Review and Analysis of Theories Underlying Grammar Teaching Methodologies Asma Alqahtani

Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Volume 13. Number 4 December 2022 Pp.
80-91
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol13no4.6
Review and Analysis of Theories Underlying Grammar Teaching Methodologies
Asma Alqahtani
English Language Institute
University of Jeddah, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Email: Asma.aedh@gmail.com
Received:05/28/2022 Accepted:11/14/2022 Published:12/15/2022
Abstract
Grammar is significant in learning other language skills, such as speaking and writing. Theories
of teaching grammar in a foreign language are vital as they allow EFL teachers to build a frame
for language learners. Grammar instruction is a bridge that links learners with other skills and if
their grammar competence is vulnerable, the whole language production will be weak too. This
study seeks to understand and review language theories that underlie daily grammar teaching.
Many of EFL/ESL teachers teach grammar without a solid understanding of the language theories
that inform their actual teaching practices and methodologies. This paper sheds light on the
linguistics theories underlying grammar teaching methodologies in most English as foreign
language classes and textbooks. It is significant for English teachers to have a basic knowledge of
language acquisition theories as it directly influences their ability to provide appropriate content-
area instructions.
Keywords: Behaviorism theory, Cognitivism theory, English teaching methods, grammar
teaching
Cite as: Alqahtani. A. (2022). Review and Analysis of Theories Underlying Grammar
Teaching Methodologies. Arab World English Journal, 13 (4) 80-91.
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol13no4.6
80
Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Volume 13. Number 4. December 2022
Review and Analysis of Theories Underlying Grammar Teaching Methodologies Alqahtani
Introduction
Teaching grammar in a foreign language is significant as it enhances students’
performance, as well as enables teachers to construct an appropriate plan to frame students’
learning. Moreover, grammar is significant as it will enable EFL teachers to build a frame for
language learners. Grammar is essential to master any language as it allows learners to produce
well-structured written and spoken English. Grammar instruction is a bridge that links learners
with other skills, and if their grammar competence is inefficient, the whole language production
will be inadequate too. Understanding language theories that underlie daily grammar teaching is
significant for English teachers to have a basic knowledge of language acquisition theories as it
directly influences their ability to provide appropriate content-area instructions. There are no
sufficient studies that have tackled the linguistics theories underlying grammar teaching
methodologies in most English as foreign language classes and textbooks. This paper seeks to
inform ESL/EFL educators with a basic knowledge of language acquisition theories as it directly
influences their ability to provide appropriate content-area instructions.
Literature Review
Theories Underlying Grammar Teaching Methodologies
Richards and Rodgers (2014) indicate that one of the most popular and predominant
methods of teaching grammar is using structure-based methods (such as the deductive method),
which includes the grammar-translation method as well as the audiolingual method. Blyth (1996)
illustrated, “largely unchanged for decades, the presentation of grammar in foreign language
textbooks and classrooms continues to be based on an outdated combination of behaviorism,
structuralist linguistics, and versions of audiolingual” (p.51). On the other hand, the inductive
approach to teaching grammar helps learners discover the grammar rules themselves which is like
the communicative, functional, and integrative approaches to teaching grammar.
Behaviorism Theory
Behaviorism theory is a psychology theory initiated by Watson as a reaction to traditional
grammar. Many theorists who support this theory, such as, Leonard Bloomfield, Mowrer, Skinner,
and Staats. Every behaviorist theorist holds a different view of this theory. There are only two
behaviorists who explored this theory in depth: Pavlo and Watson and Skinner, as indicated by
Wijayanti (2012). This theory is a systematic psychological approach to understanding human and
animal behavior.
Human behavior is generally a result of stimulus-response actions, and states people

