An Investigation into the Teaching of English Grammar at a University in Kurdistan

By: Soma Nawzad Abubakr ID NO.: U1150635010

A dissertation submitted to the University of Huddersfield in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in TESOL

Supervised by: Sonia Munro Word Count: 12,724

THE UNIVERSITY OF HUDDERSFIELD (August 2012)

Abstract The dramatic change that has happened with regard to teaching grammar and the use of appropriate materials for teaching grammar demands a wide range of research to be undertaken. Teaching grammar can entail the use of different approaches and materials. The main purpose of this study is to investigate Kurdish teachers’ attitudes on grammar materials that they use in their current teaching and the way they use these materials. Moreover, exploring Kurdish teachers’ approaches to teaching English grammar is another aim of this research, along with the factors which influence them to use these materials and their preferred pedagogic approach. A qualitative methodology was used to undertake this study, using both questionnaires and interviews for data collection. The six participants were sent questionnaires and later they were all interviewed using semi-structured interviews in order to check the data that they provided in the questionnaire. The participants were asked questions relating to their choice of teaching approaches and their views on the materials that they use for teaching grammar. It was found from the results that most of the participants are free to choose materials for teaching English grammar but they rely heavily on English Grammar in Use (Murphy, 1994). The majority of the participants justified their choice of using this book as the norm in the department and as the only available one that the department could provide the students with, while the minority state that the book was very practical for them when they were students. The results also show that almost all the participants follow the pure deductive approach when teaching English grammar, justifying their choice by stating that Kurdish students’ expectations, class size and the duration of the lessons are key factors for using the ‘pure’ deductive approach. The participants felt that they lacked trainings to help them use other methods and they were concerned about teaching large classes.

i

Acknowledgments I would like to express my acknowledgment and heartfelt gratitude to my supervisor Sonia Munro for her valuable comments and guidance throughout the completion of the research. I wish to show my greatest appreciation to the academic tutor Jane Mullen for her tremendous guidance and help. I would like to thank my government, Kurdistan Regional Government/ Iraq, for supporting me financially throughout the duration of my study in the UK. The last but not least, my special gratitude and appreciation go to my lovely husband Sarwat for his encouragement and continual support.

ii

Table of Contents ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................................... I ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................................... II INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1 RATIONALE ................................................................................................................................. 1 CONTEXT .................................................................................................................................... 2 AIMS............................................................................................................................................ 3 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................... 4

LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................................... 6 2.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST TEACHING ENGLISH GRAMMAR ............................................. 6 2.2.1 Arguments for Teaching Grammar ........................................................................... 7 2.2.2 Arguments against Teaching Grammar .................................................................. 8 2.3 APPROACHES TO TEACHING ENGLISH GRAMMAR .................................................................... 8 2.3.1 Deductive Approach ..................................................................................................... 9 2.3.2 Inductive Approaches .................................................................................................. 9 2.4 HOW DO LEARNERS LEARN A LANGUAGE? ........................................................................... 10 2.5 THE LEARNING M ATERIALS ..................................................................................................... 14 2.6 WHAT SHOULD GRAMMAR MATERIALS INCLUDE? ................................................................. 15 2.7 TEACHER COGNITION ............................................................................................................... 18 METHODOLOGY ..............................................................................................................................20 3.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 20 3.2 RESEARCH AIMS ...................................................................................................................... 20 3.3 RESEARCH METHODS .............................................................................................................. 21 3.4 RESEARCH APPROACH ............................................................................................................ 24 3.5 DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENT............................................................................................. 25 3.5.1 Questionnaire ............................................................................................................... 25 3.5.2 Interview ........................................................................................................................ 27 3.6 RESEARCH SCHEDULE ............................................................................................................. 29 3.7 PILOT STUDY ............................................................................................................................ 29 3.8 SAMPLE .................................................................................................................................... 30 3.9 ETHICAL ISSUES ....................................................................................................................... 30 3.10 VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY ...................................................................................................... 31 3.11 CONDUCT OF THE RESEARCH .................................................................................................. 34 3.12 RESEARCH ANALYSIS METHODS ............................................................................................. 34 ANALYSIS OF THE FINDINGS .......................................................................................................36 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 36 WHAT GRAMMAR MATERIALS ARE BEING USED BY KURDISH TEACHERS TO TEACH ENGLISH GRAMMAR? ............................................................................................................................................ 37 4.3 WHAT FACTORS INFLUENCE THE TEACHERS’ CHOICE AND USE OF THE MATERIALS? ........... 37 4.4 HOW DO KURDISH TEACHERS USE THOSE ENGLISH GRAMMAR MATERIALS? ....................... 41 4.5 WHAT APPROACHES DO KURDISH TEACHERS USE FOR TEACHING GRAMMAR? AND WHAT FACTORS INFLUENCE THEIR CHOICE? ................................................................................................... 42 4.5.1 Kurdish teachers’ perception on teaching grammar ......................................... 42 4.5.2 Kurdish teachers’ approaches of teaching grammar ........................................ 43 4.5.3 Kurdish teachers’ reason for choosing deductive approach .......................... 45 4.1 4.2

iii

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...............................................................................48 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7

INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 48 AIMS.......................................................................................................................................... 48 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................ 49 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENTS ............................................................................................. 50 PERSONAL DEVELOPMENTS .................................................................................................... 50 DISSEMINATIONS ...................................................................................................................... 50 EVALUATION AND SUGGESTION FOR FURTHER RESEARCH ................................................... 51

REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................52 APPENDIX A .....................................................................................................................................57 APPENDIX B .....................................................................................................................................59 APPENDIX C .....................................................................................................................................61 APPENDIX D .....................................................................................................................................62 APPENDIX E ......................................................................................................................................63 APPENDIX F ......................................................................................................................................64

iv

Chapter One Introduction 1.1 Introduction This chapter outlines a detailed rationale for this research along with providing the background and context of this study. The chapter also presents the aims and the research questions of this study. 1.2 Rationale It is worth mentioning that the reason behind choosing the topic of this research is based on personal experiences that I experienced. When I was a university student our grammar class was not that motivating due to the fact that the grammar teacher applied a pure deductive approach. The teacher came into the class, wrote down the rules and started explaining the rules without giving the students a chance to do communicative tasks. Furthermore, the teacher used a material which, I felt as a student, not a very practical and engaging. Through undertaking this research I want to investigate whether the teachers are still using the same approach and materials for teaching English grammar and if so what are their factors behind their choice. Moreover, this research will provide me with the clue on the hindrances that prevent Kurdish teachers from applying more engaging approaches and materials which probably help me to overcome the obstacles when I hopefully start teaching English grammar. Teaching grammar is the most debated area in the field of language learning research (Borg and Burns, 2008). Moreover, grammar materials are also researched and investigated, as grammar materials must have characteristics that help the students to understand the meaning and the forms of a particular grammar point. 1

For many grammarians and material writers, grammar materials must account for the learners’ needs, age and interest (Stranks, 2003 and Harmer, 2007). Moreover, grammar materials should provide a chance for the learners to practise that language by undertaking different tasks and activities (Hedge, 2000). For these fundamental points, this research is going to investigate the Kurdish teachers’ views on these materials in order to gain an insight into whether the materials have the crucial characteristics of influential grammar materials. Apart from dealing with the grammar materials, approaches of teaching grammar are another controversial subject. There are different approaches for teaching grammar such as inductive and deductive approaches (the literature review chapter provides the reader with the detailed discussion concerning these two approaches). This study plans to explore the approaches that are being used by the Kurdish teachers to teach English grammar and their reasons for following these approaches in order to find out the extent to which Kurdish teachers are following the favoured methods of teaching that are currently used in western countries. 1.3 Context The participants in this study are six Kurdish teachers who are teaching in the department of English at one of the universities in Kurdistan. These participants have been chosen based on their experience in teaching English grammar. Four of the teachers have master degrees in English language and literature whereas two of them have Bachelor of Arts in the same field. Furthermore, all the participants have experiences in teaching English grammar to the Kurdish students at university level. It is worth mentioning that the participants with 2

master degrees studied English language and literature for four academic years and master level in English language for further two years, while the other two participants studied English language and literature only for four academic years. English grammar is one of the subjects taught to students in the first and second year in the department of English at the research university in Kurdistan. Moreover, students are given grammar material by the department and teachers based on their teaching on these materials apart from the ones that they could find appropriate for teaching English grammar. Furthermore, Kurdish teachers who teach English grammar are likely to have different views on the materials that they use and different influences and factors regarding their use of certain materials. Moreover, they may have a particular approach that suits their class size and experience. This research investigates the Kurdish teachers’ views on the materials that they use for teaching English grammar, along with exploring their approaches to teaching grammar and their influential factors for their use of these materials and approaches. 1.4 Aims Teaching grammar has been the subject of many research investigations due to the arguments for and against it. Moreover, approaches to grammar teaching, amongst those grammarians who support grammar teaching, is another controversial subject. This is in addition to the use of effective materials for teaching grammar. All these arguments and controversial ideas are for providing the learners with the influential means for enhancing learning. The first step to discover whether the learning process is taking place in any education field is to investigate the teaching process in that area. For this 3

reason the aim of this research is to investigate which approaches and materials are being used by Kurdish teachers when teaching English grammar. Furthermore, the research aims at exploring Kurdish teachers’ influential factors for choosing their materials and approaches. These aims have been set to know whether Kurdish teachers are applying effective approaches for teaching English grammar and using the effective materials that enhance learning or not. These research aims are summarised in the following research questions: 

What grammar materials are being used by Kurdish teachers to teach English grammar?



What factors influence the teachers’ choice and use of the materials?



How do Kurdish teachers use those English grammar materials?



What approaches do Kurdish teachers use for teaching grammar? And what factors influence their choice?

