• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Research report traditional grammar vs functional grammar and teaching of  grammar

Research report traditional grammar vs functional grammar and teaching of grammar






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



2 Embeds 4

https://twitter.com 3
http://search.tb.ask.com 1



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft Word

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Research report traditional grammar vs functional grammar and teaching of  grammar Research report traditional grammar vs functional grammar and teaching of grammar Document Transcript

    • RESEARCH REPORT Limitations of Traditional Grammar The measures to implement functional grammar in ELC in true letter and spirit Supervisor: Pr. Riaz Qadeer Supervise: Mr. Shoaib AU515170 11/9/2013 This research report is submitted in requirement of the degree of Post graduate diploma TEFL. The Department of English Language and applied linguistics Allama Iqbal Open University Islamabad
    • 1 Contents list Sr. Contents no Page no 1 Grammar (Definition and a short history) 2 2 What is traditional grammar 3 3 Traditional grammar includes 4 4 Advantages of traditional grammar 5 5 Limitations of traditional grammar (reasons for emergence of functional 6 grammar) 6 What is systematic functional grammar(SFG) 9 7 Comparative study of TG vs SFG 11 8 Uses of TG& SFG 13 9 Conclusion 14 10 References 15 Chapter no 2 11 Teaching of grammar (measures to implement SFG in English language class room) 16 12 Strategies for Learning Grammar 18 13 Developing Grammar Activities 21 14 Using Textbook Grammar Activities 23 15 Assessing Grammar Proficiency 25 16 Resources for further study 26
    • 2 TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR VERSUS FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR Grammar (Definition and a short history) Early grammar was that of Sanskrit compiled by Indian grammarian Panini 400 BC aimed at the preaching of their religious book “Vedas” and for the translation of their “Buddha religion”. Word grammar is derived from Greek word “Grammatica or “Grammatical Techne” means “The art of writing” And this Greek concept lasted till middle ages where it became “A set of rules usually in the form of a text book dictating correct usage “. Grammar is the branch of linguistics dealing with the form and structure of words (morphology), and their interrelation in sentences (syntax). The study of grammar reveals how language works; other definition of grammar says that grammar is rule and regulations of a language governing the sounds, words, sentences, and other elements, as well as their combination and interpretation. The Romans adopted the grammatical system of the Greeks and applied it to Latin. Except for Varro, of the 1st century BC, who believed that grammarians should discover structures, not dictate them, most Latin grammarians did not attempt to alter the Greek system and also sought to protect their language from decay. Whereas the model for the Greeks and Alexandrians was the language of Homer, the works of Cicero and Virgil set the Latin standard. The works of Donatus (4th century AD) and Priscian (6th century AD), the most important Latin grammarians, were widely used to teach Latin grammar during the European Middle Ages. In medieval Europe, education was conducted in Latin, and Latin grammar became the foundation of the liberal arts curriculum. Many grammars were composed for students during this time. Aelfric, the abbot of Eynsham (11th century), who wrote the first Latin grammar in Anglo-Saxon, proposed that this work serve as an introduction to English grammar as well. Thus began the tradition of devising English grammar according to a Latin model. The Modesta, grammarians of the mid-13th to
    • 3 mid-14th century who viewed language as a reflection of reality, looked to philosophy for explanations of grammatical rules. In 17th-century France a group of grammarians from PortRoyal were interested in the idea of universal grammar. The 20th-century linguist Noam Chomsky has called the Port-Royal group the first transformational grammarians Traditional grammar Traditional Grammar is the speculative work of the medieval and the prescriptive approach of the 18th Century grammarians basically it refer back to the Aristotelian orientations towards the nature of language as it is shown in the work of the ancient Greeks and Romans. There are ideas about sentence structure deriving form Aristotle and Plato ideas about the parts of speech deriving from the socio-grammarians.A traditional grammar is a framework for the description of the structure of language. Traditional grammars are commonly used in language education.