acquire behaviors through interaction with the environments stated by Mcleod (2008).
Behaviorism theory on educating human beings is based on the notion that behavior is controlled
through positive and negative reinforcement. Practical examples of this theory are star charts or
timeouts for elementary school-aged children. Rivers (1968) states, “The Behaviorism theory of
stimulus-response learning, particularly as developed in the operant conditioning model of
Skinner, considers all learning to be the establishment of habits as a result of reinforcement and
reward” (p.73). Behaviorism theory also “measures observable behavior that are produced by the
learner to respond to the stimuli” (Wijayanti, 2012, p.56).
Arab World English Journal 81

www.awej.org
ISSN: 2229-9327
Grammar presentations in most EFL textbooks, syllabi, and classes are still based on the
theory of Behaviorism. Behaviorism theory reflects the traditional approach or the explicit
instruction of grammar. Traditional teaching approach, or the deductive approach, is based on
ideas of learning such as Behaviorism and Cognitive Code theories as stated by Blyth (1997).
Budiman (2017) says that there are different methods of teaching grammar that draw on the
Behaviorism theory, such as the Grammar Translation method (GTM), Direct method (DM),
Situational Language Teaching (SLT), and the Audio-Lingual method.
This theory of teaching focuses mainly on the production or the output of language and
ignores the significance of input in the process of grammar acquisition. Patten (1996) emphasizes
on the mismatch between theory and practice when teachers use traditional deductive teaching
approaches “with its emphasis on output practice, a traditional approach to grammar instruction
ignore the crucial rule of input in second language acquisition” (p. 6). Behaviorism views imitation
and practice as primary processes in language development, it resembles children learning their
first language, where they imitate, and practice others sounds and words in their attempts to start
speaking. Thus, children receive positive reinforcements from adults to encourage them to
communicate and learn the language. This theory is based on the habit formation of language
teaching. It resembles the learning of traditional, or explicit, grammar language learning, as it
ignores language learning and problem-solving instead of the information and performance of
habits (cited in Demirezeen,1988). Alissa (2003) states that this theory, with it is heavy reliance
on a stimulus-response model, places learners as individual and passive.
Two of the common characteristics of Behaviorism in teaching are the teacher-centered