1.5 Summary This research is divided into five chapters. The first chapter introduces the context, rationale and the aim of this research. The second chapter presents the range of readings related to the subject of the research which includes; arguments for and against teaching grammar, approaches to teaching grammar, how learners learn languages, the learning materials, the characteristic of grammar materials and teacher cognition. The third chapter is on the methodology that was used for collecting data with mentioning different tools for the data collection. In this chapter, topics such as validity and reliability along with the ethical considerations are discussed. The fourth chapter presents the analysis of the findings. Finally the last chapter is the conclusion and recommendations based on the research findings. 4

To sum up, this chapter includes the rationale and the context of undertaking this research. Moreover, it presents the research aims and the importance of this research to the department of English and the Kurdish teachers. The next chapter, the literature review, aims at presenting and critically analysing what has being written in the literature on grammar teaching and grammar materials which are relevant for this research along with points about how learners learn languages.

5

Chapter Two Literature Review 2.1 Introduction This chapter of the research aims at explaining arguments against and in favour of teaching English grammar and also discusses different approaches to teaching grammar. Furthermore, it will review issues relating to language learning materials in general, focussing particularly on materials that are being used for teaching grammar. All these factors directly related to the research aims to seek the answers for the following research questions: 

What grammar materials are being used by Kurdish teachers to teach English grammar?



What factors influence the teachers’ choice and use of the materials?



How do Kurdish teachers use those English grammar materials?



What approaches do Kurdish teachers use for teaching grammar? And what factors influence their choice?

2.2 Arguments for and against Teaching English Grammar Views on grammar teaching have changed dramatically. There is much current research that debates if and how grammar should be taught (Ellis, 2005 and Schmidt, 2001). This change might be due to the appearance of communicative methodologies which promote communicative ability and fluency over grammatical knowledge so as to let the students practise the language. Some grammarians believe that grammar should be taught and teachers should not neglect this part of teaching languages arguing that if learners know all the grammatical rules they will be able to communicate in that language (Swan, 2002). 6

2.2.1 Arguments for Teaching Grammar There are currently strong arguments regarding the value of teaching grammar. Schmidt (2001 cited in Ellis, 2006) argues that one of the facilitators of learning a language is through ‘noticing’, by which he means that learners need to have conscious attention to form in order to be able to learn that language. Moreover, Ellis (2005 cited in Ellis, 2006) suggests that learning begins with clear representation of forms, in that case teaching grammar has its own importance as a base on which to build further learning. Swan (2002) argues that grammar teaching helps the learners to communicate comprehensibly. He points out that without ‘grammar’ learners cannot use that language accurately and they cannot produce comprehensible sentences. Moreover, those who use language with a broken grammar might not be accepted seriously or might be regarded as uneducated, so teaching grammar is important. Thornbury (1999) asserts that teaching grammar rules help the learners to be creative linguistically and those learners who receive grammar instructions tend to survive what is called fossilisation, which is a state when learners cease progress in language learning. Concurring with Thornbury, Weaver (1996) asserts that teaching grammar helps the learners become effective users of that language. Therefore, they can ‘master’ another language more easily. Furthermore, Nassaji and Fotos (2004) come to the conclusion that teaching grammar is fundamental for those learners who aim at gaining a high level of accuracy. It is argued that teaching grammar has a positive effect on learners (Mohammed and Jaber, 2008). However, Ellis (2006) asserts that there is no clear evidence to support teaching grammar or not teaching it. That is why there 7

is still ambiguity in this respect. Therefore, it might be problematic for language teachers to decide whether to teach grammar or not. Consequently, this research has been planned to gain an insight into the Kurdish teachers’ perceptions on grammar teaching. 2.2.2 Arguments against Teaching Grammar The arguments against teaching grammar appear to be partly based on Krashen’s theories (Nassaji and Fotos, 2004). Krashen asserts that learning a language takes place through the exposure of that language not through formal instruction. Furthermore, teaching grammar rules alone will not lead a learner to be a competent user of that language and knowing a language is not completed by knowing its grammar rules (Richards and Renandya, 2002 and Thornbury, 1999). Therefore, direct instruction of grammar rules appears to be useless (Nassaji and Fotos, 2004). In this research, the Kurdish teachers were questioned on their perception on teaching grammar, in order to provide the rich data on Kurdish teachers’ views of grammar teaching. 2.3 Approaches to Teaching English Grammar Among those who are in favour of grammar teaching are researchers who argue about how grammar should be taught and which approach is the most appropriate one for teaching grammar. The approaches that have been used for teaching grammar are inductive and deductive approaches.

8

2.3.1 Deductive Approach A deductive approach is defined to be the way teachers start the lesson by giving the rules to the students then letting the students apply the rules (Mohammed and Jaber, 2008). Mountone (2004) asserts that if teachers want their students to accurately deal with language, a deductive approach works best. A deductive approach seems to work well if the teacher wants to save time and this approach meets the students’ expectation on classroom learning (Thornbury, 1999). This may be a very relevant aspect to consider in this research. Thornbury (1999) points out some drawbacks of a deductive approach arguing that presenting the rules at the beginning of the lesson will result in the students’ frustration as they may not understand grammar terminologies that are used by the teacher to explain the rules. Moreover, this approach might narrow down learning a language to knowing the rules. 2.3.2 Inductive Approaches Instead of giving the students or learners a set of rules to apply, students can be given a text or a context which they use to work out the rules by themselves and this approach is called an inductive approach (Prince and Felder, 2006). Hedge (2000) asserts that the context should be beneficial and suitable to the learners’

need,

therefore

grammar

becomes

generative.

Furthermore,

Mohammed and Jaber (2008) assert that providing the context allows the students to use their mental ability and their background knowledge to work out the intended grammar rules. Moreover, they will be encouraged and pay attention to the meaning and the use of grammar rules rather than focusing on forms alone (Bourke, 1996 Cited in Mohamed, 2004). 9

Through working out the embedded rules, students might be able to use that language more confidently and that helps them remember the patterns for a long period of time (Ellis, 1997 cited in Mohamed, 2004). Furthermore, Spada (1997) argues that while students are exposed to a context or communicative instruction and asked to work out the grammar rules, their ability to remember and use these rules becomes ‘long-lasting’. Taking into consideration different viewpoints on the deductive and inductive approach, this research questioned the Kurdish teachers’ chosen approach for teaching English grammar and the influential factors for this choice. The aim of finding the appropriate approach of teaching grammar is to help the learners to be successful in their attempt of learning the target language. However, people learn languages in different ways. Further research and investigations are needed in order to know how the learners learn languages best. Throughout the history of second language learning many investigations and research have been done to gain an insight into that issue. The next section is on the theories of language learning. 2.4 How Do Learners Learn a Language? Up to the 1950s the only theory that appears related to language learning was behaviourism. Broadly, this theory intends to scientifically explain how habits are learned. Then, it was applied on the process of language learning. As language learning is thought to be similar to learning habits, when there is a stimulus, learners respond to it which reinforces learning the language. Through this process of stimuli response-reinforcement language learning takes place (Ellis, 1997a, 1990; Mitchell and Myles, 2004).The implication of this theory to language teaching is that languages are learned by drilling (Mitchell and Myles, 10

2004). The dominate language teaching method influenced by behaviourism is the audio-lingual method (Ellis, 1990). Larsen-Freeman (2000) explains the audio-lingual method of teaching as a method based on an oral approach. It could be argued that this is a very limited approach of language learning with its emphasis on oral language. Later at the end of the 1960s, behaviourists faced much criticism and Noam Chomsky introduced the more acceptable cognitive theory for language learning. In the cognitive process, learners are active participants as they are born with an innate capability for language learning (Troike, 2006). It is worth mentioning that Chomsky’s theory is for first language learning. However, Krashen applied it to the second language learning (Lightbown and Spada, 2006). For Krashen, given instruction results in learning which has a limited use for communication while acquisition is a result of the input that the learners receive. Krashen’s input hypothesis suggests that learners can acquire a language when they receive instructions which are one level higher than their already acquired knowledge. This idea of comprehensible input is very important due to its confirmation of the meaningful input which will create active and engaging learners. Furthermore, the word ‘meaningful’ is interpreted in different ways by those who write materials and teachers as well (Hedge, 2000). Hedge (2000: 12) adds that meaningful input for teachers and material writers means ‘relevant and topical to learners’ interest or realistic’, that is why effective materials contain authentic texts which demonstrate learners’ motivation. Furthermore, the input hypothesis is justification for the inclusive of various materials such as cassettes and CDs so as to provide sufficient input to the learners (Hedge, 2000). 11

After the introduction of cognitive theory, teaching methods also changed their directions from audio-lingual method to another method which may better help the learners to be more engaged and use their brain by taking part in ‘meaningful

communication’

(Larsen-Freeman,

2000).Hence,

Vygotsky

introduced ‘socio-cultural’ theory in which he emphasises interaction and the input that the learners receive. He argues that social interaction trigger what is called language learning. Moreover, he views language as a means of communication that leads to language acquisition (Lightbown and Spada, 2006). For Vygotsky both interpersonal and intrapersonal interactions have seen as the influential factor for learning language (Troike, 2006). After Vygotsky, research was carried out and concluded that interaction and communication will lead to successful language learning. Language learning seems to happen when learners are surrounded by the environment in which they can practice the language (Wong, 2006). However, the characteristic of learners’ age and social background may play a significant role in the success of language learning (Mitchell and Myles, 2006 and Troike, 2006). The communicative approach and natural approach are considered as viable approaches for learning languages. By using these two approaches the teachers are able to provide the students with the opportunity to use the target language (Wong, 2006). Moreover, interaction among the learners means another source of input as the output of the learners and the teachers’ feedback can be regarded as the comprehensible input for the whole class (Hedge, 2000).