    • 4 Concepts treated in traditional grammars include S .NO NOUN S.NO NOUN 1 Subject 9 Noun 2 Predicate 10 Adjective 3 Object 11 Determiner 4 Predicative 12 Verb 5 Adverbial and adjunct 13 Adverb 6 Sentence 14 Preposition 7 Clause 15 Conjunction 8 Phrase 16 Pronoun James D. William in his book (The Teacher's Grammar Book. Routledge, 2005) says about traditional grammar: "We say that traditional grammar is prescriptive because it focuses on the distinction between what some people do with language and what they ought to do with it, according to a pre-established standard. . . . The chief goal of traditional grammar, therefore, is perpetuating a historical model of what supposedly constitutes proper language." David Crystal says in his book (The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language.Cambridge University Press, 2003): "Grammarians of the 2000s are the inheritors of the distortions and limitations imposed on English by two centuries of a Latinate perspective." In light of the above Traditional grammar is the Aristotelian orientation of Greek and Romans this was a vehicle of mastering many languages for centuries and it is full of short comings.
    • 5 Advantages of traditional grammar The primary purpose of speaking and writing is to communicate with others. Grammar is simply the commonly accepted methods of organizing and expressing words and phrases so that the intended meaning is easily and successfully communicated. As long as accepted grammar rules are followed, the communication can be successful. However, when the grammar rules are not followed fairly closely, it can become awkward for the listener to hear the intended message. It is as if they have to walk through a verbal obstacle course to reach the destination, the meaning of the communication. Misuse of grammar can also convey to the reader or listener that the communicator is not educated or not intelligent. Improper use of grammar is used by writers when they are attempting to show a lack of refinement in their characters.
    • 6 Limitations of traditional grammar(reasons for emergence of functional grammar) o Firstly, it is prescriptive in nature, attempting to lay down rules for speakers of a language. o Secondly, its grammatical categories are merely based on European languages and are found inadequate in describing other languages. o Thirdly, it lacks a theoretical framework and thus fails to account for the nature of language. o It has given a distorted view of what language is, placing priority on rules rather than on functions of communication. o Language is not a math. (Is there such a thing a 'traditional grammar'?) Though grammar can help, in the same way math‟s can help in Biology or other sciences. o The grammar of English is constantly changing (oxymoronically). Though, one could argue that there is a universal grammar, as was thought in the Baroque and Classical eras, more esp. with music. o In one respect traditional grammar is a set of rules on which the English language is based on the other hand it is a pile of an inappropriate rules and short coming because if this type of grammar was perfect and appropriate then there would be no need for so many models of modern grammar. o Traditional Grammar is basically structured on Indo-European classical languages. So, it is a poor model for the grammars of languages that differ from Greek, Latin and Sanskrit. o It does not discern between all linguistic level such as phonetic, morphology, syntactic and semantic.
    • 7 o In its essence it is normative and prescriptive rather than explicit and descriptive. As Frank Palmer says “most of the rules of grammar have no real justification and there is no serious reason condemning the errors they prescribe. What is correct and what is not correct is ultimately only a matter of what is accepted by society, for language is a matter of conventions with in society. If everyone says, “It is me” then surely “it is me” is correct English its rules are not rational, it is inconsistent and in adequate as description of actual language in use. o It rejects not only the contemporary usage but also the functional and social varieties of Language. o In its approach it is diachronic (Historical) rather than synchronic. It tries to incorporate a living language like a dead one. Fries in his book, “the structure of English” challenges traditional grammar by the calling them not insightful, pre-scientific, prescriptive and having a literary bias. o There may be about two hundred definitions of the sentence, yet they are not able to differentiate between. The girl is weeping. The weeping girl. o According to rules of the traditional grammar “noun” is the name of a person, place or thing yet it can not include pink, blue and purple in the list of nouns although there are the names of color. o It is also noticed that traditional grammar gives importance to the written form of language and it rejects the facts that spoken form is prior to the written form. On the other hand it does not cover even the whole range of the written language but it is bound to specific kinds of writing, the more formal styles, in particular it gives a general conception of the nature of language in essentially aesthetic terms.
    • 8 o Traditional Grammar uses meaning as the primary tool of linguistic analysis. Total meaning of a language utterance can not be analyzed in the present stage of our knowledge. Meaning is a complex entity to understand of which a forma description of language should form the base. Similarly it is going to treat because there is a various categories of meaning there are two major types of meaning (1) Social Meaning (2) Linguistic Meaning and Linguistic meaning is divided into tow sub-categories (1) Lexical meaning (2) Structural meaning similarly lexical meaning is divided into three subdivisions(1) notional meaning (2) referent ional meaning (3) contextual meaning.