role, wherein students tend to be passive and standardized tests to measure students’ behavioral
response. Demirezen (1988) illustrates that there are some postulates when integrating
Behaviorism Theory in teaching a second language, where learning is based on the following:
imitation, reinforcement, and rewards. In addition, he adds that imitation is help acquire basic
vocabulary and sentences; however, different studies found that learning language through
imitation resulted in no invitations. Imitation is significant in the initial stages of learning.
Behaviorism is the process of learning a second language based on generalizations in language
learning where learners imitate, or model teachers sentences through habit formation or drill
exercises. It hinders students’ ability to innovate or produce instinctive language daily.
Behaviorism theory would lead to delays in improving speech and hindering creative learning.
However, some linguists believe that this theory is constructive in the early stages of language
learning especially for young children.
Cognitivism Theory
With the dominance of Behaviorism in the second language acquisition field for a period,
and with its shortcoming of exploring the complexity of language learning, cognitivist
psychologists called for another approach to inform human learning. Cognitivism theory seeks to
understand the process occurred in a learner’s mind. The focus of a cognitivist view is to provide
the right environment for children to develop cognitively. Practical examples of this theory such
as delivering materials and activities appropriate to a child’s developmental stage or dividing
children into groups by developmental stage. Chomsky (1955) was a cognitivist who opposed the
Behaviorism theory. He illustrated that humans are constantly produce and understand new
www.awej.org
ISSN: 2229-9327
utterances, a process that cannot be explained by behavioristic theorists. This fact about learning
influenced language teaching practices and teaching methods, such as Grammar-Translation and
Audio-lingual, are based on Behaviorism theory, and structural linguistics that continue
dominating language learning classrooms. Cognitivism theory became popular in language
learning in 1970, as illustrated by Megrel (1998). In the language learning realm, Cognitivism
theory manifested to compensate for Behaviorism which ignores the mental processes in learners’
minds when they compose an utterance.
In 1968, Chomsky indicated that children acquire language innately and naturally. Children
have a universal grammar that enables them to internalize a complex system of rules to produce
speech with meaningful sentences. The universal grammar theory analyzes how learners’ minds
process information, while behaviorism considers the external conditioning agents instead of the
mental process. Cognitivism considers all mental processes that occur in the learners’ mind such
as, “sensation, perception, attention, encoding, and memory that behaviorists were reluctant to
study because cognition occurs inside the black box of the brain” (Jordan, Carlite & Stack, 2008,
p. 36). This theory interprets acquiring a second language as a conscious and reasoned thinking
process. Sharma (2014) illustrated that a child’s knowledge defined by cognitivist conception as
something to be investigated, discovered, and individually constructed. Many linguists who
worked to develop the Cognitivism Theory, such as Charles Fillmore, George Lakoff, Ronald
Longacker, and Leonard Tamly. In 1990, the work of the linguists mentioned above formed the
leading strands of the theory, but connections with related theories, such as construction grammar
were developed by other cognitive linguists. Lee (2011) indicates, “cognitivists argue that
linguistic structure is a direct reflection of cognition in the sense that a particular linguistic
expression is associated with a particular way of conceptualizing a given situation” (p. 1). Lee
adds that Cognitivism has many implications for learning and teaching and that all knowledge
must be meaningful to the learner. The best learning strategies are those built on promoting
learners’ metacognitive strategies to enable language learners to plan, organize, and monitor their
learning. Hadley (2001) indicates that although learning a language includes applying a complex
system of rules, teachers must provide learners with means to improve their output in
communication to apply the learned rules with constructive feedback from the teacher. Teachers
should not ignore students’ previous knowledge, and they should build on it and integrate it with
the new material.
Constructivism Theory
Blyth (1997) states that the Constructivism theory has been presented and developed by
several psychologists, such as Piaget, Vygotsky, Bruner, Kant, and Gardner. Constructivism posits
that human knowledge, “does not and cannot have the purpose of producing a representation of an
independent reality, but instead has an adaptive function” (Glasersfeld, 1992, p. 3). Constructivism
theory rejects perceiving learners’ knowledge as a direct reflection of reality and that every
individual can independently construct their validity. Learners acquire language through
experience and practice related to the real world. Brooks & Brooks (1999) find that the classroom
comprises a collaborative discussion between teachers and students where they can improve their
critical thinking.