12

Hedge (2000) asserts that the need for interaction and its valuable effect necessitates materials which contain tasks that require the students to interact and do group work. As group work provides the chance for the students to interact and communicate with each other (Lucantoni, 2002). In dealing with learning grammar, grammatical forms alone may not seem of great importance for the learners to be able to get the correct meaning; the job of grammar is to make a connection between words and contexts (Widdowson, 1990 cited in Tomlinson, 2003). For this reason grammar needs to be contextualised and personalised so as to help learners obtain the embedded meaning of that particular grammar structure (Hedge, 2000). Through the process of contextualisation and personalising grammar, learners are encouraged to practice grammatical knowledge and this practice makes the grammatical knowledge implicit and promotes accurate communication (Ellis, 1997). Hence, communicative approaches are seen as influential approaches for teaching grammar so as to help the learners to acquire the target language due to its focus on the role grammar has in connecting words with contexts (Widdowson, 1990 cited in Tomlinson, 2003). However, there are still debates on what type of communication is influential for learning grammar. Ellis (1997) asserts that teachers are required to provide the learners with the kind of communication which helps the learners to produce the language that they want and the kind of communication which contains comprehensible input. In order to provide the learners with the effective materials for grammar learning, those who write grammar materials should take into consideration the learning theories and the best way that the learners could learn grammar. The 13

next section is on learning materials in general and grammar materials in particular. 2.5 The Learning Materials Materials are generally defined to be anything that helps language learning. They have different forms; they can be visual, printed or audio. Moreover, dealing with their purpose, materials may have instructional, exploratory or elicited purposes (Tomlinson, 2001cited in Tomlinson, 2003).Tomlinson (2003) asserts that the basic principle that should be taken into consideration in writing the materials is the needs; this need is learners’, teachers’ and even administrators’. These sectors’ need can be satisfied by establishing a localised project. Tomlinson (2003) indicates that most language learning materials are printed course books. It has been for a long time since experts have been arguing on pros and cons of course books. Harmer (2007) points out some benefits of course books by saying that course books are presented in attractive ways and the good ones contain DVDs and videos with motivating texts. Harmer (2007) does not ignore that course books are helpful for those teachers who work under pressure and they can use those materials confidently. Bell and Gower (1988 cited in Tomlinson, 2003) add to this point by asserting that course books are of great benefit for those teachers who lack training. Moreover, they argue that with a course book both teachers and learners can look ahead to what will be done next or they can revise what have they done.

14

Despite the positive aspects of using course books, there are some very important negative elements that need to be examined. Block (1991) argues that the course books may not always contain subjects that the teachers feel are suitable for their class. Furthermore, course books might not reflect or satisfy the learners’ needs (Richards, 2001).He adds that course books and text books can ‘deskill teachers’ due to the fact that if teachers only deal with the course books, they will only present the prepared materials, as Hutchinson and Torres (1994 cited in Tomlinson, 2003) rightfully point out that teachers will only act as a ‘cipher’ for these materials. This dependence of text books by teachers may be an important aspect to consider in this research. In spite of the advantages and disadvantages of course books, the failure or the success of a particular course book partly depends on the correct choice of that course book but rather more importantly on the teachers who teach those materials. Tomlinson (2003) asserts that it may not be easy to select what might work well. However, the choice of the materials should be based on the match between the teaching contexts and the content of the material. This research is been undertaken to find out the learning materials that Kurdish teachers are using for teaching English grammar and the reason for their choice along with their perceptions on those materials. 2.6 What Should Grammar Materials Include? Grammar materials can be seen in different shapes, sizes and levels. There are grammar materials that can be used for the learners for self-study such as English Grammar in Use (Murphy, 2004) others are aimed at the teachers to guide them while teaching grammar such as Grammar for English language teachers (Parrot, 2007) and materials with many grammar games for teachers 15

to make use of, such as Games for Grammar Practice (Chin and Zaorob, 2001). These are in addition to grammar course books for the learners as part of the institutional syllabus. Harmer (2007) refers to different types of grammar materials as those which are called pedagogical materials and descriptive materials. Harmer (2007) explains the former as the materials that describe everything that exist in the language and the way they work and the latter as the materials that help the students of the language they are learning. It is worth pointing out that the grammar materials are different in the way they present the grammatical subjects; some of them present the subjects in the deductive way, present the rules and give examples and requires the learners to solve some exercises. While others are designed in the inductive way, which requires the students to work out the rules or ask them to undertake tasks. Regardless of the design or the way a particular grammar subject is presented, the grammar materials should include flexibility so as to allow the teachers to add or adapt subjects that fulfil the students’ needs (Stranks, 2003 and Harmer, 2007). Moreover, materials should consider the users’ age, gender, level and interest so as to be appropriate for learning. This is in addition to providing authentic contexts in the grammar materials (Stranks, 2003). A grammar material should also contain words and phrases that are easy for the students to use and have some resemblance to the language style and level that learners are aiming at (Tomlinson, 2003). Grammar teaching can be further strengthen or more effective in order to be successful by teaching it with other parts of the language and using different grammar games and teaching aids so as to make the lesson engaging (Tomlinson, 2003, Stranks, 2003 and Harmer, 2007). For this reason the 16

participants in this research were asked whether they use any teaching aids, and their reasons for using them. Bearing in mind how learners learn languages best, the materials or course books should be characterised in a way that suits learning. For Tomlinson (2003) the most important characteristic of learning materials is that they should be affective, in other words should engage the learners emotionally. Tomlinson adds that learning materials should contain challenging but achievable tasks encouraging the students’ confidence. This can also be true for grammar materials as the grammar material writers can include feasible tasks as Harmer (2007) mentions that by involving tasks grammar lessons become more engaging. Moreover, the materials whether grammar materials or others, should provide a chance for the learners to use the language that they want to learn (Hedge, 2000 and Tomlinson, 2003). Scrivener (2011) emphasises the importance of authenticity in quality of learning materials in order to allow learning the language. Moreover, as Richards (2001) suggests, grammar materials should provide the chance for personalisation. Furthermore, materials should contain subjects that have a connection with the learners’ daily life. Having discussed the range of issues connected to grammar materials, it is now essential to consider the role of the teacher in relation to these materials. For this reason the next part of this chapter is on teachers and their so called ‘mental life’.

17

2.7 Teacher Cognition Dealing with the teachers, Borg (2006) coined a word to describe what teachers know and believe as teacher cognition. By teacher cognition Borg (2006) means teachers ‘mental life’, what do they believe and know. This area has been taken into consideration since it was discovered that teachers’ mental lives will influence their way of teaching and their ‘instructional choice’. Moreover, the teachers’ experience in learning languages might also affect their way of teaching (Borg, 2006). The way teachers teach grammar is a resent field of research. The way teachers teach grammar is shaped by the teachers’ experience in learning languages and their experience with learning grammar (Borg and Burns, 2008). Furthermore, the teachers’ way of teaching grammar is also affected by their awareness of meta-language and their knowledge about language (Andrews, 1997 cited in Borg, 2003). Moreover, taking part in any training courses will add to the experience that the teachers have with teaching grammar or any other aspects in language. For this reason participants in this research were asked about their experience in teaching. Moreover, teachers were asked about the reasons that influence their choice of the way they teach grammar, so as to find out whether there is anything that comes from their experience in learning English grammar. To sum up, this chapter highlights crucial points that in one way or another are significant to the research questions. Reviewing the literature on arguments for and against teaching grammar has given an insight into what was written in the literature so as to have a clear view when asking the Kurdish teachers about their perceptions on teaching grammar. Moreover, points on approaches of 18

grammar teaching have been referred to in this research due to the research questions on the approaches that Kurdish teachers use while teaching English grammar. This is in addition to the reference that was made in this chapter on how learners learn languages and learning materials in relation to grammar, so as to have a clue while asking the teachers about their materials for teaching grammar and their perception on those materials. The next chapter is on the methodology that was used in undertaking this research which highlights the tools and approaches used for the data collection.

19

Chapter Three Methodology 3.1 Introduction The aim of this chapter is to describe and justify the methodological approach to this research project. The chapter begins by describing the aim of the research and the specific research questions that it aims to explore. It will then provide an explanation and justification of key issues relating to the research including the choice of methodology and data collection tools and the research schedule. It will also discuss the pilot study, sampling strategy and, ethical issues. Finally, the chapter will conclude with a discussion of the conduct of the research and the methods that were used to analyse the data. 3.2 Research Aims The aims of the research can be summarised in the following questions: 

What grammar materials are being used by Kurdish teachers to teach English grammar?



What factors influence the teachers’ choice and use of the materials?



How do Kurdish teachers use those English grammar materials?



What approaches do Kurdish teachers use for teaching grammar? And what factors influence their choice?

By answering these questions this study is going to fill the gap which might be seen in the literature on how Kurdish teachers teaching English grammar at one of the universities in Kurdistan and their use and choice of materials.

