation The approaches to teaching language well have undergone major changes and heated debates in the field of second language acquisitions. Since the 19 th century, the Grammar-Translation Method (GTM), or Classical Method, had been the most popular language teaching approach in Europe (Brown, 2000, 2007b; Larsen-Freeman, 1986). Classes were taught in the mother tongue of the learners and focused on language structure. During the late 19 th and 20 th centuries, a number of language teaching methods and approaches were developed and applied in the second language classroom. Some of these methods include the Direct Method, Situational Language Teaching, the Audio-lingual Method, Community Language Learning, the Silent Way, Total Physical Response, Communicative Language Teaching, Suggestopedia, and the Natural Approach (Brown, 2007b). The development of the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) started around 1

12 2 1960, primarily as a reaction to the partial failure of all predecessor methods. CLT has since become the most widely-used language approach. Nassaji and Fotos (2004) noted that grammar introduction has been decreasing because of the continued implementation of CLT. Nonetheless, they believed that grammar is the foundation in language teaching. Students need formal instruction to facilitate them in getting high levels of accuracy in language. Brown (2007a) noted that grammar should not be useless or inappropriate in a CLT framework because grammar instruction has a significant effect on accuracy and it contributes to an important facet of second language learning (Carroll & Swain, 1993; Nassaji & Swain, 2000; Long, 1983). In spite of all the debate about grammar instruction, there is one aspect that seems to have been underestimated in the past, namely the role of the teachers who implement general instructional methodology in their classrooms. As claimed in many studies, teaching is a cognitive process (Shavelson & Stern, 1981) and is regarded as a complex cognitive activity (Borg, 2003) that each teacher must perform. Therefore, it is important to investigate teachers' beliefs as a basis of these cognitive activities since these beliefs are the foundation for the teachers' teaching strategies (Pajares, 1992; Kuntz, 2003). Since instructors play the most important role in the second language classroom,

13 3 the way they introduce grammar is also an essential component of students success in language learning. There are various studies dedicated to understanding and emphasizing language teachers belief systems and how they impact their classroom practices (Borg, 1998, 2003; Farrell, 1999). Several effective teaching methods have been discussed through studying the relationship between a teacher s beliefs and their practices (Andrews, 2003; Elbaz, 1983; Golombek, 1998; Graden, 1996; Kleinsasser, 1993). As a result, the relationship between their beliefs and practices can be explored in order to help them improve their second language teaching. 1.2 Purpose of the Study This research adopted a case study to provide a micro-examination of the relationship between a teacher s beliefs and practices during grammar lessons. Moreover, participant observation offered a close familiarity with the teacher and the students. Further, the results of this research can serve as a resource for studies on grammar instruction. Finally, it can also give teachers a systematic demonstration of developing a better pedagogical methodology for grammar teaching.

14 4 The research goals are as follows: 1. To analyze the teacher s beliefs and practices in grammar teaching. 2. To explore the teacher s common usage of pedagogical methodology. 3. To explore the learning condition and feedback of the students after receiving the teacher s grammar teaching. 4. To compare the similarities or differences with regard to methodology between two sections of the same course taught by the same teacher. 5. To reflect on the influence of the researcher s beliefs after having experienced the instructor s teaching. 1.3 Research Questions In this study, a teacher s beliefs and classroom practice will be investigated. Five questions are addressed. These questions comprise the full scope of research on the teachers beliefs and classroom practices in the present study. 1. What are the teacher s beliefs? 2. How does the teacher actually practice his/her methodology in grammar teaching?

15 5 3. What are the consistencies and inconsistencies of methodology between the two sections? 4. What are the students reflections and feedback after the class ends for the semester? 5. What beliefs of the researcher are influenced by the teacher s teaching? 1.4 Overview of the Study The study includes five chapters. Chapter one presents the background statement, the purpose of this study, and research questions. Next, chapter two reviews the relevant theoretical frameworks and empirical research to support this study. This includes the evaluation of grammar teaching, methodology in grammar instruction, implicit versus explicit teaching, inductive versus deductive teaching, and teachers beliefs. Chapter three then presents the methodology applied for this research, which includes the backgrounds of participants, instruments, and data analysis. Chapter four shows the results and discusses the findings of this study. Finally, chapter five concludes the study with a comprehensive summary of the research, the influence of the teacher's beliefs and practice on the researcher, pedagogical implications, and suggestions for future research.