www.awej.org
ISSN: 2229-9327
The constructivist standpoint states that human beings are all different, and those
differences are opportunities for our collective growth as contributors to the totality of humanity’s
knowledge. Rummel (2008) illustrates that Piaget and Vygotsky were two psychologists who
developed the Constructivism theory. This theory indicates that children learn through interaction
and participation with others. Piaget was one of the most influential linguists who forcefully
presented this theory of understanding children’s mental learning. Piaget’s perspective of active
learning perspective occurs if teachers promote learners’ assimilation and accommodation. He
posits that children, when thinking, use various cognitive structures to make a logical interpretation
of the world. Driscoll (1994) indicated, “The structures available to children are determined by
their biological readiness and their life experiences and, he believed, in genetic epistemology” (p.
59).
Constructivism has very significant implications to the field of language teaching. John
(1990) indicates that language learning can occur in an environment where language is used to
socially communicate. Learners’ roles shift from passive to active as they individually interact and
construct their meaning and learning. Marlowe and Page (2005) illustrate that this theory,
concerning language acquisition, is built upon creating knowledge, not receiving it. In addition,
constructivism in SLA (Second Language Acquisition) is about thinking and analyzing, not
accumulating, and memorizing the language.
Sociocultural Theory
In the second language learning field, Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory in teaching a
language, views learning as a social act better achieved through collaboration with peers. Richards
& Rodgers (2001) posit that sociocultural theory is an umbrella term that covers several language
teaching techniques implemented in second language learning and teaching classrooms. In
teaching, Integrative grammar advocate students’ interaction while learning, which perceived as a
cognitive process of learning a Second Language (L2). This theory views learning “embedded
within social events and occurring as a child interacts with people, objects and events in the
environment” (Vygotsky, 1986, p.287). All students’ mental functions such processing and using
grammar in sentences can occur individually as well as in collaboration with peers Wertsch &
Rogoff (1984).
When integrating form and meaning in teaching grammar, Spada and Lightbown (1993)
argue, “that form-focused instruction and corrective feedback provided within the context of
communicative interaction can contribute positively to second language development in both the
short and long term” (p. 205). According to Sysoyev (1999), integrative grammar covers three
stages: language exploration, explanation, and expression. The first stage is where students given
different sentences to explain a specific grammar rule. Then, students were required to work in
groups with the teacher’s assistance to find the grammar pattern and explore the new grammar
rule. In the second stage, students needed to summarize what was previously discovered, but now
focusing on the form. In the last step, students were asked to practice and use the explored rules
communicatively by interacting with other peers.
Interaction and dialogue with peers or others will develop learners’ cognitive abilities.
Through social interaction with others, learners utilize language as a tool to construct meaning
Vygotsky (1978). Scaffolding is a term used by Vygotsky to indicate the amount of learning that
www.awej.org
ISSN: 2229-9327
learners can acquire with the assistance of an adult or a more competent peer to solve tasks beyond
their current levels.
Another concept of Vygotsky’s ZPD (Zone of Proximal Development) refers to the

cognitive development that occurs through the interaction between a learner and other
knowledgeable peer or teacher. He posits that learners can extend their knowledge if provided with
a space for social interaction in which they improve from those interactions, which means that
knowledge is different from learning. In addition, engaging learners in authentic, goal-oriented
activities to help them internalize academic concepts and creating “structured mediational spaces
where they can develop their teaching skills are thus among the main premises on which
sociocultural teacher education is based” Johnson & Golombek(2020).
Churcher, Downs, and Tewksbury (2014) illustrated, “While knowledge is co-constructed

in the environment (inter-psychologically) with others learning occurs within the individual (intra-
psychologically) with some internal mechanisms through collaboration” (p.35). Moreover, Jones
(2000) indicated, “the human mind is an originator of experience rather than a passive recipient of
perception and that the external physical world is known only through individual sensations” (p.3).
Humans construct their knowledge by participating in everyday mental activities. In addition,
through internalization, humans can improve their learning experiences.
The Place of Grammar in Different English Teaching Methods