20

3.3 Research Methods A qualitative approach has been chosen for undertaking this research due to the fact that qualitative research is the appropriate choice when the researchers examine a particular phenomenon in a natural context. A qualitative approach is recognised by having non-numerical data in the research (Brown and Rogers, 2002). Other experts try to define qualitative approach basing it on its discipline and philosophy. Mason (2002) asserts that qualitative research is based on data production which are flexible, in that they are from the authentic social context, in other words the data are not rigid or structured. Qualitative research allows the development of a detailed understanding of the research subjects. Moreover, it allocates a space for the participants’ voice and it investigates the underlying issues of the presented cases (Gonzales et al, 2008 cited in Cohen et al, 2011). In the case of this research, the research questions are designed to help the researcher to be able to investigate a group of Kurdish teachers’ way of teaching English grammar and the factors that are influenced them in choosing and using the materials for teaching English grammar. In addition to the previous clarification one cannot ignore what Creswell (2003) states; Creswell asserts that qualitative research contains claims on ‘participatory knowledge’. This point can be of great justification for the use of qualitative approach in this research due to the fact that the research questions demand the participants’ knowledge to be answered as the participants were selected purposefully. Moreover, it contains open-purposes with the aim of flexible interpretation. The key characteristic of qualitative research is that it focuses on the natural setting, that is to say qualitative research explores a particular context that the 21

participants are located in or which the particular phenomenon existed (Maxwell, 2005). This characteristic is being used in choosing this approach in this research as the research focuses on a particular context which is a University in Kurdistan. Moreover, Woods (2006) suggests that dealing with context is important as it affects the way participants behave. Therefore, the data that are collected from those natural settings seem to be authentic and real. Moreover, qualitative approach constructs social reality and cultural meaning (Neuman, 2000 and Punch, 2005). Another characteristic of qualitative research is that, its data can be analysed by using grounded theory due to the fact that the actual theory is generated from the data, and does not pre-exist the research (Strauss and Corbin, 1994 and Freebody, 2003). In other words, unlike quantitative research, qualitative research theory is grounded in the data (Woods, 2006). For this reason the theory which was used in analysing data in this research was not basing on any pre-existed theories but rather it was induced from the data. Woods (2006) presents another characteristic of qualitative research which is the emphasis that the researchers put on a process. In other words, there is a focus on how a particular event or phenomena happens and how it develops. Linking this characteristic to this research would be the fact that the researcher tries to explore the process of the Kurdish teachers’ choice of materials and approaches of teaching English grammar. Corbin and Strauss (2008) assert that qualitative research includes words not numbers and the researcher enjoys playing with words and focuses on the discovered meaning that the participants attach to the cases. Moreover, Corbin

22

and Strauss (2008) point out that qualitative research data have characteristics that could be interpreted in more than one way. The key aspect of the research results which conducts the qualitative approach can be recognized by developing the basic understanding of the particular case being studied or by clarifying those cases. Moreover, the data analysis might necessarily be interpretive as the data are textual (Hennink et al, 2011). Qualitative approach can be used even in the case of having a small number of participants (Neuman, 2000 and Silverman, 2005). This could be another justification for choosing qualitative approach in this research as the participants are only six Kurdish teachers due to the limited access which the researcher had to the Kurdish teachers who teach English grammar. Neuman (2000) and Silverman (2005) claim that in the case of having few subjects, qualitative research is preferable for many researchers and it tends to work best. Neuman (2000) further adds that while dealing with a specific context, qualitative style is the key to carrying out the research. That is another reason for choosing qualitative approach in undertaking this research due to the research constrain to the specific context which is Kurdistan. Moreover, the key aspect in using qualitative approach is to have a clear view of the cases as qualitative style is recognised to be the mean to enhance data (Ragin, 1994 cited in Neuman, 2000). Another key aspect in qualitative approach is that it allows for answering questions such as how and why thereby encouraging to the deeper understandings of the subjects of the research. Linking this point to the current research questions, one can notice that the research question are how and why

23

questions. This is the sharp contrast to quantitative research that provides only numerical data, which tells the quantity of the dense and complex data. 3.4 Research Approach The approach used in this research is that of a case study. A case study is one of the means in undertaking qualitative research. The aim of case studies as Flick (2006) asserts, is to identify or recreate a case. A case is defined by many experts among them is Gillham (2010) who defines a case to be ‘A unit of human activity embedded in the real world or which can only be studied or understood in context’. (Gillham 2010:1) The decision to use case study approach is based on the fact that the phenomenon that the research explores requires case study methods due to the degree of the focus on contemporary event (Yin, 2009). Another reason for this choice is the fact that a case study is used when a researcher needs or wants to understand a particular case in detail by investigating, rather than explaining the case (Punch, 2005).The case in this research is the way Kurdish teachers teach English grammar including an exploration of their view on the materials that they use. The reason for this investigation is to find out whether the teachers follow the up-to-date TESOL methods. Moreover, to gain an insight on the teachers’ views on the material they use for teaching grammar. The strength of case study is having the research outcomes that are clearly understood by everyone. Moreover, the case study can be undertaken by any researcher. In addition the case studies give clear understanding to similar

24

cases and they help the interpretation of other similar cases (Yin, 2009 and Silverman, 2004). There are strong arguments concerning generalization and case studies Silverman (2004) argues that some case studies will not allow the researcher to make generalisations, particularly if the context is a specific place or institute or in the case of small scale piece of research. However, generalizability might not be a key objective of the case study research when the aim is to deal with a particular case or to understand it in its own right (Punch, 2009). Therefore, a case study has been chosen for this research as the participants are very few and it is about a particular context which is Kurdistan. Moreover, the aim is not generalizability rather to find answers for the research questions regarding the situation in Kurdistan. 3.5 Data Collection Instrument Two data collection tools were chosen for undertaking this research, the first one was the questionnaire and the second one was the interview. 3.5.1 Questionnaire Burton and Bartlett (2009) explain questionnaire as a set of questions that the respondents can answer. Moreover, it can be for collecting both qualitative and quantitative data. Dealing with the relation between the sample and the type of questions Cohen et al (2011) present that the size of the sample decides the type of questionnaire. The larger the sample the more numerical structured the questions will be, while the smaller samples require more words and less structured questions. In the case of this research, due to the small size of the 25

sample the questionnaire was word-based and contains open ended questions. Furthermore, the questionnaire that was used in this research was sent to the participants by email as it is the possible solution in the case of having the short questionnaire (Basit, 2010). Furthermore, the absence of the researcher reduces the pressure on the respondents to take their time completing the questionnaire (Cohen et al, 2011). A number of studies have found that questionnaire can provide the researcher with an easy way to gather data. Nevertheless, questionnaire, like all the other means of data collection needs considerable amount of time for revising and piloting (Basit, 2010). This research took that point into account while structuring the questions as the questions were revised by both the researcher and another person a part from the supervisor so as to check by different individuals that the questionnaire provides the participants clear and comprehensible questions. One of the limitations of questionnaire can be the fact that with having many questions the participants may not have sufficient time and mood to answer the whole questions (Basit, 2010). The questionnaire of this research is on the safe side in that respect due to a small number of questions in the questionnaire. Another limitation that the questionnaire has is that questionnaire cannot provide the researcher with the answers of many why questions (Opie, 2004). For this reason, interviewing as another data collection mean was used in this research after the questionnaire so as to gain a deeper insight into those subjects that the questionnaire could not cover and at the same time checking the answers from the questionnaire.

26

3.5.2 Interview The second tool was interviewing. The interview was chosen to explore in deeper detail the answers that are obtained from the questionnaire. Interviewing as a tool of data collection in qualitative research has been of great interest. This interest is a result of a belief that the view points on a particular subject can be widely and openly delivered through interviews than in a usual or constrained questionnaire (Flick, 2006). Moreover, Wengraf (2001) asserts that by interviewing the participants the researcher can have the actual or real data that can be easily quoted. The weakness of interviewing might be the effect that the interviewer may have on the interviewees which can change the direction of the responses if the interviewer is not aware enough (Burton and Bartlett, 2009). The solution of this problem was mentioned later in this chapter. The reason behind using interviews is to gain a deeper understanding of those subjects that cannot provide a clear vision for the researchers while doing observation such as how someone feels or others view on a particular phenomenon (Merriam, 1989). This could also be the other justification for the choice of interviews in this research as through the observation might not be clear to know the Kurdish teachers’ views of the English grammar materials they use. Traverse (2001) adds a point to the advantages of using interview by stating that interviewing is the quickest way to know about a particular case in an authentic manner. There are various types of interviews such as the focused interview, the semistructured interview, the problem centred interview, the expert interview and the 27

ethnographic interview (Flick, 2006).The one which has been used for collecting data in this research is semi-structured interview. The design of this interview is to have a set of open questions that are prepared by the interviewer in advance (Wengraf, 2001). Moreover, the interviewer is free to have other questions that will come to his/her mind as a result of the interviewees’ response (Opie, 2004). Hence, semi-structured interview is more flexible that a rigid structured interview. However, Semi-structured interview will not be chosen in the case if the researchers want to test a particular hypothesis (David and Sutton, 2004). This might be a satisfactory justification for choosing semi-structured interview for undertaking this research as the researcher wants to gain the clear insight into why the Kurdish teachers teach English grammar in the way they teach or to explore fully the reasons behind their choice of materials, while asking those questions many other things come to the researcher’s mind that can only be asked in the case of having semi-structured interview. The advantages of semi-structured interview could be encouraging for the researchers to use this type of interview. The fact that the interviewers have a set of questions beforehand makes them appear competent whilst interviewing. Moreover, as the data is authentic and quoted from the interviewers, the semistructured interviews seem to have the reliable data (Cohen and Crabtree, 2006). This is in addition to the freedom that the interviewer has while dealing with the questions, because interviewers can organise the questions in the way that fits their aim (Corbetta, 2003). In contrast, the disadvantages of semi- structured interview might be the disability of the interviewer to ask provocative or motivating questions that might come to the interviewer’s mind as a result of the interviewees’ response. Hence, 28

the data that are collected might not be sufficient to cover the demands (Kajornboon, 2005). Cohen et al (2007) argues that the data that are collected from this type of interview, or others, might be bias as interviewing demands the interaction between both sides. 3.6 Research Schedule After preparing the proposal, research questions were discussed with the supervisor. The context of undertaking this study was set and a consent form was sent to the participants and after a week they sent back the forms. After the participants’ confirmation of participation, questions for the questionnaire were discussed and revised with the supervisor. Then, the questions were piloted by two people before sending them to the participants so as to check whether they are clear and comprehensible. The participants were given a week to answer the five questions in the questionnaire. Later questions for the interview were set and the time for doing the interview was arranged basing on the participants availability. Within four weeks, the data were collected and the process of data analysis started which needed four weeks. Along with doing the above actions, relevant literature on both research methodology and grammar teaching were revised. 3.7 Pilot Study Pilot study can be regarded as a process which is undertaken to check the reliability and validity of the questionnaire or to check whether the questions are practicable and comprehensible (Cohen et al, 2001). The researcher of this study undertook the pilot study by sending the questionnaire to two teachers

29

who were not participating in the study. The result of the pilot study was positive and the participants answered the questionnaire with ease. 3.8 Sample The participants who will be studied in this research are a group of six university teachers in Kurdistan. Those teachers have been chosen based on their experience of teaching English grammar materials to the university students. Moreover, due to insufficient access to the Kurdish teachers that amount has been chosen. Traverse (2001) states that the number of the participants might vary depending on the time scale that the researchers have for doing that research. In the case of this research, the number was limited due to the access that the researcher had to Kurdish teachers who are teaching English grammar. Moreover, there are only those six Kurdish teachers who are officially given the right to teach English grammar. Purposive sampling has been chosen for this research. Purposive sampling is explained to mean sampling when the researcher has a focus or particular purpose in mind (Punch, 2005). Cohen et al (2007) asserts that purposive sampling is used when the researchers try to gain access to people who are knowledgeable of a particular issue due to their profession or experience. As this research aims to explore the practices of a particular group of teachers, purposive sampling has been chosen. 3.9 Ethical Issues Undertaking research demands data collection and this data are collected from the individuals in a society or group of institutions. Approaching these

30

individuals for the sake of data collection in research requires ethical considerations (Oliver, 2010). Interviews like other means of data collection have ethical matters due to its direct

contact

with

participants

or

interviewees.

