Re-thinking grammar: the impact of embedded grammar teaching on students’ writing and students’ metalinguistic understanding

This paper reports on a national study, involving a mixed-method research design comprising a randomised controlled trial (RCT), text analysis, student and teacher interviews and lesson observations. It set out to investigate whether contextualised teaching of grammar, linked to the teaching of writing, would improve student outcomes in writing and in metalinguistic understanding. The RCT involved 744 students in 31 schools in the south-west and the Midlands of England, and was a blind randomisation study. Classes were randomly allocated to either a comparison or intervention group, after the sample had been matched for teacher linguistic subject knowledge (LSK). The statistical data were complemented by three interviews per teacher and three interviews with a focus student in each class, plus three lesson observations in each class, giving a data-set of 93 teacher interviews, 93 student interviews and 93 lesson observations. In addition, the final pieces of writing produced for each scheme of work were collected. The statistical results indicate a significant positive effect for the intervention, but they also indicate that this benefit was experienced more strongly by the more able writers in the sample. The regression modelling also indicates that teacher LSK was a significant mediating factor in the success of the intervention. The qualitative data provide further evidence of the impact of teacher knowledge on how the intervention was implemented and on students’ metalinguistic learning. It also reveals that teachers found the explicitness, the use of discussion and the emphasis on playful experimentation to be the most salient features of the intervention. The study is significant in providing robust evidence for the first time of a positive benefit derived from the teaching of grammar, and signals the potential of a pedagogy for a writing which includes a theorised role for grammar.

[1]  I. Diamond,et al.  On the feasibility of conducting randomised trials in education: case study of a sex education intervention , 2003 .

[2]  Douglas J. Hacker,et al.  Environmental, cognitive, and metacognitive influences on text revision: Assessing the evidence , 1996 .

[3]  Geoff N Masters,et al.  Literacy Standards in Australia , 1997 .

[4]  Richard Hudson,et al.  Why education needs linguistics (and vice versa) , 2004, Journal of Linguistics.

[5]  Debra Myhill,et al.  Towards a Linguistic Model of Sentence Development in Writing , 2008 .

[6]  Nora Robinson.  The Relation Between Knowledge of English Grammar and Ability in English Composition , 1960 .

[7]  W. B. Elley,et al.  The Role of grammar in a secondary school curriculum (Educational research series ; no. 60) , 1979 .

[8]  David Corson,et al.  Knowledge about language , 1997 .

[9]  L. Ehri,et al.  Teaching Elementary Students Who Speak Black English Vernacular to Write in Standard English: Effects of Dialect Transformation Practice. , 2000, Contemporary educational psychology.

[10]  Rebecca Wilder,et al.  Learning to write. , 2010, Journal of dental hygiene : JDH.

[11]  Dominic Wyse.  Grammar for Writing? A Critical Review of Empirical Evidence , 2001 .

[12]  C. Torgerson,et al.  The effect of grammar teaching on writing development , 2006 .

[13]  S. Raudenbush.  Educational Applications of Hierarchical Linear Models: A Review , 1988 .

[14]  Richard Braddock,et al.  Research in Written Composition , 2012 .

[15]  Graham Low,et al.  The effect of grammar teaching (syntax) in English on 5 to 16 year olds’ accuracy and quality in written composition , 2004 .

[16]  Peter Elbow,et al.  Writing with power : techniques for mastering the writing process , 1981 .

[17]  J. P. M'Caskey.  Grammar , 1899, The ACS Guide to Scholarly Communication.

[18]  W. Shadish,et al.  Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference , 2001 .

[19]  Allan Donner,et al.  Design and Analysis of Cluster Randomization Trials in Health Research , 2001 .

[20]  Tom A. B. Snijders.  Power and Sample Size in Multilevel Linear Models , 2005 .

[21]  Terry Locke.  Editorial: “Grammar wars” – Beyond a truce , 2005 .

[22]  Debra Myhill.  Principled Understanding? Teaching the Active and Passive Voice , 2003 .

[23]  R. Andrews.  Knowledge about the teaching of [sentence] grammar: The state of play , 2005 .

[24]  V. Berninger.  The Ordeal of Deliberate Choice: Metalinguistic Development in Secondary Writers , 2012 .

[25]  Debra Myhill,et al.  Becoming a Designer: Trajectories of Linguistic Development , 2009 .

[26]  Grammar in New Zealand Schools: Two Case Studies. , 2005 .

[27]  L. Poundie Burstein.  The Analysis of Multilevel Data in Educational Research and Evaluation , 1980 .

[28]  Arthur N. Applebee.  Alternative models of writing development. , 2000 .

[29]  Debra Myhill.  Applied Linguistics and Primary School Teaching: Grammar for designers: how grammar supports the development of writing , 2011 .

[30]  Denis Alamargot,et al.  Through the Models of Writing , 2001 .

[31]  Richard Braddock,et al.  The state of knowledge about composition : a reprint of chapter III from Research in written composition , 1963 .

[32]  L. Poundie Burstein.  Chapter 4: The Analysis of Multilevel Data in Educational Research and Evaluation , 1980 .

[33]  C. S. Englert,et al.  Socially Mediated Instruction: Improving Students' Knowledge and Talk about Writing , 1992, The Elementary School Journal.

[34]  J. Flavell.  Metacognitive aspects of problem solving , 1976 .

[35]  D. Myhill.  Ways of Knowing: Grammar as a Tool for Developing Writing , 2010 .

[36]  Debra Myhill,et al.  More Than Just Error Correction , 2007 .

[37]  R. Oostdam,et al.  Effects of Fluency Training on the Application of Linguistic Operations in Writing , 2005 .

[38]  Laura R. Micciche.  Making a Case for Rhetorical Grammar , 2004, College Composition & Communication.

[39]  Donald R. Bateman,et al.  The effect of a study of transformational grammar on the writing of ninth and tenth graders , 1966 .

[40]  Theo van Leeuwen,et al.  Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design , 1996 .

[41]  David Tomlinson.  Errors in the Research into the Effectiveness of Grammar Teaching , 1994 .

[42]  David L. Wallace,et al.  Redefining Revision for Freshmen , 1991, Reading Empirical Research Studies: The Rhetoric of Research.

[43]  J. Gombert,et al.  Implicit and Explicit Learning to Read : Implication as for Subtypes of Dyslexia , 2003 .

[44]  Leo Van Lier,et al.  The Relationship Between Consciousness, Interaction and Language Learning , 1998 .

[45]  David M. Murray,et al.  Design and Analysis of Group- Randomized Trials , 1998 .

[46]  B. Cope,et al.  Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures , 2001 .

[47]  Roel Bosker,et al.  Standard Errors and Sample Sizes for Two-Level Research , 1993 .

[48]  C. Hancock,et al.  The Story of English Grammar in United States Schools. , 2005 .

[49]  D. Myhill,et al.  Making meaning with grammar: A repertoire of possibilities , 2012 .

[50]  P. Lachenbruch.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[51]  关兆冲.  Teaching English Grammar , 1978 .

[52]  Anne Lobeck,et al.  Language in the Schools: Integrating Linguistics into K12 Teaching , 2005 .

[53]  Terry Locke,et al.  Beyond the grammar wars : a resource for teachers and students on developing language knowledge in the English/literacy classroom , 2010 .

[54]  Mike Sharples,et al.  How We Write - Writing as Creative Design , 1998 .

[55]  R. T. Kellogg.  The Psychology of Writing , 1994 .