By Sudirman
Nunan (2001) claims that there is a close link between grammar and context in real communication, hence, the only way to gain appropriate grammatical choices is that grammar should be taught based on the context and purpose of the communication. In addition, he says that students will find difficulties to understand why and how alternative forms exist to express different communicative meanings if they do not have the opportunity to study grammar in context. Nunan also says that teachers need an approach how to help the students learn to form structures correctly and know how to apply them, therefore he strongly suggests an organic approach to teaching grammar rather than a linear model.
In accordance with Nunan’s (2001) idea, Long (2001) also suggests that grammar should not be taught as an isolated subject yet it should be embedded within the context. He furthermore claims that the best way to study a language is not by treating is an object of study but rather as a means of communication. He points out three benefits of teaching grammar integrated with the context; first, it enhances the rate of learning speed, second, it affects the acquisition processes which will be beneficial for long term-accuracy, and third, it shows that it helps to increase the ultimate achievement level.
In addition, Pineman (1986 as cited in Ellis, 2002) believes that instruction can only promote language acquisition if the inter-language is close to the point of natural context. In other words, learners have their inbuilt syllabus and they can follow it as long as it connects to the students’ context which students are familiar with. From this point, when a teacher recognizes the problem of teaching grammatical structures for unplanned language use, the solution is to ensure that students practice new structures in a variety of contexts to help them internalize and master them. Ellis (2002) argues that, traditionally, grammar teaching methods are concerned with content. The content can be transmitted via explicit descriptions and skills which are able to be developed through controlled practice. Ellis suggests that grammar teaching should be rethought to allow learners to discover grammar rules for themselves, and to notice how grammar features are through input processing rather than production practice.
I argue that grammatical competence is very important and a compulsory element in developing communicative competence. However, grammar does not need to be taught separately, grammar can be learned and integrated into language skills learning. Grammar should not be learned only to gain grammar mastery, but it should be learned to comprehend and produce appropriate speaking and writing communication. In my context, in teaching English in Indonesia, grammar is best to be taught embedded to teach the four language skills, in addition, since English is a foreign language to Indonesian students, it will be worthwhile if the portion grammar aspect is added a bit more. I see, in recent curricula, that teaching grammar is very limited.
References:
Ellis,
R. (2002). Methodological options in grammar teaching materials. New
perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms. New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah.
Long,
M. (2001). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In CN. Candlin, & N. Mercer (Eds.), English language teaching in its social
context (pp. 180-190) London: Routledge.
Nunan, D. (2001). Teaching grammar in context. In CN. Candlin, & N. Mercer (Eds.), English language teaching in its social context (pp. 191-200) London: Routledge.
