Different Approaches to Teaching Grammar in Elementary School Learning the basics in a translatable way will help the children

retain the knowledge longer. Teaching grammar in elementary school can get boring for both you and the student. Using the same old lectures class after class about the same old comma-usages and the same old sentence structures can be draining and end up simply boring the students rather than teaching them any valuable lessons. Using alternative approaches to teaching grammar is something that every elementary school teacher should try, just to keep the interest level high in the classroom. 1. Use Stories and Excerpts Using stories and excerpts from stories can aid students in learning the dos and don'ts of grammar usage. Teachers can have the students go through a short story or block of text and mark all of the areas where grammar is not used correctly. Teachers can also present a block of text or a short story that does not have anything wrong with the grammar and have the child tell you why it is right. Error Correction in Sentences
o

Teachers can use the students' own experiences to help teach grammar. Having the child tell a story about what she did over the weekend will cause the student to speak at length. At any point, if she misspeaks or uses improper grammar, correct her. This will help the student learn from experience and be better able to understand the practical application of grammar and usage.

The Daily Double

o

Introduce two grammatical principles in a single day. This will allow students to work on two principles simultaneously. Keep it down to four principles per week though so as not to overload them with information. Present two principles and spend a day or two further explaining and teaching the intricacies of those principles. Then, introduce the next round of

grammatical goodies. This way, the students have plenty of time to learn multiple principles while you are still moving down your curriculum sheet. Listen and Learn
o

Listening to students can help with material for class. Listen to the students talk before class and copy down a short conversation that they have. Then, the teacher can write that conversation down on the board and discuss how or if it is grammatically correct or incorrect. Doing this will bring the lessons down to the students' level and keep the subject interesting. It also shows that grammar is part of everyday life.

Inductive and Deductive Instruction Two very distinct and opposing instructional approaches are inductive and deductive. Both approaches can offer certain advantages, but the biggest difference is the role of the teacher. In a deductive classroom, the teacher conducts lessons by introducing and explaining concepts to students, and then expecting students to complete tasks to practice the concepts; this approach is very teacher-centred. Conversely, inductive instruction is a much more studentcentred approach and makes use of a strategy known as noticing. Lets take a closer look at the differences between inductive and deductive instruction, and find out how noticing can be used in the language classroom to better facilitate student learning What is deductive instruction? A deductive approach to instruction is a more teacher-centered approach. This means that the teacher gives the students a new concept, explains it, and then has the students practice using the concept. For example, when teaching a new grammar concept, the teacher will introduce the concept, explain the rules related to its use, and finally the students will practice using the concept in a variety of different ways. According to Bob Adamson, The deductive method is often criticized because: a) it teaches grammar in an isolated way; b ) little attention is paid to meaning; c) practice is often mechanical. This method can, however, be a viable option in certain situations; for example, when dealing with highly motivated students, teaching a particularly difficult concept, or for preparing students to write exams. What is inductive instruction? In contrast with the deductive method, inductive instruction makes use of student noticing. Instead of explaining a given concept and following this explanation with examples, the teacher presents students with many examples showing how the concept is used. The intent is for students to notice, by way of the examples, how the concept works.

Using the grammar situation from above, the teacher would present the students with a variety of examples for a given concept without giving any preamble about how the concept is used. As students see how the concept is used, it is hoped that they will notice how the concept is to be used and determine the grammar rule. As a conclusion to the activity, the teacher can ask the students to explain the grammar rule as a final check that they understand the concept.