    • 9 Functional Grammar Systemic functional grammar (SFG) is a form of grammatical description originated by Michael Halliday.[1] It is part of a social semiotic approach to language called systemic functional linguistics. In these two terms, systemic refers to the view of language as "a network of systems, or interrelated sets of options for making meaning";[2] functional refers to Halliday's view that language is as it is because of what it has evolved to do (see Metafunction). Thus, what he refers to as the multidimensional architecture of language "reflects the multidimensional nature of human experience and interpersonal relations Functional Grammar (FG) is a general theory of the organization of natural language as developed by Simon C. Dik and others. In the theory functional notions play essential and fundamental roles at different levels of grammatical organization. The theory is based on data and descriptions of many languages, and therefore has a high degree of typological adequacy. FG offers a platform for both theoretical linguists interested in representation and formalism and descriptive linguists interested in data and analysis. The Renaissance approach to grammar, which based the description of all languages on the model of Greek and Latin, died slowly, however. Not until the early 20th century did grammarians began to describe languages on their own terms. Noteworthy in this regard are the Handbook of American Indian Languages (1911), the work of the German American anthropologist Franz Boas and his colleagues; and the studies by the Danish linguist Otto Jespersen,A Modern English Grammar (pub. in four parts, 1909-31), and The Philosophy of Grammar (1924). Boas's work formed the basis of various types of American descriptive grammar study. Jespersen's work was the precursor of such current approaches to linguistic theory as transformational generative grammar.Some grammarians are more concerned, however, with determining how the meaningful arrangement of the basic word-building units (morphemes) and sentencebuilding units (constituents) can best be described. This approach is called descriptive
    • 10 grammar. Descriptive grammars contain actual speech forms recorded from native speakers of a particular language and represented by means of written symbols. Descriptive grammars indicate what languages—often those never before written down or otherwise recorded—are like structurally.Boas challenged the application of conventional methods of language study to those non-Indo-European languages with no written records, such as the ones spoken by Native North Americans (see Native American Languages). He saw grammar as a description of how human speech in a language is organized. A descriptive grammar should describe the relationships of speech elements in words and sentences. Given impetus by the fresh perspective of Boas, the approach to grammar known as descriptive linguistics became dominant in the U.S. during the first half of the 20th century.We have now discussed both type of grammar in full detail ,now let us have a look on their features then it would be then easy for us to decide what tupe of grammar is needed nowadays.
    • 11 COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TRADITIONAL AND FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR S.NO TRADITIONAL FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR GRAMMAR 1 It is old and is declined after It is developed newly mainly in the twentieth the eighteenth century. century. 2 It is pre or unscientific. It is scientific. 3 It is illogical, inconsistent It is logical, consistent and methodological. and unmethodological. 4 Subjective or intuitive. Objective and verifiable. 5 Informal Formal 6 Studies language as they Studies language as a mirror of culture, since were all alike. no cultures are alike, no two languages are alike. 7 Gives priority to written Gives priority to spoken form, the form, especially literary form contemporary, actual usage. of language. 8 Lacks precision and Is full of precision and economy. economy. 9 Is a set of prescriptive or Is an inventory of the language unit‟sphoneme, morpheme phrases, clauses normative rules and sentences? 10 Gives main meaning. emphasis to Since meaning phenomenon it is a ignores very meaning emphasize communication. 11 complex Based on Greek and Latin Based on factual study of language. rather
    • 12 models. 12 Fusion of all linguistic Separation of all linguistic levels. levels. 13 Explanatory (How and Observational and descriptive or functional. Why?) 14 Humanistic and Empirical science. philosophical study. 15 It could not express gesture It could express gesture and feelings. and feelings. 16 It could not considerate Since language is constantly in change it language change. accepts new trends. 17 It emphasizes rules. It observes native speakers. 18 It is deductive. It is inductive. 19 It has long history. It has short history. 20 It ignores speaking. It emphasizes speaking.
    • 13 USES OF TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR S.NO USE OF TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR AND REASON 1 Phraseology of second language could be easily explained. 2 It is useful for adults as they can follow rule and can produce good language. 3 It is in use in our schools as our education system is mainly based on grammar translation method (GTM). Moreover many teachers are also not trained for the same. 4 It is in use as we cannot produce native like situation in our schools. USES OF FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR S.NO USE OF FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR AND REASON 1 It„s use is helpful in classes as it produce native like speaking. 2 It emphasizes native like use of language therefore students learn language naturally. 3 It is student centered and in our country it cannot be used due to nonavailability of trained staff. 4 Language could be learnt easily therefore now it is much emphasized.
