learning log outside my classroom 15 th October, 2014

The effect of grammar teaching (syntax) in English on 5-16 year old ’s accuracy and quality in written composition

             I learned about research of The effect of grammar teaching (syntax) in English on 5-16 year old ’s accuracy and quality in written composition A systematic review is needed in order to ask the question: What is the effect of grammar teaching (syntax) in English on 5-16 year old ’ s accuracy and quality in written composition? therefore required to provide an authoritative account of the results of research into the question. In 1986, Hillocks analyzed the experimental research between 1960-1982 and concluded that grammar instruction led to a statistically significant decline in student writing ability.

 Objectives

Ø To map the field of research on the effects of text-and sentence grammar-level grammar  teaching on writing in English-speaking countries for pupils aged between 5 and 16.

Ø To undertake two distinct but complementary in-depth reviews in the field of sentence-level grammar.

Methods used in the review

a)    The soundness of studies (internal methodological coherence), based upon the study only.

b)   The appropriateness of the research design and analysis used for answering the review question.

c)    The relevance of the study topic focus (from the sample, measures, scenario, or other indicator of the focus of the study) to the review question  

Identifying and describing studies: results

Of these 16, 12 provided a conclusion about the effect of syntax teaching on the accuracy and quality of pupils’ writing. None of these 12 reviews of the teaching of syntax concluded that teaching traditional or transformative/generative had appositive effect on the quality and accuracy of 5 to 16 year-olds’ written compositions. The results of these reviews provide the context for our discussion of the results our review.

In-depth review: results

Elley et al. conclude that syntax teaching, whether traditional or transformational, has virtually no influence on the language growth of typical secondary school students.
In terms of practice, the main implication of our finding is that there is no high quality evidence that the teaching of grammar, whether traditional or generative/transformation, is worth the time

 In conclusion, if the aim is the improvement of the quality and accuracy of written composition. This is not to say that the teaching of such grammar might not be of value in itself, or that it lead to enhanced knowledge and awareness of how language works, and of systems of language use. But clear implication, based on the available high quality evidence, is that the evidence base to justify the teaching of grammar in English to 5to 16 year olds in order to improve writing is very small.