http://www.jezykangielski.org/inductive.html
Inductive and deductive approach to grammar Teaching grammar has been a controversial issue for centuries. Some people perceive it as essential to teaching any foreign language (for example those in favour of Grammar Translation Method), whereas others view it as an impediment to second language acquisition. Even experts on language teaching from the past and contemporary linguists like Stephen Krashen, who once saidThe effects of grammar teaching are peripheral and fragile, seem to question the very idea of including grammar lessons in second language teaching. This incessant debate over the usefulness and the form of grammar teaching (and, consequently, of grammar instruction), in which as of yet no one has been able to support their claims with an unquestionably conclusive research, has resulted in plenty of different methods and techniques of formulating grammar instruction, among which two stand out, namely inductive and deductive method. The former is based on the assumption that knowledge of grammatical rules should be acquired through exposure to samples of speech that present a particular construction. Students are to elicit the rule from the given input and subconsciously learn it by recognizing the reoccurring patterns. Proponents of deductive approach to grammar instruction, on the other hand, claim that an introduction of a new structure should be commenced with an explicit presentation of the rule that governs the structure. The presentation is followed by examples which show to students how the rule is used in context. As we can see, these two methods are completely different and simultaneous use of both is impracticable. The rift that divides them finds, obviously, reflection in the results that they produce. Firstly, lets analyze how they affect students and the teacher. Deductive approach is certainly easier to apply and leaves little room for mistakes providing that the rule is concisely and clearly stated. It makes students feel secure and provides them with a tool with which to tackle the tasks at hand. Not only is their confidence reinforced by numerous examples, but also by the fact that the scope of what is expected of them is very clearly defined. Moreover, deductive method does not require much preparation on the part of the teacher. His work boils down to producing a comprehensible and lucid definition which can be easily applied in the exercises that follow. Nonetheless, it also has some quite significant disadvantages that cannot be disregarded. The most important one is lack of studentsinvolvement and struggle for

understanding, which may result in the lesson being teacher-centered and not demanding in terms of creativity and imagination. Teachers incompetence may deteriorate the situation further; if he is unable to state the rule explicitly, back it up with relevant examples and adjust the use of metalanguage to the needs of his students, then even the simpliest grammar instruction can become ambiguous, and breed confusion and discouragement. When it comes to inductive method of presenting grammar instruction, it succeeds almost in every area where deductive method fails. Its major advantage is the fact that it encourages mental effort and forces students to rely on their intelligence and the ability to analyze and make connections between particular samples of speech. Knowledge obtained through the subconscious process of identification and incorporation of the presented grammatical rules into ones language system is characterized by greater permanence and can be put into practice without conscious and time-consuming examination of the context from the grammatical point of view. But here, too, much depends on the teacher. Choosing examples that will guide students to the desired conclusions is an awfully demanding and risky task. Not being able to delineate the path leading to a particular grammatical point with appropriate instances, the teacher puts on the line the whole lesson. Moreover, inductive method may take a lot of valuable time (in case when students are not able to come up with the rule implied in the given sentences) that could be devoted to practice and production. Hence the question arises: are we ready to risk that much? In my opinion, the question should be answered with resounding yes, but only in certain circumstances. Inductive method can be used solely by an experienced and competent teacher who knows his students well enough to be able to adjust the instruction to their needs and capacities. The superiority of inductive method over deductive one can only be utilized if one has profound insight into teaching techniques and possesses deep knowledge of students patterns of thinking and approaching new structures. It is also of paramount importance to know when and how to help learners, what can be done to aid them in coming up with a particular rule and how to do that efficiently. The question of whether to state the rule at the end of the inductive phase should be addressed by each teacher separately since, owing to individual differences between students, there are no two identical classroom situations. Providing these requirements have been fulfilled, inductive method can enrich classroom experience immeasurably. Firstly, students obtain knowledge in the most natural and effective way, through sheer exposure to input in foreign language (which, in order to make it more comprehensible, may be summed up with the rule that it presents). Secondly, students are forced to make the most of their perceptiveness, prior knowledge and mental capacity. Last but not least, they learn how to be self-dependent, which may make a world of difference in their future study of the language. But though these profits are certainly of undisputable value, we cannot abandon deductive method altogether. Research has shown that most students prefer to be given grammar rules directly, and that in some cases it is better to avoid