One

of

the

ethical

considerations in dealing with interviews is the informed consent (Cohen et al, 2007). Informed consent is explained to be the way that before collecting the data from the participants, participants know about the content of the research (Punch, 2005). The ethical consideration in this research was taken into account by sending the participants the consent form. Through consent form they could be familiar with the research title, aims or research questions. Therefore, they would have a clear insight to what a research is about. Moreover, they were given the right to withdraw at any time they feel uncomfortable. There anonymities were kept throughout the research. Hence, they were informed in the consent form about this point. These two above points (withdrawal and anonymity of the participant) have been mentioned by Davies (2007), Cohen et al (2007) and Punch (2005) to be the fundamental part to be in the safe side while dealing with ethical issues.( a copy of the consent form is provided in the appendix). 3.10

Validity and Reliability

Validity in qualitative research has been described as ‘truthfulness’ and ‘correctness’ of the data (Burton and Bartlett, 2009). Moreover, Silverman (2010) argues that validity is a synonym for truth. This truthfulness for Davies

31

(2007) in qualitative research refers to the accurateness of the findings that are the outcome of the authentic cases that the researcher claims to be. Validity can be measured through the way particular measurement is used to measure the concept that is supposed to measure (Bryman, 2008). For instance a set of questions in a questionnaire to measure a case should represent that particular case (Boeije, 2010). Hernon (2009) asserts that for qualitative research credibility is focused on as the word which indicated internal validity, which is the way the proper instrument is used for measuring a particular concept. Reliability is the term which is associated with validity. This term has different explanations regarding the type of research. Stenbacka (2001 cited in Golfashani, 2003) argues that measuring reliability in the qualitative research is ended with the judgement that the research is not a perfect one due to the reason that reliability is the degree of repeatability. Golafshani (2003) argues that the reliability of the qualitative research lies in its quality. Stenbacka (2001:551 cited in Golfashani, 2003) explains the quality in a qualitative research to be ‘generating understanding’. Bogdan and Biklen (1992 cited in Cohen et al, 2011) argue that reliability in the qualitative research can be the suitability between what has been collected as data and what actually happen in the natural setting. The style of this study is qualitative and the tools that were used for data collection were interview and questionnaire. There are a range of literature on reliability and validity in interviews and questionnaires.

32

The validity in the qualitative interview tends to be the way questions are for the purpose that they claim to (Kannel and Kahn, 1968 cited in Cohen et al, 2011). Cohen et al (2011) argue that the reason behind the invalid interview might be because the interviewing seems to be bias. One of the ways that can be taken to avoid being bias as what the researchers can use another measure which is valid in that research (Flick, 2009 and Cohen et al, 2011). Moreover, Davies (2007) argues the possible way to avoid being bias in the interview might be through the researchers’ behaviour. That is to say the researchers should act as if they do not know much about the case they are researching. Moreover, the language that the researchers use should contain chunks that are neutral. However, as Davies (2007) suggests, researchers can put these words into the interviewees’ mouth but must be done carefully. Morrison (1993) adds to the reasons behind being bias in the interviews which results in invalidity, to be the presence of leading questions. Leading questions are like the fact that the interviewers ask a question that they put a word into the interviewees’ mouth; in that case the interviewees’ answer will be the one that the interviewers want. The validity and reliability in questionnaire might be assured through the accuracy of the responses. One way that the researchers can check the accuracy is through the use of interviews after the questionnaire and this was the case in this research. Moreover, questionnaire is more reliable than interview as it embraces greater honesty (Cohen et al, 2011). In dealing with this study, leading questions were avoided and the questions were studied carefully to ensure that they exist to serve the aim of the research. Furthermore, as the validity and reliability of the questionnaire is through the 33

accuracy of the respondents, the interview was set to check the responses’ accuracy. 3.11

Conduct of the Research

The methodology of the research was qualitative approach by using two tools of data collection. This choice might be due to the fact that the access to the participants is very difficult and dealing with quantitative approach will be troublesome for researchers who face difficulty in math and statistical issues. This point is supported by Davies (2007), who argues that quantitative methodology cannot be that easy for these researchers who may not do well in calculations. This study is limited due to the fact that the findings cannot be generalised. Moreover, the participants do not represent the whole Kurdish teachers. It is worth mentioning that if other researchers try to use quantitative approach and use other data collection tools rather than interviews and questionnaires, they might obtain better results and a more satisfying outcome. However, in the case of this research the interview could gain enough data that can be sufficient to answer the research questions. 3.12

Research Analysis Methods

It is worth mentioning that the data collected throughout the research may not provide a clear insight without being analysed. Furthermore, as Boeije (2010) suggests the raw data cannot be regarded as the research findings. Boeije (2010) asserts that the qualitative data should go through the process of interpretive analysis. Hence, thematic analysis as one of the forms of content analysis was used in this study to analyse the data. While doing this type of 34

analysis, the researcher starts distinguishing different themes or categories in the data. Different themes are emerged from the data basing on the research questions (Boeije, 2010).Thematic analysis is explained to be the way that the data are fractured to different themes or codes (Basit, 2010). Moreover, after creating the codes they should be examined and compared. The type of coding which was used in this research was open-coding. Code- basing analysis was used in undertaking this research due to its appropriateness with different type of qualitative data (Cohen et al, 2011). The next chapter is on analysing the data which were collected to answer the research questions.

35

Chapter Four Analysis of the Findings 4.1 Introduction This chapter of the research aims to analyse the data which was collected from both the questionnaires and interviews. Kurdish teachers’ views on grammar material were taken into consideration in order to answer the research questions which are: 

What grammar materials are being used by Kurdish teachers to teach English grammar?



What factors influence the teachers’ choice and use of the materials?



How do Kurdish teachers use those English grammar materials?



What approaches do Kurdish teachers use for teaching grammar? And what factors influence their choice?

This chapter is divided into four sections and three subsections and each section is entitled by one of the research questions. Each question contains a theme or two using data from both the questionnaires and interviews and analyse the data. The first step in analysing the data from the questionnaires and the interviews was reading the data and transcribing the interviews in order to answer the research questions. In order to present the raw data, the questionnaire with the teachers’ responses are presented as a table attached in appendix A.

36

4.2 What grammar materials are being used by Kurdish teachers to teach English grammar? Almost all of the participants use English Grammar in Use (Murphy, 1994). Besides using this book Teacher B and Teacher F use Understanding and Using English Grammar (Azar, 2000). It is worth mentioning that English Grammar in Use is regarded as a self -study book by Harmer (2007) which could not be regarded as the suitable material for classroom teaching due to the fact that students can use and even learn from self –study materials by them without attending the class. Teacher C besides using English Grammar in Use, copies sections from a course book Interchange (Richards et al, 2005) which she gives to the students as hand-outs. While teacher E uses grammar materials that he finds on internet. The only grammar material that is used by teacher A is English grammar in use. The findings reveal that the participants are heavily dependent on English Grammar in Use for teaching English grammar at the university level. Despite the dependency on this book, the participants are having critical views on English Grammar in Use. This point is discussed in more detail in 4:3. 4.3 What factors influence the teachers’ choice and use of the materials? Starting from teacher A, the reason behind her choice of the material was due to the recommendation which was made by the department to include English Grammar in Use as one of the materials for teaching English grammar. However, she was allowed to include other appropriate materials that she could find.

37

‘The text was (Murphy, Grammar in Use) chosen by the department to be finished though the two academic years, that is to say first stage and second …we as teachers were free to choose other materials but unfortunately I did not use others due to the pressure which was on me in the department and my lack of experience to search and find a proper material..’ (sic) (Teacher A, Interview) Teacher A regards English Grammar in Use as the appropriate material for teaching grammar and a suitable book for the students’ level. This response links directly to Stranks (2003) assertion that grammar materials should account for the learners’ level, age and interest and according to teacher A English Grammar in Use is suitable for learners’ level and interests. However, teachers B and E assert that English Grammar in Use is not a book that Kurdish students are interested in as: ‘There are students at English department who are even not interested in the department and they are studying English because their high school marks decided upon their colleges, so they need to be motivated inside the class and that book by murphy is really boring for them and is empty of any regards to Kurdish students interest’ (Teacher B, Interview, Questionnaire) Teacher B adds that she included English Grammar in Use due to the large number of exercises that are presented in that book. Moreover, she states this book is the only one that the department provides the students with. However, teacher B states that the exercises mostly are not the ones that require the learners to use English for communication.