The most appropriate method to ensure the success of teaching foreign languages is to
adopt a good teaching method. Demirel in Öztürk (2018) purports that the problem of teaching a
foreign language is essentially a methodological problem, and the only way to achieve the highest
level of success in teaching grammar based on the methods adopted in teaching. Grammar teaching
methods include different applications teachers use to achieve the preferred learning and teaching
objectives. Grammar constituted a critical element in foreign language teaching until the onset of
the 20th century. However, while the significance of grammar in teaching foreign languages
continues to exist, Öztürk asserts that different stakeholders, including teachers, learners, parents,
and some academicians, are divergent about how grammar should deliver in a foreign language
classroom. In the teaching methods and classroom practices, an overwhelming majority preferred
an inductive and explicit approach to grammar teaching Al-khresheh , and Orak(2021).
There are different methods have been adopted in teaching grammar. Oztürk asserts that
the commonly adopted methods of teaching language that has adopted by the Council of Europe’s
Modern Languages Department include the Grammar-Translation method, direct method, audio-
lingual method, and total physical response.
Grammar-Translation Method
As stated in Öztürk (2018), the Grammar-Translation Method (GTM) is regarded as one of
the oldest approaches to teaching grammar which was popular in the nineteenth century. This
method focuses on the goal of achieving grammatical competence. This method has several
characteristics and techniques that will be used in its implementation to help to achieve high level
of grammatical competence (Al-maamari, 2021). In this method, grammar depicts as a collection
of numerous rules needed for linguistic production. Grammar has been presented in a deductive,
www.awej.org
ISSN: 2229-9327
and explicit manner and therefore, teaching focuses on fortification via reading and rendition tasks
after learning the grammar was espoused. Grammar-translation method found on the philosophy
of teaching language rules, principles, and structure intensively, forcing learners to remember
language vocabulary with the assistance of a list of vocabulary terms, as indicated by Öztürk
(2018). It requires learners to translation studies from a language of interest into their native
language and from their native language to the language of interest. Despite the emergence of
many other methods of teaching grammar, this method applies in the teaching process without
losing its value. Nassaji and Fotos (2004) purport that, students who learn a foreign language using
the grammar-translation method cannot use it as a means of communication. Educators often prefer
the GTM because they can simply teach students a rule, give them some practice, and help students
learn how to use the learned grammar rule in their communication.
Direct Method
The direct method is the direct opposite of the grammar-translation method. Batool, Anosh
and Iqbal (2015) insist that the direct method needs to be connected directly with the language of
interest without translating it into the mother tongue. Accordingly, the direct method is prevalent
and helps learners perform a particular exercise that provides learners with an opportunity to
communicate effectively or share information in a foreign language. The underlying rationale of
this method lies in the meaning of words, language acquisition, and expressive gestures, which are
directly related to the picture of an object in learners’ mind and having a vivid memory of it as if
they could see it. Rivers in Batool et al. (2015) demonstrates that students stand a better chance of
understanding how to communicate in a language by not only listening but also via speaking.
Audio-lingual Method
Mukalel (2005) describes audio-lingual as the recommended term when referring to a method of
teaching foreign language with the aim of instilling in learners’ oral abilities to communicate
fluently. This method is based on Skinner’s behavioral theory, where students learn grammar
through repetition, practice, and “memorization” (Spada, 2007, p. 273). Audio-lingual Method
views teaching grammar in an inductive way where learners are required to induce grammatical
rules after receiving new structures from the teachers. Compared to other methods such as direct
translation, an audio-visual method provides great deal of motivational activities for learning a
foreign language. Mukalel (2005) states that the audio-lingual method can provide an appropriate
atmosphere for teaching a foreign language. However, Larsen-Freeman (2001) points out, “the
important problem regarding Audio-Lingual Method was learners’ inability to transfer the habits
they had mastered in the class to communicative use outside it” (p. 35). The audio-lingual method
depends on dialogue and drills in learning which makes it redundant in attracting teachers and
learners.
Communicative Language Teaching Approach

Brown (2007) indicated that the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach
encompassed a broad theoretical position toward language teaching. This comprehensive theory
prompted many questions regarding its suitability and usability in curricula with diverse students.
CLT can be traced back to Hymes (1972), who proposes the idea that learning a language is more
than competency in grammar or lexical items. Instead, language learners must develop
communicative competence on a daily life basis. This notion was adopted by many language
www.awej.org
ISSN: 2229-9327
educators. Hiep (2007) cites how Canale and Swain (1980) elaborate on CLT to encompass
“communicative competence comprises grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence,
discourse competence, and strategic competence” (Hiep, 2007, p.193). It is recommended for
instructors to encourage the notion that Halliday (1994, p. 54) the learning group ideal, where
learners can improve their communication skills by communicating with their peers in the
classroom and by embracing curricula that uses authentic language input materials.
The CLT approach balances theory and application because it teaches grammar
inductively, in a practical way, which helps instructors to recognize and reveal the myriad benefits
and positive effects of applying this approach to teaching the English language. As Hiep (2007)
illustrates, “When CLT theory is put into action a particular context, a range of issues open up, but
these issues do not necessarily negate the potential usefulness of CLT” (p.193).
A communicative approach increases the interest of students in language learning because