    • 14 Conclusion: Despite the fact that traditional grammar is informal, unscientific full of contradictions and inconsistencies, inexplicit, inadequate, and prescriptive uneconomical and unwholesome and it ignores spoken language, language change, contemporary usage and all the varieties of language. T is still crucial unit of English language. It is not in so much what traditional grammar actually tells us about language that is the real worrying factor as what it does not tell us. Thus there is no need for whole scale change, it surely needs to be mended rather than ended. This is what palmer has to say in his book “Grammar”. “Provided we are aware of the problem, we can use the traditional parts of speech and their terminology as the basis for word classification Inspite of focusing on functional grammar Traditional grammar being full of short comings is still in use because of our system being based on it and. To sum up I would like to quote Fries who says about Traditional grammarians thus: “Not insightful, prescientific, prescriptive and having a literary bias, they are full of inadequacies there may be about 200 definitions of a sentences yet they are not able to differentiate between “The dog is barking and The barking dog.” ”
    • 15 Teaching of grammar (measures to implement SFG in English language class room) Grammar is central to the teaching and learning of languages. It is also one of the more difficult aspects of language to teach well. Many people, including language teachers, hear the word "grammar" and think of a fixed set of word forms and rules of usage. They associate "good" grammar with the prestige forms of the language, such as those used in writing and in formal oral presentations, and "bad" or "no" grammar with the language used in everyday conversation or used by speakers of nonprestige forms. Language teachers who adopt this definition focus on grammar as a set of forms and rules. They teach grammar by explaining the forms and rules and then drilling students on them. This results in bored, disaffected students who can produce correct forms on exercises and tests, but consistently make errors when they try to use the language in context. Other language teachers, influenced by recent theoretical work on the difference between language learning and language acquisition, tend not to teach grammar at all. Believing that children acquire their first language without overt grammar instruction, they expect students to learn their second language the same way. They assume that students will absorb grammar rules as they hear, read, and use the language in communication activities. This approach does not allow students to use one of the major tools they have as learners: their active understanding of what grammar is and how it works in the language they already know. The communicative competence model balances these extremes. The model recognizes that overt grammar instruction helps students acquire the language more efficiently, but it incorporates grammar teaching and learning into the larger context of teaching students to use
    • 16 the language. Instructors using this model teach students the grammar they need to know to accomplish defined communication tasks.
    • 17 Strategies for Learning Grammar Language teachers and language learners are often frustrated by the disconnect between knowing the rules of grammar and being able to apply those rules automatically in listening, speaking, reading, and writing. This disconnect reflects a separation between declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge. Declarative knowledge is knowledge about something. Declarative knowledge enables a student to describe a rule of grammar and apply it in pattern practice drills. Procedural knowledge is knowledge of how to do something. Procedural knowledge enables a student to apply a rule of grammar in communication. For example, declarative knowledge is what you have when you read and understand the instructions for programming the DVD player. Procedural knowledge is what you demonstrate when you program the DVD player. Procedural knowledge does not translate automatically into declarative knowledge; many native speakers can use their language clearly and correctly without being able to state the rules of its grammar. Likewise, declarative knowledge does not translate automatically into procedural knowledge; students may be able to state a grammar rule, but consistently fail to apply the rule when speaking or writing. To address the declarative knowledge/procedural knowledge dichotomy, teachers and students can apply several strategies. 1. Relate knowledge needs to learning goals. Identify the relationship of declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge to student goals for learning the language. Students who plan to use the language exclusively for reading
    • 18 journal articles need to focus more on the declarative knowledge of grammar and discourse structures that will help them understand those texts. Students who plan to live in-country need to focus more on the procedural knowledge that will help them manage day to day oral and written interactions. 2. Apply higher order thinking skills. Recognize that development of declarative knowledge can accelerate development of procedural knowledge. Teaching students how the language works and giving them opportunities to compare it with other languages they know allows them to draw on critical thinking and analytical skills. These processes can support the development of the innate understanding that characterizes procedural knowledge. 3. Provide plentiful, appropriate language input. Understand that students develop both procedural and declarative knowledge on the basis of the input they receive. This input includes both finely tuned input that requires students to pay attention to the relationships among form, meaning, and use for a specific grammar rule, and roughly tuned input that allows students to encounter the grammar rule in a variety of contexts. (For more on input, see Teaching Goals and Methods.) 4. Use predicting skills. Discourse analyst Douglas Biber has demonstrated that different communication types can be characterized by the clusters of linguistic features that are common to those types. Verb tense and aspect, sentence length and structure, and larger discourse patterns all may contribute to the distinctive profile of a given communication type. For example, a history textbook and a newspaper article in English both use past tense verbs almost exclusively. However, the newspaper article will use short sentences and a discourse pattern that alternates between