ambiguity and risk of misunderstanding. To my mind, restricting oneself to only one method impedes the learning process. Grammar, whether we claim that it should be acquired subconsciously or not, remains a foundation of fluency in the second language, hence the conclusion that the teacher should use all possible means of conveying its rules, not limiting himself to one particular method of instruction, however productive and infallible it may seem. All things considered, I personally believe that applying inductive method as the main, but not the only, means of presenting grammar instruction is bound to produce amazing results and help students back up their knowledge with intuition and a deeper understanding of the second language that are unattainable for those who rely solely on what clearly resembles Grammar Translation Method, which has been condemned by contemporary linguists. Although deductive method has its disadvantages, if used in appropriate context it can facilitate the learning process thanks to the fact that it is helpful whenever sheer examples and studentsinductive thinking fail. There is no ultimate method of grammar instruction and the key to success lies in the wisdom to draw from the experience of others, avoiding their mistakes and making the most of the approaches and techniques bore fruit. And inductive method can certainly be termed as such. Bibliografia:How to teach grammar, Scott Thornbury, wydawnictwo Longman

http://www.teflcertificatecourses.com/tefl-articles/tesol-inductive-deductiveapproaches.php Inductive approach and Deductive approach in TESOL By International Teacher Training Organization In teaching, there are many theoretical approaches that have been developed to promote the students' success in learning new information. In TESOL (Teaching English to Students of Other Languages), there are two main theoretical approaches for the presentation of new English grammar structures or functions to ESL/EFL students: inductive approach and deductive approach. The more traditional of the two theories, is the deductive approach, while the emerging and more modern theory, is the inductive approach. The deductive approach represents a more traditional style of teaching in that the grammatical structures or rules are dictated to the students first (Rivers and Temperley 110). Thus, the students learn the rule and apply it only after they have been introduced to the rule. For example, if the structure to be presented is present perfect, the teacher would begin the lesson by saying, "Today we are going to learn how to use the present perfect structure". Then, the rules of the present perfect structure would be outlined and the students would complete exercises, in a number of ways, to practice using the structure. (Goner, Phillips, and Walters 135) In this approach, the teacher is the center of the class and is responsible for all of the presentation and explanation of the new material. The inductive approach represents a more modern style of teaching where the new grammatical structures or rules are presented to the students in a real language context (Goner, Phillips, and Walters 135). The students learn the use of the structure through practice of the language in context, and later realize the rules from the practical examples. For example, if the structure to be presented is the comparative form, the teacher would begin the lesson by drawing a figure on the board and saying, "This is Jim. He is tall." Then, the teacher would draw another taller figure next to the first saying, "This is Bill. He is taller than Jim." The teacher would then provide many examples using students and items from the classroom,

famous people, or anything within the normal daily life of the students, to create an understanding of the use of the structure. The students repeat after the teacher, after each of the different examples, and eventually practice the structures meaningfully in groups or pairs. (Goner, Phillips, and Walters 135-136) With this approach, the teacher's role is to provide meaningful contexts to encourage demonstration of the rule, while the students evolve the rules from the examples of its use and continued practice (Rivers and Temperley 110). In both approaches, the students practice and apply the use of the grammatical structure, yet, there are advantages and disadvantages to each in the EFL/ESL classroom (Rivers and Temperley 110). The deductive approach can be effective with students of a higher level, who already know the basic structures of the language, or with students who are accustomed to a very traditional syle of learning and expect grammatical presentations (Goner, Philips, and Walters 134). The deductive approach however, is less suitable for lower level language students, for presenting grammatical structures that are complex in both form and meaning, and for classrooms that contain younger learners (Goner, Philips, and Walters 134). The advantages of the inductive approach are that students can focus on the use of the language without being held back by grammatical terminology and rules that can inhibit fluency. The inductive approach also promotes increased student participation and practice of the target language in the classroom, in meaningful contexts. The use of the inductive approach has been noted for its success in EFL/ESL classrooms world-wide, but its disadvantage is that it is sometimes difficult for students who expect a more traditional style of teaching to induce the language rules from context. Understanding the disadvantages and advantages of both approaches, may help the teacher to vary and organize the EFL/ESL lesson, in order to keep classes interesting and motivating for the students (Goner, Philips, and Walters 129). References:

Goner, Phillips, and Walters. Teaching Practice Handbook: Structures: Grammar and Function. Heinemann, 1995. 129-138.

Rivers, Wilga M., Temperley, Mary S. A Practical Guide to the Teaching of English as a Second or Foreign Language. Oxford University Press, 1978. 110.