1

Introduction

For the purpose of this assignment, English File (EF) and Innovations have been selected at B2 level. This decision was made because their approaches to presenting and practicing grammar seem fairly opposed.

The difference in approaches is apparent in the grammar notes in the teacher’s books. EF’s teacher’s book claims that B2-level students need to revise previously learned grammar, but also start to acquire more sophisticated structures. It adds that students need to encounter opportunities to hone their ‘instinct.’

Innovations, conversely, claims that its starting point is not the grammatical structures themselves, but the conversations in which students would like to take part. The language focussed on, therefore, is presented as a means for having those conversations successfully. As such, the book states that it presents a model of spoken grammar, along with more conventional structures. The authors believe that the book provides a ‘broader concept’ of grammar than others.

What methodologies are employed?

EF appears to be based on communicative methodology, as many of the lessons conform to a standard ‘PPP’ model. Grammar is presented in a listening or reading context, then practiced in a controlled manner (almost exclusively gap-fill tasks in the ‘grammar bank’) and then produced in a communicative activity. The ‘communicative’ section contains a myriad of language games, role-plays, and discussions, designed to be used as this final production task. These activities aim to promote learner involvement, and many seem to place the emphasis firmly on meaningful communication rather than grammatical accuracy. Indeed, the teacher’s book suggests having students face one another during the activities so as to encourage ‘real’ speaking.

However, while many activities in this section are indeed freer and do not insist upon the production of completely accurate language (figure 1), others still require the manipulation of target forms, and therefore might not be truly ‘communicative’ (figure 2).

2

While EF is clearly communicative, it also contains vestiges of older methodologies. For instance, the focus on accuracy and prevalence of metalanguage in the grammar bank are typically associated with grammar translation, while the frequent use of substitution tables is reminiscent of audio-lingualism.

Innovations also follows a PPP approach, in that language first appears in a reading or listening context, is then practiced in a controlled manner, and then produced more freely, typically in the form of a personalisation exercise. Innovations, therefore, also seems to subscribe to a communicative methodology.

However, while most of the structures in the book are presented, practiced, and produced (all 3 ‘P’s’), not every structure comes with an opportunity for the final ‘P’ . In such cases, a personalisation or freer task is absent. Also, as in EF, some of the final production tasks require the manipulation of target forms, and are therefore not entirely communicative (figure 3).

3

What grammar is included?

In total, EF contains 30 grammatical ‘topics’, while Innovations contains 32. 15 grammatical areas are covered in both books, while 15 are covered only in EF, and 13 are covered only in Innovations.

Covered in both books Covered only in EF Covered only in Innovations

Auxiliaries

Present perfect

Present perfect continuous

Past simple

Past continuous

Past perfect

Past Perfect continuous

Future continuous

2nd conditional

Structures with ‘wish’

Gerunds + Infinitives

Modals

‘Sense’ verbs

Passives

Clauses of contrast and purpose

Question formation

Indirect questions

Adjectives as nouns

Adjective order

Position of adverbs

Adverbial phrases

Future Perfect

Zero conditional

First conditional

Third conditional

Used to/be used to/get used to

Reporting verbs

Uncountable + plural nouns

Quantifiers

Articles

Present Simple

Present continuous

Comparatives

‘Would’

Future forms (will, going to, present simple, present continuous)

‘Not until’

Present participles

‘Or something/Or anything’

Relative clauses

Conjunctions

Mixed conditionals

Was/were going to

Cleft sentences

Is grammar teaching covert/overt? Is it inductive/deductive?

In EF, grammar is taught overtly, as exercises are clearly labelled as such. Students are directed to the grammar bank, where several rules are presented, along with controlled practice activities. This is a deductive approach. To a lesser extent, however, EF also employs a ‘guided discovery’ approach, where students are asked specific questions to guide them to the meaning (figure 4). Although guided-discovery is more inductive in nature, because students are steered to the meaning through carefully constructed and intentionally sequenced questions, it is perhaps only ‘half-way’ inductive (Thornbury, 2011).

4

Innovations also labels grammar activities overtly. One common method of grammar teaching in innovations is through matching tasks, where students match halves of sentences containing target structures (figure 5). Although no specific rules are provided, students are still asked to personalise the new language. This may be considered an inductive approach to some extent. On other occasions, grammar is presented not with rules per se, but a brief explanation of the function of the structure – i.e. what it is used to do (figure 6). It appears that the authors do not wish to ‘break stride’ within the lesson itself by burdening the students with rules, although there remains the option of going to the grammar commentary section for a more thorough explanation (a more deductive approach). Innovations, therefore, allows the teacher some flexibility in deciding whether to veer more towards induction or deduction.

Meaning focussed vs Focus on forms vs Focus on form

5

EF adheres to a ‘focus on forms’ approach, as pre-selected discreet grammar items are taught. The teaching is also conscious and explicit, as the students’ attention is overtly directed to language forms. Indeed, the authors’ claim that students need to ‘learn more structures’ confirms this.