the learning process becomes more vivid; it is especially effective in teaching bilingual students
Sanchez (2015). It becomes interesting by integrating authentic materials. CLT approach
advocates and urges designing curricula and activities that focuses on collaboration between peers.
Students who learn to work and play collaboratively with classmates from different cultural
backgrounds are more competent for the world they will encounter in their present lives or the
future. When the communicative approach is applied widely, students begin using English more
fluently and faster than students with a similar initial level of language competence, when other
methods are applied. Clarke and Silberstein (1977) thus argue that classroom activities should
parallel the natural world as closely as possible. Since language is a communication tool, methods
and materials should concentrate on the message and not the medium.
Miller (2014) explains language acquisition occurs faster through the natural
communication process in real life situations. It entails the constant practice of language use during
contact in the target language, and during the application of a communicative approach. A
communicative approach establishes a direct bond between the experience and the expression to
the extent that students may overcome difficulties or even disabilities that interfere with the
learning process and may prevent a successful language acquisition Erevelles(2005).
Functional Grammar in a Communicative Approach

According to Crystal (2003), functional grammar is a term that was first introduced in
the 1970s as an alternative to the abstract, formalized view of language presented by teaching
grammar explicitly. Michael Halliday developed Functional grammar in the 1960s and introduced
it as a type of grammar that relies on a pragmatic view of language as social interaction. Halliday
(1994) defines functional grammar as “a natural grammar in the sense that everything in it can be
explained, ultimately, by reference to how language is used” (p.33). It focuses on enhancing EFL
students’ communicative abilities and providing an opportunity for them to recognize the linguistic
features of the language, which they need to learn for success at school Schleppegrell (2004). The
view of the target language in this approach is as a means for communication in particular social
contexts. The functional grammar differs from traditional grammar, it views language as a
meaning-making resource rather than as a set of rules. The functional approach presents a new

www.awej.org
ISSN: 2229-9327
division of teaching content into notions and functions abiding by the learner’s specific needs in a
foreign context.
Conclusion and Discussion

This paper reviews and explores the impact of language theories on grammar teaching. It
links grammar teaching methodologies with linguistic language theories, roots of language
learning theories and how they are adopted in teaching English grammar. Grammar presentations
in most EFL textbooks, syllabi, and classes are still based on the Behaviorism theory. Behaviorism
theory reflects the traditional approach or the explicit instruction of grammar. Traditional teaching
approach, or what is called the deductive approach, is based on theories of learning, such as
Behaviorism and Cognitive Code theories. There are different methods of teaching grammar that
draw on the Behaviorism theory such as the Grammar Translation Method (GTM), Direct Method
(DM), Situational Language Teaching (SLT), and the audio-lingual method. The most appropriate
methods for ensuring the success of teaching foreign languages coupled with the reflection of the
various methods used in the teaching process are very vital. Nowadays, there is a trend toward
adopting Constructivism theory and communicative approach in designing English textbooks.
However, there is still a misconception regarding applying this theory in the actual teaching
practice. While there are learners can acquire language solely through gaining its understanding.
In such a case, if comprehensive input really exists, students can acquire a second language without
the need to be taught grammar since learners can acquire such forms in a natural way mainly
through meaning. Some scientists believe that teaching grammar has a tangential outcome on
learning a language. However, an emphasis has been put on grammar acquisition as the key
consideration in teaching language to second language learners. Others argue that acquired
grammar serves as a means of production whereas the learned system is responsible for monitoring
and only helpful when learners have time to check the accuracy of their language output. Taking
into consideration that maintains that the development of linguistic structures cannot be achieved
in the absence of teaching grammar, some other scientists argued that language fluency was a
function of acquisition. Their beliefs hinged on the proposition that grammar teaching does not
result in the acquisition of structures since conscious learning takes place and conscious knowledge
only serves as an editor or monitor of already acquired structures.
About the Author