16 Chapter Two Literature Review This chapter reviews the theoretical frameworks and empirical research that support this thesis. Five sections are included. They are: the evaluation of grammar teaching; methodology in grammar instruction; implicit or explicit teaching; inductive and deductive teaching; and the beliefs of the teacher. The first section reviews the evolution of grammar teaching, which presents the relevant methodologies in grammar instruction including Grammar Translation Method, Communicative Language Teaching and Form-Focused Instruction, as well as arguments that oppose and support grammar teaching. The second section examines implicit versus explicit and inductive versus deductive teaching. The last focuses on the beliefs of the teacher as well as the students, in addition to the relationship between beliefs and classroom practices. 6

17 7 2.1 The Evolution of Grammar Teaching Grammar Translation Method Since the 18 th century, people in the West commonly studied Latin or classical Greek as a foreign language in school. The Classical Method was developed for understanding these classical languages (Chastain, 1988). Because this method began in the German Kingdom of Prussia during the late 18 th century, it is also called the Prussian Method (Richards & Rodgers, 2001). The Classical Method focused on grammatical rules, memorization of vocabulary, translation of text and written exercises, and it helped learners read and understand foreign language literature (Larsen-Freeman, 1986). From 1840 to 1940, the Classical Method was known as the Grammar Translation Method (GTM) and it became a highly-regarded method of teaching (Brown, 2007b). In Partor and Celce-Murcia s (1979) and Larsen-Freeman s (2003) research, the major features of GTM were listed. 1. Both target language and mother language were used in an English as foreign language (EFL) or English as second language (ESL) class, but the mother tongue was used the majority of the time.

18 8 2. Learners were required to memorize a specific set of vocabulary rules and grammar rules. 3. Reading knowledge of foreign language acquisition was required. 4. Reading and written skills were emphasized. 5. Accuracy was more important than fluency in language usage. 6. Translating sentences from the target language into the first language comprised the most frequently used drills and exercises. Based on Brown s (2007b) explanation, the Grammar Translation Method was commonly adopted in most schools and became popular because teachers required few professional skills and abilities in the target language. They could also get objective scores for learners by tests of grammar rules and translation. However, this method mainly emphasized grammar teaching and only paid a little or no attention to pronunciation, listening or speaking skills. As a result, most learners were unable to develop their communication skills from this method. Consequently, grammar teaching has widely been criticized for determining the methodology of second language teaching (R. Ellis, 1994). Many researchers argued over the necessity of grammar teaching (Garrett, 1986; Krashen, 1981, 1983, 1985) and

19 9 discovered that grammar should be completely eliminated Claims against Grammar Teaching By the close of the 20 th century, Stephen Krashen developed a theory of second language learning in which he claimed that grammar teaching was useless (Cowan, 2008). Krashen (1981) insisted that if people could learn their first language without formal instruction, they could learn a second language without formal instruction as well. Second language learners should acquire their language abilities through natural exposure, not learn through formal instruction (Krashen, 1981; Schwartz, 1993). Krashen (1981) also distinguishes in his studies between conscious learning and unconscious acquisition. Nassaji and Fotos (2004) mentioned that the debate led to a division of language teaching into two approaches. It resulted in formal grammar instruction on one side and non-formal grammar instruction on the other. In 1982, Krashen asserted that formal instruction could not help people to learn a language, and that it could create learning difficulties and discourage learners from getting involved in successful communication (Krashen & Terrell, 1983). Based on Krashen s (1985) hypothesis, grammar was an unnecessary lesson because learners could automatically obtain it from natural input