    • 19 subjects or perspectives. The history textbook will use complex sentences and will follow a timeline in its discourse structure. Awareness of these features allows students to anticipate the forms and structures they will encounter in a given communication task. 5. Limit expectations for drills. Mechanical drills in which students substitute pronouns for nouns or alternate the person, number, or tense of verbs can help students memorize irregular forms and challenging structures. However, students do not develop the ability to use grammar correctly in oral and written interactions by doing mechanical drills, because these drills separate form from meaning and use. The content of the prompt and the response is set in advance; the student only has to supply the correct grammatical form, and can do that without really needing to understand or communicate anything. The main lesson that students learn from doing these drills is: Grammar is boring. Communicative drills encourage students to connect form, meaning, and use because multiple correct responses are possible. In communicative drills, students respond to a prompt using the grammar point under consideration, but providing their own content. For example, to practice questions and answers in the past tense in English, teacher and students can ask and answer questions about activities the previous evening. The drill is communicative because none of the content is set in advance: Teacher: Did you go to the library last night? Student 1: No, I didn‟t. I went to the movies. (To Student 2): Did you read chapter 3? Student 2: Yes, I read chapter 3, but I didn‟t understand it. (To Student 3): Did you understand chapter 3? Student 3: I didn‟t read chapter 3. I went to the movies with Student 1.
    • 20 Developing Grammar Activities Many courses and textbooks, especially those designed for lower proficiency levels, use a specified sequence of grammatical topics as their organizing principle. When this is the case, classroom activities need to reflect the grammar point that is being introduced or reviewed. By contrast, when a course curriculum follows a topic sequence, grammar points can be addressed as they come up. In both cases, instructors can use the Larsen-Freeman pie chart as a guide for developing activities. For curricula that introduce grammatical forms in a specified sequence, instructors need to develop activities that relate form to meaning and use. Describe the grammar point, including form, meaning, and use, and give examples (structured input) Ask students to practice the grammar point in communicative drills (structured output) Have students do a communicative task that provides opportunities to use the grammar point (communicative output) For curricula that follow a sequence of topics, instructors need to develop activities that relate the topical discourse (use) to meaning and form. Provide oral or written input (audiotape, reading selection) that addresses the topic (structured input) Review the point of grammar, using examples from the material (structured input) Ask students to practice the grammar point in communicative drills that focus on the topic (structured output)
    • 21 Have students do a communicative task on the topic (communicative output) See Teaching Goals and Methods for definitions of input and output. When instructors have the opportunity to develop part or the entire course curriculum, they can develop a series of contexts based on the real world tasks that students will need to perform using the language, and then teach grammar and vocabulary in relation to those contexts. For example, students who plan to travel will need to understand public address announcements in airports and train stations. Instructors can use audiotaped simulations to provide input; teach the grammatical forms that typically occur in such announcements; and then have students practice by asking and answering questions about what was announced.
    • 22 Using Textbook Grammar Activities Textbooks usually provide one or more of the following three types of grammar exercises. Mechanical drills: Each prompt has only one correct response, and students can complete the exercise without attending to meaning. For example: George waited for the bus this morning. He will wait for the bus tomorrow morning, too. Meaningful drills: Each prompt has only one correct response, and students must attend to meaning to complete the exercise. For example: Where are George‟s papers? They are in his notebook. (Students must understand the meaning of the question in order to answer, but only one correct answer is possible because they all know where George‟s papers are.) Communicative drills, described in Strategies for Learning Grammar To use textbook grammar exercises effectively, instructors need to recognize which type they are, devote the appropriate amount of time to them, and supplement them as needed. Recognizing Types Before the teaching term begins, inventory the textbook to see which type(s) of drills it provides. Decide which you will use in class, which you will assign as homework, and which you will skip. Assigning Time When deciding which textbook drills to use and how much time to allot to them, keep their relative value in mind.