Dr. Asma Alqahtani is an assistant professor of TESOL at the University of Jeddah,
English Institute. She holds a masters in TESOL and doctorate degrees in TESOL /Curriculum
and Instruction from America, Murray State University. Her research interests lie in the areas of
Second Language Acquisition and grammar teaching and processing. Alqahtani has experience
teaching English as a foreign language in several contexts, including mm Al-Qura University,
Nashville/ Tennessee English Center, and Murray
State University. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8723-7945

www.awej.org
ISSN: 2229-9327
References
Al-khresheh, M., & Orak, D. S. (2021). The place of grammar instruction in the 21st century:
Exploring global perspectives of English teachers towards the role of teaching Grammar
in EFL/ESL Classrooms. World Journal of English Language, 11(1), 9-23.
https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v11n1p9.
Al-maamari, A. A. A. H. (2021) “An Overview of Grammar Translation Method’s Effect on
EFL Teaching And Learning”, IJET (Indonesian Journal of English Teaching), 10(1), pp.
26–35. doi: 10.15642/ijet2.2021.10.1.26-35.
Alissa, D., E. (2003). Behaviorism: More than a Failure to Follow in Darwin’s Footsteps.
Illinois: Jossey-Bass.American History Vol (87) (2), pp. 686.
Batool, N., Anosh, M., Batool, A., & Iqbal, N. (2015). The direct method: A good start to teach
oral language. Journal of Literature, Languages and Linguistics, 5, 53-55.
Blyth, C. (1997). A constructivist approach to grammar: Teaching teachers to teach aspect. The
Modern Language Journal, 81(1), 50-66. https://doi.org/10.2307/32916
https://doi.org/10.2307/329160
Brooks, J. G. & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist
classrooms, with a new introduction by the authors. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (8th ed.). Pearson Education.
Budiman, A. (2017). Behaviorism in Foreign Language Teaching Methodology. English Franca,
1, 101-114. https://doi.org/10.29240/ef.v1i2.171
Chomsky, N. (1959). A review of B. F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior. Language, 35, 26-58.
https://doi.org/10.2307/411334
Churcher, K. M. A., E. Downs, and D. Tewksbury. 2014. “‘Friending’ Vygotsky: A Social
Constructivist Pedagogy of Knowledge Building Through Classroom Social Media Use.”
Journal of Effective Teaching 14 (1): 33–50. http://uncw.edu/cte/et
/articles/Vol14_1/Churcher.pdf.
Demirezen, M. (1988). Behaviorist theory and language learning. Hacettepe Universitesi Eğitim
Fakultesi Dergisi, 3, 161-162. Retrieved from
http://www.efdergi.hacettepe.edu.tr/19883MEHMET%20DEM%C4%B0REZEN.pdf
Driscoll, M.P. (1994). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Churcher, K. M. A., E. Downs, and D. Tewksbury. (2014). “Friending’ Vygotsky: Asocial
Constructivist Pedagogy of Knowledge Building Through Classroom So-cial Media
Use.” Journal of Effective Teaching 14 (1): 33–
50.http://uncw.edu/cte/et/articles/Vol14_1/Churcher.pdf.
Driscoll, M.P. (1994). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Erevelles, N. (2005). Understanding curriculum as normalizing text: Disability studies meet
curriculum theory. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(4), 421-439.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027032000276970
Hadley, A. O. (2001). Teaching language in context (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Halliday, A. (1994). Appropriate methodology and social context. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge
University Press.
Hiep, P. H. (2007). Communicative language teaching: Unity within diversity. ELT Journal
61(3), 193-201. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm026

www.awej.org
ISSN: 2229-9327
Johnson, K. E. & Golombek, P. R. (2020) Informing and transforming language teacher

education pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 24(1): 116–127.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818777539
Jones, J. (2000). Teaching grammar in the modern foreign language classroom. In K. Field (ed.)
Issues in Modern Foreign Languages Teaching .London, UK: Routledge/Falmer.
Jordan, A., Carlite O., & Stack, A. (2008). Approaches to learning: A guide for teachers. New
York, NY: McGraw Hill. https://doi.org/10.3316/CAR0101067
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001). Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press.
Lee, D. (2001). Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University
Marlowe, B., & Page, M. (2005). Creating and sustaining the constructivist classroom.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
McLeod, S. A. (2008). Bruner. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/bruner.html.
Mergel, B. (1998). Instructional Design & Learning Theory. Retrieved
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242429320_Instructional_Design_Learning_Th
eory.
Miller, J.L. (2014). Curriculum theorizing in the throes of the audit culture. Curriculum and
Teaching Dialogue, 16(1-2), 13-30.
Mukalel, J. C. (2005). Approaches to English language teaching. New Delhi: Discovery
Publishing House.
Oztürk, B. K. (2018). Evaluation of the grammar teaching process by using the methods used in
Turkish language teaching as a foreign language: A case study. Universal Journal of
Educational Research, 6(2), 278-288.
Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. (2004). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge,
MA: Cambridge University Press.
Rivers, M. W. (1968). Teaching foreign language skills. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
Routledge.
Rummel, E. (2008). Constructing cognition. American Scientist, 96(1), 80-82.
https://doi.org/10.1511/2008.69.80
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410610317
Sharma, M. K. (2014). The impact on consumer buying behavior: Cognitive Dissonance. Global
Journal of Finance and Management, 6(9), 833-840.
Spada, N. (1997). Form-focused instruction and Second Language Acquisition: A review of
classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching, 30(02), 73-87.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800012799
Sysoyev, Pavel V. (1999). Integrative L2 Grammar Teaching: Exploration, Explanation and
Expression. The Internet TESL Journal. Vol. V, No. 6. Available
http://iteslj.org/Articles/Sysoyev-Integrative.html
Thompson, I. (2010). Collaborative research methodology for investigating teaching and
learning: The use of interactive whiteboard technology. Educational Review, 57(4), 457-
469. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131910500279551
VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition.
Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

www.awej.org
ISSN: 2229-9327
Von Glasersfeld, E. (1992). A constructivist approach to teaching. Paper presented at the

Alternative epistemologies Conference at the University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (Ed.). (1986). Language and thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wijayanit, D. (2012). The essay of Behaviorism of language teaching and learning. Retrieved
from https://mydreamarea.wordpress.com/author/mydreamarea/page/2/.

www.awej.org
ISSN: 2229-9327

Review and Analysis of Theories Underlying Grammar Teaching Methodologies Asma Alqahtani

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Review and Analysis of Theories Underlying Grammar Teaching Methodologies Asma Alqahtani

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Volume 13. Number 4 December 2022 Pp.

Review and Analysis of Theories Underlying Grammar Teaching Methodologies

Received:05/28/2022 Accepted:11/14/2022 Published:12/15/2022

Human behavior is generally a result of stimulus-response actions, and states people

Arab World English Journal 81

Two of the common characteristics of Behaviorism in teaching are the teacher-centered

Arab World English Journal 83

Another concept of Vygotsky’s ZPD (Zone of Proximal Development) refers to the

Churcher, Downs, and Tewksbury (2014) illustrated, “While knowledge is co-constructed

The Place of Grammar in Different English Teaching Methods

Communicative Language Teaching Approach

A communicative approach increases the interest of students in language learning because

Functional Grammar in a Communicative Approach

Arab World English Journal 87

Conclusion and Discussion

About the Author

Arab World English Journal 88

Arab World English Journal 89

Johnson, K. E. & Golombek, P. R. (2020) Informing and transforming language teacher

Arab World English Journal 90

Von Glasersfeld, E. (1992). A constructivist approach to teaching. Paper presented at the

Arab World English Journal 91

You might also like