20 10 during communication. It would encourage learners to imitate the grammar rules consciously, thus preventing them from developing and integrating them into their interlanguage (Prabhu, 1987). Resultantly, grammar teaching was believed to develop learners knowledge of grammar structures (R. Ellis, 2001), but not their abilities to use these grammatical forms correctly. That explains why Nassaji & Fotos (2004) proposed not only that grammar instruction was useless, but that it might even be harmful for language learning. Since then, grammar teaching has become a controversial issue (R. Ellis, 2002b; Richards & Renandya, 2003) and some linguistic experts were against it in language learning. They suggested that it be abandoned altogether (Nassaji & Fotos, 2004; Richards & Renandya, 2002). Meanwhile, Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) has become an increasingly widespread teaching approach since the 1970s (Maley & Duff, 1978) Communicative Language Teaching Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) was developed in Britain in the 1960s and it applies to the theoretical perspective of the Communicative Approach

21 11 (Larsen-Freeman, 1986). The concept of CLT emphasizes the importance of meaningful language learning as well as classroom interaction. Compared to Grammar Translation Method (GTM), the most significant, distinct feature of CLT is using the target language with rich meaningful input to achieve communicative competence (Brown, 2000). There are six major characteristics of CLT as listed in Brown (2007b) and Larsen-Freeman s (1986) studies. 1. Learners are engaged to use a more pragmatic, authentic and functional target language towards a meaningful purpose. 2. Fluency is usually more important than accuracy. 3. The role of teachers is to value student s linguistic improvement. 4. Learner-centered, cooperative and collaborative learning are focused on in class. 5. Classes should be focused on real-world contexts so that students are able to use the target language appropriately in real life. 6. The students learning process is one of the essential components responsible for developing their production and comprehension in order for them to continue learning the target language beyond the classroom. According to Krashen s (1982) universal principle, language should be acquired

22 12 without formal instruction because it is considered to be a tool of communication. Because use of CLT is aimed at developing students communicative competence, it has been a welcome and popular second language teaching method since the late 1970s (Maley & Duff, 1978; Nassaji & Fotos, 2004; Nunan, 1988). In addition, Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) is one of the most significant approaches to CLT. Many of the communicative activities in TBLT are based on the CLT framework. Therefore, most activities are related to the real world, and the students must learn to complete tasks through communication (Brown, 2007b). Whether or not tasks are completed will determine success or failure in TBLT (Johnson, 1979). Moreover, meaning is important. Grammatical rules are usually paid little to no attention in the majority of tasks. However, Thompson (1996) recommended that language teachers should not adopt CLT without grammar teaching in the second language classroom. He did so because CLT focuses on communicative competence, which is composed of four main components: grammatical competence; sociolinguistic competence; discourse competence; and strategic competence (Canale & Swain, 1980; Richards & Rodgers, 1986). Canale and Swain (1980) explained that grammatical competence should be integrated within the context of meaningful communication because its main purpose is

23 13 to express information or convey a message by using appropriate grammatical forms. Garrett (1986) and Brown (2007a) each claimed that grammar teaching plays a critical role in the development of communicative competence. Larsen-Freeman (1997) also suggested that grammar rules cannot be neglected, and that they should be considered to be just as important as other competencies. In addition, Swain and her colleagues proved that a long-term exposure to rich, meaningful input without grammar teaching could not achieve learners language accuracy (Lapkin, Hart, & Swain, 1991; Swain & Lapkin, 1998). Therefore, the role of grammar and the importance of grammar teaching have been reconsidered in light of current research (Brown, 2007a; Doughty & Williams, 1998; Nassaji & Fotos, 2004) Reasons in Support of Grammar Teaching Grammar is the central heart of language (Kerr, 1996), and is a tool to help learners comprehension of the target language. Because grammar provides systematic rules of structure and word order, learners can create their own spoken and written discourse using these grammatical rules (Rao, 1996). Without grammatical structure, the use of

24 14 language could easily become chaotic and might not be understandable (Canale & Swain, 1980; Brown, 2007a). Furthermore, Nunan (1991) strongly supported grammar teaching because grammar helps learners perform their target languages better. He also thought that students cannot communicate well if they do not have a fundamental level of grammar. Current research has shown that grammar teaching is both necessary and essential because grammar knowledge can affect learners capabilities to express themselves in the target language (Carroll & Swain, 1993; R. Ellis 2001, 2002a; Nassaji & Fotos, 2004). Nassaji and Fotos (2004) have demonstrated positive effects as a result of grammar instruction. Other studies also have shown that grammar teaching helps learners to communicate more effectively and accurately in the target language, and it also allows them to communicate more meaningfully (Canale & Swain, 1980; Higgs, 1985; Hinkel & Fotos, 2002; Richards & Renandya, 2003). Therefore, recent suggestions strongly advocate focusing on forms within communicative approaches in a second language curriculum (R. Ellis, 2002a). This is because the concepts between the communicative teaching approach and the grammar teaching approach should not be separated (Higgs, 1985).

