CHAPTER 1 :
In this research paper we will study the effectiveness of games in teaching grammar for year five students. We will learn to incorporate and use appropriate games when teaching grammar to year five students as games are a part of stimulant. The best way to teach people on anything is to keep them interested by making the teaching process fun. English language is just like any other subject. It could be boring for some people. Hence, the incorporation of games can help keep the students thrilled and upbeat about the subject.
2.0 PROBLEM STATEMENT
Learning grammar can be boring and constant effort is required. Most young learners will not internally decide that they want to learn grammar. They don’t yet understand the concepts of why it is important to learn grammar, so external factors won’t affect them much.
3.0 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
• To find out if the difficulty level of the games mesh with the student’s proficiency level. • To discover which skills the games practice.
4.0 RESEARCH QUESTION
1. Do the difficulty level of the games mesh with student’s proficiency level? 2. Which skills do the games practice?
5.0 LIMITATION OF STUDY
The limitations of this study are; some participants may not want to cooperate since the participants are only primary school students and may lose interest while the research is being conducted. They may not understand the significance of the study therefore, it is hard to control them and carry out the research upon them.
We also have to take into consideration the proficiency level of the students because each of them have different proficiency levels, therefore conducting a research like this can be proven to be tricky.
Another limitation of this study is the time. Because only one class is used, therefore the study will consume a lot of time rather than if we were to take two classes, the time taken for this study would be reduced.
Grammar is often misunderstood in the language teaching field. The misconception lies in the view that grammar is a collection of arbitrary rules about static structures in the language. Further questionable claims are that the structures do not have to be taught, learners will acquire them on their own, or if the structures are taught, the lessons that ensue will be boring. Consequently, communicative and proficiency-based teaching approaches sometimes unduly limit grammar instruction.
Carol Chomsky (1969) showed that native English speakers were still in the process of acquiring certain grammatical structures in English well into adolescence. Thus, another important question is whether it is possible to accelerate students' natural learning of grammar through instruction. Research findings can be brought to bear on this question from a variety of sources (see Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1991). Pienemann (1984) demonstrated that subjects who received grammar instruction progressed to the next stage after a two-week period, a passage normally taking several months in untutored development. While the number of subjects studied was admittedly small, the finding, if corroborated, provides evidence of the efficacy of teaching over leaving acquisition to run its natural course.
Teaching grammar does not mean asking students to repeat models in a mindless way, and it does not mean memorizing rules. Such activities can be boring and do not necessarily teach grammar. This does not mean there is no place for drills, but drills should be used in a meaningful and purposeful way.
Research shows that some people have a more analytical learning style than others. According to Hatch (1974), some learners approach the language learning task as "rule formers." Such learners are accurate but halting users of the target language. Others are what Hatch...