In Innovations, there also appears to be a focus on forms, though not quite as explicitly as in EF. While the authors have ensured that many standard structures are covered (focus on forms), much of the grammar does seem to flow organically from dialogues in a way that appears almost incidental (focus on form).

The interface debate

EF, due to its focus on forms, holds a strong interface position. It appears that the rule-driven grammar bank is an attempt to strengthen students’ declarative knowledge, while the communicative tasks may be an opportunity for them to activate, or ‘automatise’ this knowledge. Perhaps this is what the authors intended when stating that students must develop their ‘instincts’.

Innovations also holds a strong interface position. Perhaps the key difference is that, while EF places considerable emphasis on knowledge of rules (declarative knowledge), Innovations attempts to give students an insight into the communicative function the grammar serves, and the real-life situations in which it can be employed (procedural knowledge).

Grammar and lexis

EF contains a ‘vocabulary bank’, in which items of lexis related to the theme of each lesson are taught (often single-word items). Because this section is distinct from the grammar bank, little attention is drawn to how grammar and lexis interact.

Innovations, conversely, gives considerable importance to lexis - particularly chunks. Indeed, the grammar commentary section frequently provides lists of ‘ready-to-use’ chunks containing target structures (figure 7). Therefore, Innovations can be described as employing a lexico-grammatical approach.

Spoken grammar

As mentioned, Innovations claims to present features of spoken grammar. The inclusion of ‘or something/anything’ for vagueness is one example, though no other features (e.g. co-construction, ellipsis, headers) are presented overtly. One possible reason for this is that the book’s content may be described as intuition-based, rather than corpus-based (Timmis, 2012, as cited by McDonough,

6

Shaw, and Masahura, 2013). However, many of the dialogues in the listening section do include examples of spoken grammar (particularly vague language and ellipsis), which the teacher may draw the students’ attention to. Additionally, the grammar commentary section includes information on how more traditional grammar tends to be used in natural conversation (figure 8).

EF does not explicitly teach any features of spoken grammar. However, as with Innovations, some of the listening dialogues contain examples of ellipsis, vague language, and fillers, which the teacher may choose to focus on.

Controlled written practice activities

Another feature of the books that warrants focus is the nature of the controlled written practice activities. In both EF and Innovations, the main exercise type through which controlled practice is provided is gap-fill tasks.

One notable difference between both books’ gap fill tasks, however, is the sentences within the tasks themselves. In EF, sentences in the exercise are self-contained, in that they do not appear to be in any way related to the other sentences in the exercise. (figure 9)

While Innovations also contains some instances of this, many of the gap fill exercises do seem to be thematically linked (figure 10), further strengthening the theme of the unit (which, in the case of the example, is ‘big decisions’), and thus, possibly, providing useful information on the types of discourse in which the target structure is often used (e.g. talking about decisions).

7

Overall impressions and conclusion

Since both books attempt to improve students’ communicative ability, it is useful to assess them in terms of how likely they are to achieve this through their teaching of grammar. While EF seems to value declarative knowledge of structures, Innovations goes a step further by regularly providing insight into what type of real-life conversations certain structures are likely to occur in. In this regard, Innovations seems more effective.

Innovations also gives more attention to lexis, and its recommendation that students learn ready-made and fully grammaticalized chunks is a useful advantage.

Another strength of Innovations is that it allows the teacher greater flexibility in terms of how deeply they wish to explore grammar. Should the teacher not wish to go into abundant detail, the main lesson will suffice. However, greater detail is available in the grammar commentary section if required. EF does not allow the same flexibility, as grammar is always dealt with in the fairly dense and terminology-rich grammar bank.

The strength of EF is the wealth of communicative material, which is a useful opportunity for students to put their grammatical knowledge to use. While Innovations also contains communicative tasks, EF certainly contains more.

Given the above, Innovations’ approach to presenting and practicing grammar appears more flexible and effective in the opinion of the author.

References

McDonough, J., Shaw, C., & Masuhara, H. (2013). Materials and methods in ELT. A teacher’s guide. Third Edition. Wiley-Blackwell.

Thornbury, S. (2011). An A-Z of ELT. Retrieved 7/1/19 from https://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/2011/06/05/g-is-for-guided-discovery/

Bibliography

Dellar, H. and Hocking, D. (2003). Innovations upper -intermediate coursebook second edition. Thomson-Heinle.

Dellar, H., Hocking, D., and Walkley, A. (2003). Innovations upper -intermediate teacher’s book second edition. Thomson-Heinle.

Latham-Koenig, C. and Oxenden, C. (2012). English file upper-intermediate student’s book third edition. Oxford University Press.

Latham-Koenig, C. and Oxenden, C. (2012). English file upper-intermediate teacher’s book third edition. Oxford University Press.