Moreover, she points out that she

is not that experienced to judge on a suitability of the particular material for her students. Understanding and using English grammar is another book that was preferred by teacher B, she claims that: ‘I found the students very interested when I included sections from Understanding and Using English Grammar’. 38

Past experiences as a learner themselves can also influence the teachers’ choice of materials (Borg, 2006). This is evident when teacher C and D refer to the reason behind their choice of English Grammar In Use to be the fact that when they were students their teachers used that book and they were, as students, interested in that book. Teacher D added that: ‘English grammar in use was very practical for me when I was a student’ This can be regarded as the evidence to what Borg (2006) refers to as teacher cognition, by stating that the teachers learning experiences influence the way they do instructional choices and way of teaching. Apart from using English Grammar in Use teacher C states that she copies sections from the course book Interchange because she finds this course book ‘decorative’ and engaging for the students. This point can be regarded as the positive element of course books by Harmer (2007) as he discusses the importance of course book design to be engaging for the students. Regarding teacher E, he states that he mainly depends on English Grammar in Use because firstly, it is the norm in the department to use that book for teaching English grammar and secondly, he is not that experienced to decide upon suitable materials to use for teaching English grammar. However, teacher E argues that he used the internet and other grammatical sources for further details and he believes that: ‘English grammar in use is a book which lacks context, and this is a huge problem for grammar books and it is outdated’ The lack of context in grammar materials can be seen as the huge problem due to the effect that context has on learning grammar. Mohammed and Jaber (2008) assert that having the context allows the students to use their mental ability and their background knowledge. Moreover, they will be encouraged and 39

pay attention to the meaning and the use of grammar rules, rather than focusing on forms alone (Bourke, 1996 Cited in Mohamed, 2004). Contextualisation is regarded as the best way for presenting grammar which helps the learners to be encouraged and motivated in classroom activities (Hedge, 2000). Furthermore, to achieve the influential teaching the chosen grammar materials should contain contexts (Stranks, 2003) and this is what teacher E is wanting from grammar materials. In the interview teacher E refers to one of the positive aspects of English Grammar in Use as it meets the Kurdish students’ expectations due to the fact that the students always expect the teacher to give rules and later allow them to apply. It appears that the Kurdish teachers are given freedom to choose the materials that they find useful for teaching English grammar. However, the book that they mostly rely on is English Grammar In use and they are not fully satisfied with it. It is clear from the participants’ explanation that two of them are using that book due to the fact that they found it useful for themselves when they were students; this might not be a practical reason for using that material, due to the fact that learners are different in their way of learning languages basing on their characteristics, background and motivation. For other teachers the use of English Grammar in Use is based on the fact that the book is already available in the department and they feel that they are not that experienced to be able to choose and decide on the suitability of particular materials for their students. However, two of them rightly point out that the book lacks context and the activities are not the ones that require the students to communicate and use English. 40

4.4 How do Kurdish teachers use those English grammar materials? It is worth mentioning that each of the participants used materials in the way that they find appropriate for their students and their classes. For instance teachers A and F state that they follow the same order as in the English Grammar in Use due to their belief that the order in the book is appropriate for the students. Moreover, they were asked about their use of other teaching aids but they did not use any teaching aids because teaching aids were not available for them. Teacher B says that she did not necessarily follow the same order as presented in the books. She confirms that she added and removed those parts that she thought were not suitable for her students’ level. At this point one can refer to what is mentioned by Stranks (2003) as the characteristics of the materials, Stranks (2003) rightly points out that the materials should be flexible in order to allow the teachers to add, remove or adapt any subjects that they think is suitable for their students. Teacher C also asserts that she does not follow the same order in the books because she found the order boring for the students. Moreover, she argues that students like variety. Teachers should be spontaneous and they should do their best to provide the interesting atmosphere for the students. Good teachers should vary the topics and activities in order to make their classes motivating and interesting for the students (Harmer, 2007). Teacher D used the materials based on the students need and level. While teacher E says that he hardly followed the same sequence of the subjects because:

41

‘I think the subjects in the English grammar in use are designed following a very old prescriptive approach for language teaching’ (Teacher E, Questionnaire) Teacher E says that he taught the basics of grammar first as he thought learners need those first. Moreover, he used teaching aids and games so as to engage the students. 4.5 What approaches do Kurdish teachers use for teaching grammar? And what factors influence their choice? Before asking the participants how they teach English grammar, they were asked about their perception on teaching grammar. This section is divided into three subsections as each contains a particular theme. 4.5.1 Kurdish teachers’ perception on teaching grammar Teachers A, C and D assume that rules are important for language learning and learners cannot manage the language without managing its rules. This belief on teaching grammar is not acceptable for Krashen because he states that learning a language is not completed by learning its grammar rules (Richards and Renandya, 2002 and Thornbury, 1999). Teacher B asserts that: ‘I agree with grammar teaching but not alone, what I mean is that grammar should not be taught alone, because it will be boring for the students to deal with it alone’. Teaching grammar in relation with other skills is one of most important points to consider in language teaching. Mitchell (2000 cited in Borg and Burns, 2008) sheds light on the fact that grammar teaching should be integrated with other skills or within ‘meaning oriented activities’ ,by doing this students will be given 42

a chance to use and practice the language. Teacher B rightfully points out that context is very important for teaching grammar because contextualising grammar helps learners to see the grammar elements in their real occurrence. Teacher E states that teaching grammar is very much dependent on the students. He asserts that university students need to be taught grammar due to the fact that they are in an academic field and they are using English to write academic works so their work must show accuracy. This point is rightly pointed out in the literature. For the learner to be taken seriously and to be able to write effective piece of works, grammar teaching is important. Moreover, teaching grammar helps the learners to be creative linguistically (Swan, 2002 and Thornbury, 1999). Through knowing Kurdish teachers’ view on teaching grammar, one might perceive how Kurdish teachers teach English grammar. However, one can notice a gap between what they prefer as a theory of teaching grammar and their practice of teaching English grammar. This is due to the fact that they believe in teaching grammar in a context integrated with other skills. However, they cannot practice their belief as they claim that the class size, lack of experience, and duration of the lessons are not helpful to teach grammar in a way that they find it effective. 4.5.2 Kurdish teachers’ approaches of teaching grammar The collected data reveals that the participants followed a deductive approach when teaching English grammar and it is noticeable that it is a ‘pure’ deductive approach. Hence, they do not use any other approaches such as presentation, practice production or more creative and engaging deductive approaches, which are nowadays regarded as influential approaches that engage students to 43

use the target language. Following the deductive approach in teaching, as it was mentioned in the literature review, has its advantages and disadvantages. If teachers want their students to deal with the language accurately, the deductive approach is the best choice and it is also the approach that meets students’ expectation (Mountone, 2004 and Thornbury, 1999). Thornbury (1999) argues that despite the advantages, the deductive approach may narrow down learning the language to purely learning the rules. Five of the participants state that they normally start their lessons by presenting the rules and explaining the use and meaning of a particular grammar point, then allowing the students to give examples and apply the rules. However, Teacher E states that he was ‘eclectic’ in teaching. He explains his approach to teaching to be a mixture of approaches. A number of factors influence how he teaches: ‘I had students with different levels and ages; I have tried to choose different approaches of teaching so as if one did not work with some students the other hopefully work… What I mean is that I have used what was working with the students as well as the subject’. (Teacher E, Questionnaire). Mixed approaches or methods may interest the students and encourage them to become involved and practice in the classroom activities, but it has drawbacks particularly if the teacher is not experienced. Being eclectic in teaching sometimes leads to disorganisation in the class (Harmer, 2007). Teacher E states that he has faced difficulties in trying different approaches due to the class size and lesson periods. However, he found that his students were happy with the way he taught and they were active and engaged.

44

4.5.3 Kurdish teachers’ reason for choosing deductive approach Factors that influence Kurdish teachers to use pure deductive approach to teach English grammar are their class sizes; space and the duration of the lessons. As teacher B admits that she lacks experience in following a more engaging and pleasurable method of teaching, as she states: ‘In a class of 35 students the way we as Kurdish teachers teach is different because we cannot include any up-to-date method of teaching, this is in addition to the duration of the lessons…moreover, I can admit that we lack experiences to use other ways of teaching other than this…’ (Teacher B, Questionnaire) All of the reasons they state are not conducive for any communicative tasks or pair work. This justification for not using pair work or communicative tasks is discussed by Harmer (2007). He asserts that even in big classes, teachers can include pair work and communicative tasks by arranging the classes and having group leaders amongst the students. Moreover, Wharton and Race (1999) suggest that teachers still can involve the students and create a lively atmosphere by simply asking them to solve exercises in pairs, or by giving them time to discuss relevant points together. It is quite natural that different places have their own different cultural backgrounds and perceptions on teachers. In eastern countries teachers have a respected image in the view of the students and they are regarded as being knowledgeable and authoritative (Smith and Chang, 2001). Smith (2001) discusses the teaching system in eastern countries to be mostly relying on the teacher, that is to say teachers should provide information and knowledge whereas learners are ‘knowledge receivers’. Things like elicitation and discussion may not be accepted since it’s the teacher who provides 45

knowledge not the learners. This over-reliant on the teacher and the fact that they are so respected will lead to a restricted relationship between teachers and learners. Moreover, classroom life is considered very serious which very likely leads teachers to avoid enjoyable and involving activities as they are not helpful to conduce effective learning (Chang, 2001). It is not arguable that Kurdistan is an eastern country where people have eastern views on teachers and classroom life. Kurdish teachers are seen as the ‘knowers’, that is to say, the person who supposed to know everything. Moreover, students are used to learn the rules and then given a chance to practice. Students do not expect the teacher to ask them things that they do not or hardly know. This is the Kurdish teachers’ justification for their choice of using the deductive approach. In dealing with students’ expectations and the views they have on teachers, Harmer (2007) asserts that teachers should be aware when choosing a particular method of teaching due to the fact that in each context there is a cultural specificity that affects the students’ views on the teachers and their way of teaching. Despite the high students’ expectations from the teachers, most of the teachers admit that they lack experience and need training courses to help them cope with big classes, using up-to-date methods of teaching and to be experienced to decide suitable materials for the students. For this reason chapter five includes some feasible recommendations for the department to implement. To sum up, the Kurdish teachers prefer to have lively classes and engaged students but there are obstacles that prevent to practice what is thought to be appropriate. For teachers, class size, the duration of lessons and lack of 46

effective training courses are of the main hindrances. The following chapter summarises the findings in relation to the research questions along with recommendations and suggestion for further studies.