25 15 Since grammar is recommended to be taught by using the communicative approach (Batstone, 1994), form-focused instruction has been developed in the second language classroom. According to Lightbown s (1998) and R. Ellis s (2002a) studies, form-focused instructional activities are regarded as the most effective when embedded with communicative contexts. Harley (1993) believed that form-focused instruction could address those features of the second language that are different from the learner s first language Form-Focused Instruction R. Ellis s (2001) definition of form-focused instruction (FFI) is any planned or incidental instructional activity that is intended to induce language learners (p. 1). Form-focused instruction is combined with two approaches, one is focus-on-forms instruction (FonFS), and the other is focus-on-form instruction (FonF). In focus-on-forms instruction, grammatical rules are taught separately from language learning. Language is seen as a tool, and the way to learn language is to practice it systematically so that students not only learn the rules, but also that they might be able to use the target

26 16 language. Alternatively, focus-on-form instruction is embedded in meaningful context and grammatical structures inside of language teaching. Students still learn some grammar rules to promote their language accuracy and fluency, and thus they are able to create their own sentences based on this grammatical form outside of the classroom (Brown, 2007a). As long as the grammar teaching context is combined with meaningful communicative interaction, learners can improve their accuracy and fluency of second language (Canale & Swain, 1980). As a consequence, most studies agree that form-focused instruction is a natural approach for learners to rapidly master grammatical forms and to promote expedient language acquisition (R. Ellis, 1985, 1994; Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1991). Since form-focused instruction is highly recommended, there are different grammar approaches provided as explicit versus implicit teaching and deductive versus inductive teaching (Doughty & Williams, 1998; R. Ellis, 2002a). 2.2 Explicit versus Implicit Teaching and Learning N. Ellis (1994) mentioned that grammar instruction could be taught in an implicit

27 17 way that requires learners to understand the rules from the given examples or in an explicit way where learners are given rules before they practice them. He also explained that implicit and explicit teaching were recognized by whether the target language was taught through examples or whether it was taught alongside linguistic rules that could contribute to the acquisition of grammatical competence. Doughty (2003) explained that explicit grammar teaching is essentially a series of grammatical rules that are taught. In this teaching style, the grammar rules and structures are introduced to learners before they are used or practiced (R. Ellis, 1994). Rule presentation and discussion, consciousness-raising tasks, and input-processing instruction are known as the three techniques of explicit teaching (Doughty & Williams, 1998). Research suggests that consciousness, attention, or noticing towards form are a necessary condition for language learning (Schmidt, 1990). N. Ellis (2005) also agreed that language acquisition is rapidly growing through explicit teaching because students can overcome grammar problems by using grammar consciousness-raising or noticing tasks (Harley, 1989; White, Spada, Lightbown, & Ranta, 1991). It is possibile that correct grammatical forms cannot be used immediately by learners; instead, they can be used by noticing the forms when they try to solve problems through meaningful communication,

28 18 and it can actually help language acquistion in the future. Additionally, most Second Language Acquisition (SLA) researchers agree that noticing or awareness of target forms plays an important role in L2 learning (Nassaji & Fotos, 2004, p. 128) On one hand, explicit teaching can help learners use and practice grammatical structures as explained by the teacher. On the other hand, implicit teaching emphasizes the role of exposure (N. Ellis, 2005). Cowan (2008) defined the teaching of implicit grammar as one in which students can immediately find grammatical rules by looking at examples. Three common techniques of this teaching are unfocused exposure to input, input flood, and input enhancement (Doughty & Williams, 1998). N. Ellis (1994) emphasized that most learning is implicit and unconscious. Language acquisition is a result of using the target language in implicit learning. This is because of what occurs during fluent language comprehension and production (N. Ellis, 2005). Krashen (1982) also explained that proponents of implicit grammar believe that learners acquire grammatical knowledge autonomously through exposure to the linguistic and syntactic structures. This takes place in activities that focus on both reading and listening without paying conscious attention to linguistic structures. Brown (2007a) assented that implicit learning is learning without conscious attention or awareness and

