The importance of explicit grammar instruction has been debated during decades within the second language acquisition discourse community. Researchers’ views on the topic are controversial, and there is still no clear answer to be found. In terms of English teacher attitudes, previous research shows no indication of a gradually decreasing interest in explicit grammar instruction in L2 or FL classrooms. Despite this, the Swedish National Agency of Education does not mention explicit grammar instruction in their official documents regarding the subject of English. Hence, this paper aims to examine if the Swedish context has an impact on in-service English teachers’ attitudes towards explicit grammar instruction. To investigate their attitudes, along with their preferred approaches to explicit grammar instruction, semi-structured interviews were conducted with five English teachers at upper secondary school. The interviews were recorded, carefully analysed and partly transcribed. The results show that all of the interviewed English teachers were positive towards explicit grammar instruction and use it in their teaching. In terms of approaches to explicit grammar instruction, all of the five teachers explained that they highlight a certain grammatical rule when they notice that many of their students have a hard time with it. It is often after a writing assignment that the grammatical difficulties are revealed and will be brought up in class. The teachers tend to explain the rule by using the whiteboard, a relevant YouTube clip or a PowerPoint. An interesting finding was that all of the teachers referred to their own experience when explaining why they use a specific approach to explicit grammar instruction, whereas none of the teachers referred to research within the field. In addition, all of the interviewed teachers expressed that the official steering documents by the Swedish National Agency of Education should mention grammar instruction more explicitly. However, they were still positive towards the official documents, because of the fact that these focus on communication. The current paper provides an indication of how English teachers in Sweden prefer to work with explicit grammar instruction, along with suggestions for further research on the topic.

The syllabus for English 5 in Swedish upper secondary school has a strong communicative focus, and grammar is only explicitly mentioned once throughout the syllabus. This raised my interest about the role and importance of explicit grammar teaching in Swedish upper secondary schools. The aim of this thesis is to review the effectiveness of explicit and implicit grammar instruction in second language learning contexts. To guide the research, the following research questions were formulated: 1) What are the effects of explicit grammar instruction on L2 learners' grammar knowledge? 2) What are the effects of implicit grammar instruction on L2 learners' grammar knowledge? 3) How are these effects sustained in the long term? Subsequently, empirical articles on the topic were read and analysed to answer the research questions. The results showed that explicit grammar instruction was more effective than implicit grammar instruction, although in some cases relating to the complexity of structures, explicit grammar instruction was found to be more effective for complex structure. Explicit grammar instruction facilitated the learning of both explicit and implicit knowledge whereas implicit grammar instruction primarily facilitated learning of implicit knowledge. Also, explicit grammar instruction showed positive effects for receptive and productive skills, while implicit instruction primarily benefitted receptive skills. Lastly, results showed that explicit instruction needed to be accompanied by follow-up instruction or communicative tasks in order to facilitate long-term effects. In the only longitudinal study reviewed, it was concluded that exposure to naturalistic language was more important than the type of explicit grammar instruction (FonF vs. FonFs) in predicting language proficiency. Thus, it can be argued that explicit grammar instruction should have a significant role in second language classrooms, although either incidentally or intentionally accompanied by communicative or consciousness-raising tasks.

The Chinese ba-construction is a frequently used, language-specific construction that is difficult for most learners who study Chinese as a second language. The purpose of this study is to test the effectiveness of a Chinese second language pedagogical model on the ba-construction among college-level English-speaking learners of Chinese. For the ba-construction, namely “Subject + ba + ba-NP + ba-VP (Verb + Complement),” the investigator proposed an L2 instructional model that emphasizes both syntactic and semantic relationships between the ba-NP and the ba-VP. Based on this model and on cognitive theories of second language acquisition, the investigator designed a series of grammar instruction sessions that combined meaningful input, communicative tasks and form-focused instruction on four frequently used types of the ba-construction and one less frequently used type. The instruction sessions were administered weekly to the participants for a total of four weeks. Fourteen participants at two proficiency levels, namely novice and intermediate, were recruited for the study. Quantitative data were obtained from a pre-test, a post-test and a delayed post-test in the form of four measurement tasks: Grammaticality Judgement, Cloze, Translation and Contextualized Sentence Production with Keywords. Using a split-plot statistical model (with the time factor crossed and the proficiency level factor non-assignable), non-parametric alternative tests and a semi-structured interview, the investigator addressed the following three research questions: 1) Is the pedagogical model effectively strong in explaining the ba-construction and facilitating L2 learners’ comprehension and production? 2) Are the instruction sessions beneficial to L2 learners’ understanding of different form–meaning mappings of the ba-construction? 3) Do the effects of the pedagogical model and the instruction vary for L2 learners at different proficiency levels? Data analyses revealed a significant main time effect on participants’ overall performance and performance on each measurement task; the main group effect was not significant except for the Cloze task; no interaction effects were found in either the comprehension or production tasks. While participants acquired the ba-constructions in comprehension significantly better than in production, different trends in acquisition patterns were also found between their performances in these two language skills. After receiving instruction, participants performed significantly better in comprehension tasks and could maintain that level of performance in the delayed post-test; their performance on production tasks became better right after the instruction sessions, but deteriorated significantly afterwards. The participants’ improvement on ba-constructions with directional complements (Type 3) and resultative complements (Type 4), as well as the less commonly used type, was significant in general; in comprehension tasks, participants’ improvement on Type 5 was significantly higher than that for the Type 1 ba-constructions expressing relocation/displacement. Data collected from the semi-structured interviews indicated participants’ favorable evaluation and need for integrated L2 instruction that included elements of pedagogical grammar, especially on language-specific constructions. These results point to the importance of L2 grammar instruction in drawing L2 learners’ attention to form and to the association between form and meaning; instruction plays an indispensable role in communicative L2 classes and serves as a necessary reinforcement to the frequent exposure to meaningful L2 input. For Chinese ba-constructions, instruction that focuses on declarative knowledge is beneficial across proficiency levels.

No description available.