47

Chapter Five Conclusions and Recommendations 5.1 Introduction This chapter provides an overview of the outcomes making links to the research questions. Moreover, recommendations are set out based on the findings of this research. 5.2 Aims The aims of this research were to explore the grammar materials that are used by Kurdish teachers to teach grammar. The findings show that all the participants are using English Grammar in Use (Murphy, 1997) as a main source of teaching English grammar. The other aim of the research was to investigate the factors that influence the Kurdish teachers to choose English Grammar in Use for teaching grammar. The researcher has found that the factors that influence the participants are; two of them are using this book basing on their personal experience that is what (Borg, 2006) discuses to be ‘teacher cognition’. The other participants rely on this book because this book is the one that the department can provide the students with and it is the norm in the department to use that book. However, they have been given freedom to choose the materials that they find appropriate for the learners but they do not use that freedom due to the reasons that they mentioned. The other aim was to find out how the participants use the materials when teaching English grammar. The data analysis revealed that, the majority of the participants confirm that they hardly follow the same sequence as they believe that students like the variety and teachers should take into account learners’ 48

needs and interest, whereas the minority of them follow the same order as it is in the English Grammar in Use due to their belief that the order is suitable for the students’ level. The final aim of this study was to find out what approach Kurdish teachers use when teaching English grammar and what factors influence their choice. The data reveals that almost all the teachers use a pure deductive approach, except one teacher who claims that he uses an ‘eclectic’ approach. The factors that influence the teachers to follow the pure deductive approach are lack of experience, class size and duration of the lessons. For this reason the next section makes the recommendations to solving this dependence on the use of the pure deductive approach. 5.3 Recommendations As the findings revealed the participants rely heavily on English Grammar in Use (Murphy, 1997) and claim that they cannot decide on the suitability of other materials as they lack experience. Therefore, it can be recommended that the department should arrange training courses for the teachers to get experience in searching, choosing and evaluating materials based on the learners’ needs, age and interests. Moreover, as the findings show that all most all the participants use the pure deductive approach. However, most of them would prefer to teach grammar differently but they cannot due to lack of experience and large classes. Again training courses could be provided especially courses that help them to learn and apply more effective and engaging methods of teaching and to manage big classes while trying to involve students in actively undertaking exercises.

49

5.4 Professional Developments From the findings of this study some important points have been discovered such as; grammar teachers should be experienced enough to be able to evaluate appropriate materials for learning. Moreover, they need to apply effective approaches of teaching and to manage big classes so as to encourage students’ active participation. In addition to the above points, this study can provide the Kurdish teachers with the clear insight into what learning materials, especially grammar materials, should include. Moreover, it could help them to realise that even big classes can be managed in a way that the students are involved and more engaging. 5.5 Personal Developments This study has a significant role in improving my ability to contact with the participants and interview them considering the ethical issues. Moreover, undertaking research requires reading a wide range of resources and this study has been a perfect experience for me to be able to search related materials and read in a limited time scale. Furthermore, undertaking the research in English by a non-English researcher helps me as a non-native speaker of English to be able to improve my skills in writing academic work, as the work has being revised and proofread many times. 5.6 Disseminations I hope to share my findings with the head of the department in which I probably teach. Moreover, I hope I can arrange seminars for the Kurdish teachers who teach English grammar and share my findings with them in order to know their 50

view points and their further suggestions. Moreover, I hope I can increase the Kurdish teachers’ awareness that instead of using only a pure deductive approach, they can still follow a deductive approach but using other more creative methods as well. 5.7 Evaluation and Suggestion for Further Research Six Kurdish teachers have been chosen for undertaking this research basing on the fact that they are teaching English grammar. Moreover, the participants are from one of the universities of Kurdistan due to the lack of access to other universities in Kurdistan. This is in addition to a limitation of this study which is the participants are not representing the whole grammar teachers in Kurdistan as it is a small scale research. For this reason, the further research is suggested to be on taking samples from different universities in order to gain an insight into the other Kurdish universities way of teaching English grammar. Moreover, the Kurdish teachers’ mental life in relation with teaching grammar could be the best research subject for further study. Furthermore, only two tools of data collection have been used in this study whereas other tools such as; observation and focus groups could be more helpful in undertaking research projects.

51

References 

Basit, T. (2010) Conducting Research in Educational Context. London: Continuum.



Block, D. (1991) Some Thoughts on DIY material design. ELT Journal 45, (3), 211-17.



Boeije, H. (2010) Analysis in Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. London: SAGA publication Ltd.



Borg, S. (2003) Teacher Cognition in Language Teaching: A Review of Research on What Language Teachers Think, Know, Believe, and Do. Language Teaching, 36(2), 81-109.



Borg, S. (2006). Teacher Cognition and Language Education: Research and Practice. London: Continuum.



Borg, S. and Burns, A. (2008) Integrating Grammar in Adult TESOL Classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 29/3: 456-482. Oxford University Press.



Brown, J. and Rodgers, T. (2002) Doing Second Language Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.



Bryman, A. (2008) Social Research Methods. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.



Burton, D. and Bartlett, S. (2009) Key Issues for Education Researchers. London: Sage.



Chang, J. (2001) ‘Chinese speakers’ In Swan, M. and Smith, B. (ed) (2001) Learner English: A Teacher’s Guide to Interference and Other Problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.



Cohen, D. Crabtree, B. (2006) "Qualitative Research Guidelines Project." July 2006. http://www.qualres.org/HomeSemi-3629.html. Accessed on



Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2011) Research Methods in Education. 7th ed. USA: Routledge



Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2007) Research Methods in Education. 7th ed. USA: Routledge.



Corbetta, P. (2003) Social Research Theory: Methods and Techniques. London: SAGE Publications.



Corbin, J. and Strauss, A. (2008) Basics of Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. London: Sage.

52



Creswell, J. (2003) Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Method Approaches. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publication.



David, M. and Sutton C.D. (2004) Social Research the Basics. London: SAGE Publications.



Davies, M. (2007) Doing a Successful Research Project Using Qualitative or Quantitative Methods. London: Macmillan.



Decoo, W. (1996) The Induction-Deduction Opposition: Ambiguities and Complexities of The Didactic Reality. IRAL International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching.34: 95-118.



Ellis, R. (1990) Instructed Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University press.



Ellis, R. (1997) Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.



Ellis, R. (2006) Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective. TESOL quarterly. Vol.40, No.1 March 2006.Auckland: University of Auckland.



Flick, U. (2006) An Introduction to Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. London: Saga.



Freebody, P. (2003) Qualitative Research in Education Interaction and Practice. London: Sage.



Gillham, B. (2010) Real World Research: Case Study Research Methods. London, GBR: Continuum International Publishing.



Golafshani, N. (2003) Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. The qualitative report. Vol.8, No.4 December 2003, 597-607.



Harmer, J. (2007) The Practice of English Language Teaching. 4th ed. Harlow: Longman.



Hedge, T. (2000) Teaching and Learning in The Language Classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.



Hennink, M., Hutter, I. and Baily, A. (2011) Qualitative Research Methods. London: Sage.



Hernon, P. and Schwarz, C. (2009) Library and Information Science Research. USA: Simon College, Graduate School of Library and Information Science.

53



Kajornboon, A. (2005) Using Interviews as Research Instruments. Chulalongkorn University: Language Institute.



Krashen, S. (1982) Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.



Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000) Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.



Lightbown, P. and Spada, N. (2006) How Languages are Learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.



Lucantoni, P. (2002). Teaching and Assessing Skills in English as a Second Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.



Mason, J. (2002) Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. London: Sage.



Maxwell, J. (2005) Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. (2nd ed). London: Sage.



Merriam, S. (1989) Case Study Research in Education: A Qualitative Approach. London: Jossey-Bass.



Mitchell, R. and Myles, F. (2004) Second Language Learning Theories. London. Hodder Education.



Mohamed,

N.

(2004)

Consciousness-Rising

Tasks:

A

Learner

Perspective. ELT Journal 58/3. (July 2004). Oxford University Press. 

Mohammed, A. and Jaber, H. (2008) The Effects of Deductive and Inductive Approaches of Teaching on Jordanian University Students Use of The Active and Passive Voice in English. College Student Journal.



Morrison, K.R.B. (1993) Planning and Accomplishing School-Centred Evaluation. Norfolk: Peter Francis Publishers.



Mountone, P. (2004) How to Use Examples Effectively: Deductive Vs. Inductive Approaches. University of California, Santa Barbara.



Nassaji, H. and Fotos, S. (2004) Current Development in Research on the Teaching of Grammar. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics Vol.24. Pp 126-145.



Neuman, W. (2000) Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. 4th ed. A Pearson Education Company.



Oliver, P. (2010) The Student’s Guide to Research Ethics. London: Open University Press.

54



Opie, C. (2004) ‘Research Procedures’ In Opie, C. (ed) Doing Educational Research: A Guide to First Time Researchers. London: Sage. Pp. 95-130.



Prince, M. and Felder, R. (2005) Inductive Teaching and Learning Methods: Definitions, Comparisons and Research Basis.



Punch, K. (2005) Introduction to Social Research Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. 2nd ed. London: Cromwell Press Ltd.



Punch, K. (2009) Introduction to Research Methods in Education. London: Sage.



Richards, J. (2001) Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.



Richards, J. and Renandya, W. (2002) Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.