29 19 that it happens without intention to learn and without awareness of what has been learned (p. 292). Moreover, Krashen (1982) strongly suggested that implicit teaching is preferable to explicit teaching. Paradis (1994) later stated that explicit knowledge could not become implicit knowledge. Dekeyser (1995) confirmed that learners did a better job after being provided with many examples in a target languague than they did when first being given rules. However, Norris and Ortega (2000) argued that explicit teaching is more effective than implicit teaching. Further, they argued that second language learning can be more effective and versatile because implicit grammar instruction is not sufficient to promote accurate use of the target language. Language acquisition cannot happen unless learners notice the target language s structure to begin with. Because of this, implicit teaching still needs to be combined with explicit grammar teaching (R. Ellis, 2001; Fotos, 1994; Spada & Lightbown, 1993). R. Ellis (1984) verified that explicit learning facilitates implicit learning and promotes learners language knowledge because it helps them pay attention to the gap between the target language and their own interlanguage (Schmidt, 1990). Reber (1993) suggested that the more complex rules should be learned implicitly; whereas Krashen (1994) recommended less-complex rules to be taught by explicit means.

30 20 Mathews et al. (1989) and Reber et al. (1980, Experiment 2) stated that combining both implicit and explicit teaching might be a good way to learn a target language. In SLA research, learners are encouraged to learn grammatical patterns first through explicit learning and then fine-tune those patterns and integrate them into their linguistic system by implicit learning (N. Ellis, 2005). 2.3 Deductive versus Inductive Teaching The deductive and inductive dichotomy is built upon rule-based and example-based teaching. The deductive approach is a rule-based teaching style that involves presentation or explanation before learners encounter how rules function in language; therefore, the deductive approach is one of the explicit teaching styles (Cowan, 2008). In contrast, the inductive approach is identified as a rule-search or discovery-based approach (Robinson, 1996; R. Ellis, 2002b), which involves having learners formulate rules from examples (Cowan, 2008). Nevertheless, Krashen (1982) argued that inductive teaching is still on the explicit end because it aims at raising a learner s consciouseness on language forms, which contradicts implicit teaching.

31 21 Comparing the two approaches, deductive teaching is the one that is commonly used in ESL and EFL textbooks (Cowan, 2008; R. Ellis 2002b; Krashen, 1982). Seliger (1975) also found that students maintained their grammar knowledge longer by deductive teaching. Robinson (1996) proved that learners performed grammatical tasks better and reacted faster in deductive rather than inductive teaching. Erlam (2003) confirmed that deductive teaching is easier for learners to acquire direct object pronouns in French as a second language, and it is highly likely that the same holds true for learners of English. In contrast, R. Ellis (2002b) believed that the inductive teaching has its advantages in classroom practices. Hawkins (1984) also agreed that inductive approach promotes second language learners to discover rules with spontaneity and lead them into operating the language well. Herron and Tomasello (1992) agreed that inductive teaching is more effective when teaching French as a second language. Foto (1994) also showed that inductive teaching could function just as well as rule-base teaching. Rosa and O Neill (1999) went as far as to contend that inductive and deductive teachings have no significant differences between them. As such, both approaches have been demonstrated as feasible for helping the progress of language acquisition. Therefore, the most effective way of teaching could be

32 22 mixing the two approaches and adopting them together while teaching. It is up to teachers to form this delicate blend. 2.4 Beliefs Teachers Beliefs The best way to teach grammar still has not been confirmed (Borg, 1999; R. Ellis, 1994), whereas previous studies mainly emphasized grammar rules and to present them, the more recently, the role of teachers has become focus of attention. Teachers are considered to be playing an important role for learners language acquisition because they educate and familiarize the students with knowledge of language rules (Magno, 2010). Rios (1996) believed that the teacher s beliefs, theories, and knowledge have the most profound influence on their teaching. Johnson (1999) also pointed out that beliefs have a cognitive, an affective, and a behavioral component and therefore act as influences on what we know, feel, and do (p. 30). That is how teachers interpret a teaching situation; it is usually based on their beliefs of second or foreign langague learning and teaching. Kagan (1992) also indicated that most research showed teachers beliefs would be