    • 23 Mechanical drills are the least useful because they bear little resemblance to real communication. They do not require students to learn anything; they only require parroting of a pattern or rule. Meaningful drills can help students develop understanding of the workings of rules of grammar because they require students to make form-meaning correlations. Their resemblance to real communication is limited by the fact that they have only one correct answer. Communicative drills require students to be aware of the relationships among form, meaning, and use. In communicative drills, students test and develop their ability to use language to convey ideas and information. Supplementing If the textbook provides few or no meaningful and communicative drills, instructors may want to create some to substitute for mechanical drills. See Developing Grammar Activities for guidelines.
    • 24 Assessing Grammar Proficiency Authentic Assessment Just as mechanical drills do not teach students the language, mechanical test questions do not assess their ability to use it in authentic ways. In order to provide authentic assessment of students‟ grammar proficiency, an evaluation must reflect real-life uses of grammar in context. This means that the activity must have a purpose other than assessment and require students to demonstrate their level of grammar proficiency by completing some task. To develop authentic assessment activities, begin with the types of tasks that students will actually need to do using the language. Assessment can then take the form of communicative drills and communicative activities like those used in the teaching process. For example, the activity based on audiotapes of public address announcements (Developing Grammar Activities) can be converted into an assessment by having students respond orally or in writing to questions about a similar tape. In this type of assessment, the instructor uses achecklist or rubric to evaluate the student understands and/or use of grammar in context. (See Assessing Learning for more on checklists and rubrics.) Mechanical Tests Mechanical tests do serve one purpose: They motivate students to memorize. They can therefore serve as prompts to encourage memorization of irregular forms and vocabulary items. Because they test only memory capacity, not language ability, they are best used as quizzes and given relatively little weight in evaluating student performance and progress.
    • 25 Resources for further study James D. Williams, The Teacher's Grammar Book. Routledge, 2005. David Crystal, The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. CambridgeUniversity Press, 2003. George Hillocks, Research on Written Composition: New Directions for Teaching. National Council of Teachers, 1986. Brian Brooks, James Pinson, and Jean Gaddy Wilson, Working with Words.Macmillan, 2005. .Frank Palmer (Grammar) John Lyons (introduction to the theoretical linguistics). Fries ( the Structure of English) Grammar Code 5657 AIOU Islamabad. Beretta, A. (1991). Theory construction in SLA: Complementarity and opposition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13 (4), 493-511. Brown, D. (1994). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Regents. Chamot, A.U. (1995). The teacher's voice: Action research in your classroom. ERIC/CLL News Bulletin, 18 (2). Doff, A. (1988). Teach English: A training course for teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Harmer, J. (1991). The practice of English language teaching. London: Longman.
    • 26 Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press. Kramsch, C. (1995). Embracing conflict versus achieving consensus in foreign language education. ADFL Bulletin, 26(3), 6-12. Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1992). How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Richards, J., & Lockhart, C. (1994). Reflective teaching in second language classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press. Rivers, W. (1988). Teaching French: A practical guide. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books. Seldin, P. (1991). The teaching portfolio: A practical guide to improved performance and promotion/tenure decisions. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing. Wallace, M. J. (1991). Training foreign language teachers: A reflective approach. New York: Cambridge University Press. Bialystok, E. (1990). Communication strategies: A psychological analysis of second language use. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Chamot, A. U. (1993). Student responses to learning strategy instruction in the foreign language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 26(3), 308-321. Chamot, A. U., & Küpper, L. (1989). Learning strategies in foreign language instruction. Foreign Language Annals, 22(1), 13-24.
    • 27 Derry, S. J. (1990). Learning strategies for acquiring useful knowledge. In B. F. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 347-379). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Gagné, E. D., Yekovich, C. W., & Yekovich, F. R. (1993). The cognitive psychology of school learning (2nd ed.). New York: Harper Collins. Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold. Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second-language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (1994). Second language acquisition: An introductory course. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. H. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. London: Longman. O'Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press. O'Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., & Küpper, L. (1989). Listening comprehension strategies in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 10(4), 418-437. Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.