Scrivener, J. (2011) Learning Teaching: The Essential Guide to English Language Teaching. 3rd ed. Oxford: Macmillan.



Silverman, D. (2005) Doing Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. London: Sage.



Smith, B. (2001) ‘Arabic Speakers’ In Swan, M. and Smith, B. (ed) (2001) Learner English: A Teacher’s Guide to Interference and Other Problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.



Spada, N. (1997) Form-Focused Instruction and Second Language Acquisition: A Review of Classroom and Laboratory Research. Language teaching, 29, 1-15.



Stranks, J. (2003) ‘Materials For the Teaching of Grammar’ In Tomlinson, B.

(ed)

Developing Materials for Language

Teaching.

London:

Continuum. 

Swan, M. (2002) ‘Seven Bad Reasons for Teaching Grammar –and Two Good Ones’. In Richards, J. and Renandya, W. (2002) Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.



Thornbury, S. (1999) How to Teach Grammar. Harlow: Person Education Ltd.

55



Tomlinson, B. (2003) ‘Introduction: Are Materials Developing?’ In Tomlinson, B. (ed) Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London: Continuum.



Traverse, M. (2001) Introducing Qualitative Methods: Qualitative Research through Case Studies. London: Sage.



Troike, M. (2006) Introducing Second Language Acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.



Weaver, C. (1996) Teaching Grammar in Context. Portsmouth: Boyton/ Cook Publishers.



Wengraf, T. (2001) Qualitative Research Interviewing. London: Sage.



Wharton, S. and Race, P. (1999) 500 Tips for TESOL: Teaching English to the Speakers of Other Languages. London: RoutledgeFalmaer.



Wong, S. (2006) Dialogic Approaches to TESOL: Where the Ginkgo Tree Grows. London: Lawrence erl BAUM Associates.



Woods,

P.

(2006)

Qualitative

Research.

(online)

Available:

http://www.edu.plymouth.ac.uk/resined/qualitative%20methods%202/qua lrshm.htm (accessed 26th June, 2012). 

Yin, R. (2009) Case Study Research Design and Methods. 4th ed. London. Sage Ltd.

56

Appendix A Data Questions

Teacher A

What

English Grammar in Use

materials do you use for teaching

Teacher B Understanding and Using English Grammar, English Grammar in Use

Teacher C hand outs and English Grammar in Use

Teacher D

Teacher E

English

used a

Use’

Teacher F English Grammar in Use an Understanding and Using English Grammar,

Grammar in

textbook called

Use

‘English

No,

Grammar in

English grammar? Do you

No, I

data show (

Yes, I do.

I use

have used

use any

didn’t

not mostly),

I use

technological

pictures,

teaching

sentence

tools as well as

diagrams,

aids? If

grid, games posters in

overhead

yes what

teaching

projectors and

are they?

English

data shows

grammar How do you choose your materials?

I choose the materials basing on the students level.

Usually I choose the materials according to their level of understanding

According according to the to the students’ levels interest and and needs needs of the students.

I was looking

The materials

for what helps

are chosen

the students

from both the

most when

text book and

communicating extra in English.

exercises online

I was teaching use all the according materials? to the order, Do you Sometimes I was use the deleting subjects certain structures in the and adding materials others in the Do you

Not necessarily, depending on the importance of the subjects.

No, I don’t

It depends on the level and needs of the students again

I though what is needed first in grammar is the basics such as what is a verb and an adjective before moving to a

57

The subjects are taught in the same order of the text book

same

complicated

order as

subject such as

they are?

‘future perfect continuous’.

How do you teach English grammar?

I start teaching with writing the rules and giving examples.

I teach differently according to the subject.

I start to explain the subject using different materials. I mostly use the whiteboard for explanation .When the subject is explained, the students should do different exercises.

I explain the

have tried to

subject of that

teach it not

day by

only following

presenting the

a certain

rules and

approach for

explaining the

language

use and

teaching such

meaning of

as CLT, but it

each point, and

was rather

then I give the

‘elective’

students time to

approach.

solve exercises.

58

I start with the rules and definitions and proceed to apply them to particular examples, then clarifying ideas and implication of the formula and the rules.

Appendix B

University of Huddersfield: School of Education and Professional Development Research Approval Documentation

Participant Information Sheet 1. Research project title An Investigation into the Teaching of English Grammar at a University in Kurdistan 2. Invitation paragraph You are being invited to take part in a research project. Before you decide it is important for you to understand why this research is being done and what it will involve. Please take time to read the following information and discuss it with others if you wish. Ask if there is anything that is not clear or if you would like more information. Thank you for taking time to read this. 3. What is the purpose of the project The aim of this research is to explore what English grammar materials do the teachers use for EFL students at university level in Kurdistan. It involves both the teachers’ view of English grammar materials and the way(s) that the teachers use the materials. Moreover, the approaches that the teachers use for teaching English Grammar Materials are also investigated. 4. Why have I been chosen? You have been chosen to kindly take part in this project as you are teaching or have taught English Grammar Materials as an EFL to the university students in 59

Kurdistan. As it is mentioned above, the research investigates how the teachers’ use the Grammar materials at universities in Kurdistan. 5. Do I have to take part? As your participation is highly appreciated, it is important to know that taking part in this research is voluntary and you can withdraw at any stage whenever you feel uncomfortable without any penalty. 6. What do I have to do? All you have to do is to kindly participate in the questionnaire that will be send to you by email and the Skype interview for the research. 7. Are there any disadvantages to taking part? As a teacher, this research might help you to know how English Grammar teachers use English Grammar materials at universities in Kurdistan. It might give you some knowledge not about how do you use the materials but also about how do your colleagues use the materials. 8. Will all my details be kept confidential? You should be aware that all information is entirely confidential. 9. What will happen to the results of the research project? The data collected from the interviews and the questionnaire will be analysed thoroughly to come into some findings. Be assured that everything related to the research including the tapes of interviews and the questionnaire will be destroyed after the research.

60

Appendix C

Participant Consent Form

Title of Project: An Investigation into the Teaching of English Grammar at a University in Kurdistan

Name of Researcher: Soma Nawzad Abubakr

I confirm that I have read and understood the Participant Information Sheet related to this research, and have had the opportunity to ask questions.

I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time without giving any reason.

I understand that all my responses will be anonymised.

I give permission for members of the research team to have access to my anonymised responses.

I agree to take part in the above project.

Name of participant:

Date:

61

Appendix D Questionnaire on: An Investigation into the Teaching of English Grammar at a University in Kurdistan.

Please take you time answering these questions and do not skip any of them.

Q1. What materials do you use for teaching English grammar?

Q2. Do you use any teaching aids? If yes what are they?

Q3. How do you choose your materials?

Q4.Do you use all the materials? Do you use the subjects in the materials in the same order as they are?

Q5.How do you teach English grammar?

62

Appendix E Sample of Interview Questions 

What is your perception on teaching these materials? Do they account for the students’ needs and age?



Are you selective in teaching materials? Which parts do you select and why?



Do you adapt any parts of the materials you use? Why?



Do you avoid teaching any parts from the materials? Why?



How do you teach English grammar? Why?



Do you think that following that approach is helpful? Why?



To what extent are the activities motivating for the students?



If you would like to change the way you teach grammar, are there any barrier that would prevent you from doing so?



What is your perception on teaching grammar? Do you agree that grammar should be taught or not? Why?



What do you think to be the best approach, if there is any, for teaching English grammar? Why?



What other types of materials do you think would be suitable for teaching grammar?



Tell me about your experience in learning English grammar? Do you remember any technics used by your teacher while you were a student?



Have you ever participated in any training courses?



While teaching grammar, do you teach like a typical teacher that you had while you were a student?

63

Appendix F Interview Transcript: Teacher E Q1. What is your perception on teaching grammar? Do you agree that grammar should be taught? A1. I think that very much depends on the person that you are teaching, for example as you are talking about university students who are trying to study bachelor in English language, that is they are studying English in an academic area , because they are writing essays or doing researches, I definitely agree with teaching grammar. Q2. Why you believe that students at university level should be taught grammar? A2. For many reasons, firstly, because they are studying language, it is not only not how to communicate in that language, it is also gaining the knowledge of that language. Therefore, if you are trying to gain that knowledge, grammar is important part in that knowledge. Another reason, they are using that language for their academic writing. Q3. In the questionnaire, you wrote something on the way you were using for teaching grammar, you wrote that you are elective in using the approaches of teaching grammar, what factors influence you to be that selective? A3. I think, what I consider very much in my teaching is how students learn, that is my focal point, how do I try to make students to feel that they are learning something, for that reason I should search and think about different ways to suite different level and different student backgrounds, that is to say, I had students with different level and age; I have tried to choose different approaches of teaching so as if one did not work with some students the other hopefully work… What I mean is that I have used what was working with the students as well as the subject’, I think it was very helpful for the students but the hardest job for me. Q4. In the questionnaire, you mentioned the material that you use for teaching grammar to be mainly English grammar in use. What factors influence you to use that book? 64

A4. I think to a great extent, for someone like me who is not with that experience and I was not in a position to decide the suitable book for the level I taught, that is why what I tried is to go on a norm which was in the department, I thought using that book was the recommendation from the department rather imposing that book. Q5. What are your perceptions on that book? A5. That book has not worked and not working, it is a self-study book. It is not suitable for a class, English grammar in use is a book which lacks context, and this is a huge problem for grammar books and it is outdated. It is following an approach which might not work for all the students. That book does not account for the students need and interest. Q6. While teaching that book, did you try to ignore or add parts? A6. Yes, I could skip units, basing on my personal judgment for the students’ need. Q7. Did you try to adapt any parts A7. Yes, because I tried to create context and adapt the unites which did not work. Q8. What type of grammar material do you think to be suitable for teaching grammar? A8. Simply, the material that consider the students’ age, need and interest and probably the one which counts for the context.

65