33 23 observable in their teaching style. In addition, Johnson (1999) explained how teachers make their instructional judgments and decisions usually based on their beliefs the majority of the time. As such, what impacts teachers beliefs is also an important issue for researchers to consider. Borg (1999, 2003) explained that the personality, educational background, and professional experiences in the teacher s life usually have a powerful influence on the development of their teaching styles. Graves (2000) suggested that teachers beliefs are based on their learning experiences, working experiences and places, and their ongoing professional development. Moreover, Richardson (1996) pointed out three types of experiences, which include personal experience, experience with schooling and instruction, and experience with formal knowledge. They have primarily influenced the development of beliefs about and knowledge of teaching. Therefore, Richardson (1996) indicated that exploring teachers beliefs and finding out how these beliefs change is a crucial process to undergo for the purposes of understanding the teachers educational development and classroom practices.

34 The Relationship between Beliefs and Practices Since the 1990s, teachers beliefs in language teaching have become the most popular topic in the field of language teaching. Understanding their beliefs is imperative for improving the educational practice as a whole (Lumpe, Haney, & Czerniak, 1998; Tobin, Tippins, & Gallard, 1994). Rios (1996) also agreed that the teacher s beliefs and practices interact and influence one another. In addition, Richards and Lockhart (1994) mentioned that understanding teachers beliefs is a better approach to realizing how they typically teach. This is because their beliefs affect their decisions about what and how they teach (Grossman, 1990). In addition, Kagan (1992) indicated that the majority of his research showed that teachers beliefs would be represented through their teaching style. Furthermore, Martinez (2000) strongly suggested that beliefs can lead to educational decisions and classroom practices, and through those beliefs, they can understand teachers and the process of schooling. Without understanding the thoughts, knowledge, and beliefs that influence what teachers do, the factors that determine the growth of teacher cognition cannot be properly understood (Borg, 2009). In Golombek s (1998) study, he examined two in-service teachers beliefs by using

35 25 strategies to handle the tensions they encountered in the classroom. The results showed that both teachers combined their knowledge and experiences to deal with the problems. Golombek s study interpreted that two ESL teachers personal knowledge and experiences they used to conduct their classroom practices. Andrews (2003) study used a questionnaire to identify the association between the teacher s beliefs of subject matter and their background and language level for 170 ESL teachers. He also interviewed and participated in classroom observations to indentify the association between the teachers beliefs and practices for 17 out of the 170 teachers. The results proved that the teachers cognition about subject matter was connected with their particular teaching practices through interviewing and observing the teachers classrooms. Silva (2005), furthermore, investigated this association. She studied three Brazilian internship teachers perceptions on English teaching in the ESL classroom. They participated in the study when they observed other experienced teachers classrooms, when they taught, and when they reviewed their own teaching videotapes. The results explained that the teachers professional knowledge affected their perceptions; in turn, their perceptions affected their classroom practices.

36 26 As the result, teachers beliefs were shown to have a significant influence on their classroom practices and decision-making (Golombek, 1998; Richards & Lockhart, 1994; Wilson, 1988) Teachers Beliefs on Grammar Teaching Teachers are held responsible for bridging theories and practices together in the classroom (Lawrence, 2000). The task of deciding whether grammar teaching is necessary or not is usually conducted by these teachers as well (Borg, 1999). Based on various studies, they have concluded that grammar should be taught in ESL classrooms (Ebsworth & Schweers, 1997; Burgess & Etherington, 2002). In 2002, Burgess and Etherington s study showed that participant teachers considered grammar to be a fundamental and indispensable component in learning. They preferred error correction, use of grammatical terminology and structure practice for their teaching approaches. They further believed that explicit instruction is valuable for the exposure to the target language in the classroom and that it also helpful for learners. Ebsworth and Schweers research from 1997, 60 university ESL instructors (30 from

37 27 New York and 30 from Puerto Rico) were evaluated for their perceptions of grammar teaching. In their study, teachers decided up what percentage of grammar teaching should be represented and integrated into the classrooms. They decided that it would depend on the students proficiency, age, and education level. Most of the teachers agreed about the importance of having explicit instruction combined with communicative practice. In addition, they suggested that explicit instruction was only appropriate for adults and not young learners. They also supported the idea that grammar should be involved in language teaching. The teachers in Puerto Rico strongly agreed with the value of grammar teaching in second language learning. Teachers from Puerto Rico chose a fixed approach when they taught grammar. Conversely, those from New York were more willing to experiment with new teaching approaches in their grammar lessons. To build on that, the studies explained that students expectations affected the teachers preference for grammar teaching. That was particularly noticeable where learners were required to have the target language for academic purposes or formal writing. Consequently, the role of students with respect to using their second language is a vital deliberation for teacher s beliefs in grammar teaching.

38 Relationship between Teachers and Students Beliefs The students beliefs are usually important for their learning motivation. This is because the students preferences determine their learning strategies in second or foreign language teaching. Nevertheless, students beliefs are easily influenced because language teachers are seen as an authoritative resource in the classroom. In fact, they are usually viewed as experts by students (Horwitz, 1988). Some studies have explained that the outcome of the learning process could be powerfully influenced by teachers beliefs. This influence could be even more substantial than learners beliefs from the cognitive aspect (Arnold & Brown, 1999). Further, instructors teaching behaviors have a profound effect on the students learning (Oxford, 1999). The students beliefs have an enough effect on language instructors to decide upon an appropriately balanced approach for grammar instruction. This determines the percentage of grammar teaching that should be taught in the classroom (Ebsworth & Schweers, 1997). Nathan and Koedinger (2000) stated that teachers beliefs about students ability and learning greatly influence their instructional practices (p. 168). As a result, understanding the teachers and students beliefs and how they interact is

39 29 critical for language teaching (Kern, 1995). Mismatched beliefs between teachers and students could negatively affect student s learning motivation (Schulz, 1996). Gardner (2001) also showed that students learning could be affected by the teacher, the course, the course materials, or the classroom activities. In sum, there are various methods for grammar teaching in the second or foreign language classrooms. However, none of them claim to include the best way to teach grammar. Since teachers have more authority to decide on a suitable method to teach based on their beliefs, they can observe the consequences of their teaching methods with regard to classroom practice and learners beliefs.

40 Chapter Three Methodology This study examines the relationship between the beliefs and practices of an ESL teacher from the United States. It compares the interaction between the teacher and the students of two classes, and explores their learning satisfaction in those classrooms. This chapter presents the participants, instruments, and data analysis. 3.1 Background of Participants The Participant Teacher The participating teacher in this study is from the United States and is a native-speaking ESL teacher. He is quite organized and patient with an excellent knowledge and teaching ability of grammar. He has an undergraduate major and minor in Psychology and Biology, respectively. He earned his bachelor s degree from a midwestern university and has earned a Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) certificate. While in the certificate program, he taught English to middle school 30

41 31 as well as to adult learners. The teacher has taught in his present school for two years, and he usually teaches Grammar and TOEFL (Test of English as a Foreign Language) preparation classes. Furthermore, the instructor has been learning German as a second language for several years. As a result, he has experienced how difficult learning a second language can be, as well as where the students feelings and difficulties about learning English have come from The Two Observed Classes This study was designed to investigate a teacher s beliefs and classroom practices in grammar instruction. Hence, the two groups of students were taken from the teacher s two sections of the same grammar course at a low-advanced level in the ESL program. The following table displays the distribution of male and females students for the two sections of the same grammar course that he taught.

42 32 Table 3.1 The number of students in two classes (N=62) Gender The first class The second class male female 5 7 total These students came from various countries, including China, Saudi Arabia, India, Taiwan, the Congo, and Japan. The majority of the students in both of the classes spoke Mandarin as their native language. However, the first class was a more mixed group because 12 of the students spoke Turkish, Arabic, and Hindi while the rest spoke Chinese. Alternatively, in the second class, there were 27 students who spoke Chinese, and only one student each spoke Japanese and French. The second class was essentially an entirely almost Chinese group. 3.2 A Case Study This was a case study designed to provide a micro-examination of the relationship between the beliefs and practices of a native ESL teacher in grammar instruction. According to Stake (1995), a case study is used to analyze the details of the examination

43 33 from a particular individual, group, or event. This study indicates that teachers beliefs based on their educational backgrounds and personal experiences (Pajares, 1992). In order to recognize a teacher s beliefs, his thoughts and feelings about both the current and previous experiences must be explored. Moreover, a case study can supply rich and holistic information to help researchers deeply understand how the teachers classroom practices reflect or differ from their beliefs based on how actual events happened in the classroom. The researcher could be closely observed how both the teacher and the students act and react in class. Therefore, the interaction between the teacher and the students, how the teacher stimulates the learners learning motivation, and the students satisfaction with the grammar instruction could be collected and examined for this study. 3.3 Data Collection Instruments and Procedure The data collection instruments used in this study evaluate the teacher s beliefs and classroom practice, as well as the learner s satisfaction and motivation. The instruments consist of three parts: semi-structured interviews; participant observation; and a questionnaire.

44 Semi-Structured Interview Wragg (1999) noted that semi-structured interviews are commonly used for classroom research. Interviewees are given written questions from the questionnaire and encouraged to engage in some natural conversation while answering it. The semi-structured interview (Appendix A) in this study involved two parts. The first section concerned the participant teacher s background and the second addressed his perspective about grammar teaching. The questions were all pre-designed. The main purpose of the interviews was to explore the teacher s beliefs. In order to gauge the teacher s beliefs, the teacher was interviewed on two separate occasions to compare any change of the beliefs from the beginning to the end of class. Before the first interview, the participant teacher was given one week to preview the interview questions. The first interview was held on January 26 to understand the teacher s educational background and beliefs concerning grammar teaching. The second interview was held on May 10 and it consisted of the same questions except on the subject of the teacher s background. The data was collected by tape-recording and transcription. The teacher s beliefs

45 35 were then explored and compared by transcript data. The results of both interviews were evaluated as to whether they were consistent before and after the semester and also whether they held consistent to the teacher s classroom practices Participant Observation This study adopted classroom observation as one of the major research approaches to examine if the teacher s beliefs and classroom practices held consistent from March 1 to May 7 during the 2010 spring semester. The observations were held in ESL classrooms, and three main variables were observed: how the teacher taught grammar in the classrooms; the interaction between the teacher and students; and the classroom environment and setting over the course of semester. Collecting data through classroom observation can help researchers to study closely a phenomenon with the presence of contextual variables (Seliger & Shohamy, 1989). A video camera placed in the back of the classroom was used to collect observations. The researcher s field notes also helped to provide data about teaching methods, as well as the usage of class materials, resources, activities, and exercises.

46 Questionnaire The questionnaire (Appendix B) contains two sections. The first inquired about the learners background including personal and learning-related information. The second surveyed the learners beliefs about grammar, their satisfaction with grammar instruction, and their self-reflection on their learning behavior. The questionnaire was distributed after the end of the semester on May 7, the last day of class. The two sections that the participant learners were asked to fill out elicited information concerning their satisfaction, attitude, and motivation in the class. From the collection of data about the learner s feedback, the teacher s beliefs were evaluated as to whether they were consistent or not with the learners perspectives. 3.4 Data Analysis Both qualitative and quantitative methods were adopted in this study. Qualitative research is necessary for describing the teacher s beliefs and behavior in grammar teaching. Four items were collected from two classes for qualitative research; they were the primary interviews with the participant teacher at the beginning and the end of the

47 37 semester, participant observations, video recording, and researcher s field notes. On the contrarily, quantitative research explains the percentage of learner s satisfaction in the classrooms. Because of this, the study included the questionnaire survey. The questionnaire asked for the students demographic information and their satisfaction with the teacher s grammar instruction.

48 Chapter Four Results and Discussion In this chapter, the major findings of this study are presented and discussed in three sections. The first section is divided into two parts. One addresses the participant teacher s beliefs, which were collected from semi-structured interviews. The other concerns the teacher s classroom practices, which were obtained from the interaction between the teacher and learners in two sections of the same grammar course. The second section compares the different approaches and strategies between the two classes. The third section describes the participant students reflections and feedback between the two classes. 38