1

Teaching Grammar in Context

Waad Sleiman

Advanced Methods

Miss Rasha Halat

Wednesday, February 1st, 2012

Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 2

Grammar is one aspect of learning a language and it has been subject to many debate and

discussion, especially regarding the teaching methods. Grammar over the passage of years has

been regarded differently by several thinkers, some believed that it was very necessary and

taught in a very traditional manner and others believed that it was not of great importance and

tended to ignore it in their classrooms.

Contextualization or presenting aspects of language in context is a difficult task for

teachers, mostly because it requires of the teachers a great deal of preparation and planning.

However, it is the most effective way of presenting material to students; it gives them the

opportunity to experience things from a “real world” perspective. Through contextualized

teaching, students would be able to experience, explore, and evaluate things- knowledge- from a

broader perspective and thus become capable of relating different educational concepts together

and realizing relationships between things they learn in class and those around them in real life. I

guess this is the real purpose of education; to be able to use and incorporate acquired concepts

into ones’ daily life.

As an English teacher, it is pretty easy and feasible to present things in context, especially

reading, writing, listening, and speaking because any of the topics presented in these aspects are

very concept based and extracted from the real world. Many of the reading units and topics I

present to students are extracted from real life, such as fashion, advertising, crime, sports

obsession, and other social features; they have provided students with a vast range of real life

information and allowed them to construct solid and assured points of view. These units gave the

students the chance to discuss and relate things they learn in class to those they have experienced
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 3

and lived in society. This contextualization helped them to evaluate their many fragile beliefs

and reconsider new ones or modify them to become more solidified. In addition, they gave value

to the learning material and made students aware of the significance of what they are learning

and thus became more interested and motivated to learn.

In terms of teaching, presenting things in context is a two sided coin, one which offers

teachers as well as students a very interesting and meaningful experience and one which requires

a lot of planning and preparation, in addition to a lot of application time, since students have to

be engaged in multiple tasks and activities to ensure that they understand the material at hand

properly. Nevertheless, contextualized teaching or what is known by many context-based

teaching yields very fruitful results and allows students to build bridges between school acquired

material and daily life.

In spite the contextualized nature of the English language and many other languages,

specifically in terms of teaching, it seems very difficult and strange for teachers to present all its

aspects in a concept-based structure. Many teachers find one feature very rigid and dry and thus

prefer to teach it in isolation of any context; “Grammar”. Grammar is known to present students

with a set of rules which are followed by a cluster of activities that simply offer drilling and

practice in isolation of any contextualization. This makes grammar session very boring and

demotivating and many students feel disconnected and lost during grammar sessions, while

others seem to excel in them simply because they feel that grammar is organized and predictable.

The rules are there you only need to follow them to solve the activities and here is the major

problem. Language is not a set of features or categories that are predictable and pre-set, language

engages students into critical thinking processes and self evaluation to track their development

and progress. Language can be measured in two ways fluency and accuracy; fluency is achieved
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 4

through speech and accuracy is achieved through proper usage and knowledge of form; in other

words grammar.

I am one of the teachers who wanted to teach grammar in context but was not able to or

could not device the appropriate set of tasks that ensure its contextualization. Maybe because I

did not really understand its value or maybe because as a student I was taught grammar in such a

modern way; I call it modern because the common grammar instruction procedure is known as

“traditional”. For this reason I started seeking ways to improve my performance as a teacher

from all areas of teaching and mostly in grammar. During my search and readings, I came into

many hypotheses and reviews that helped me shape my view about grammar instructions and

what practices I shall adopt from now on.

It is necessary to shed light on the different views regarding grammar instructions and

approaches. There are three views regarding grammar, the view first is the one that regards

grammar as something that is acquired along the way and thus doesn’t need to be focused on and

thus it is ignored during classroom explanations or instructions. This view largely focuses on

fluency developing activities believing that the acquisition of L1 is similar to that of L2 and thus

students shall acquire it in the same pattern they acquire their L1. The second approach is the

traditional approach: through this approach the teachers present grammar by simply explaining

the rules and the forms and then drilling the students on these rules, this results in boredom and

students who can only produce correct forms on tests and exercises, but consistently make errors

when trying to use the language in context. (Byrd, 1998). The traditional method has been widely

used by teachers and many of us have been taught through the same approach and that is why

they feel safe and confident when using it in their own class. However, this approach has shown
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 5

that it can affect students’ performance in terms of task-based activities or when attempting to

actually using the language in society and this can lead to more drastic complications.

Michael Swan in “Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current

Practice” has identified seven main reasons for teachers to adopt the traditional method of

grammar instructions in their classrooms. These reasons seem very logical and justifiable when

you actually think about them.

1. It is there: Swan maintains that many teachers teach grammar simply because it is

there; i.e. exists in language. They don’t consider the possibility that this book they

are using has been done for purposes not related to their students, or even the teaching

situation in their classrooms. In other words, Swan is trying to say that not all that is

available in grammar is suitable for our students and as teachers we should think of

the benefits of our students first and then decide what grammar concepts are mostly

related to their situations in class and their backgrounds.

2. It is tidy: Swan states that many teach grammar because it is very tidy. B y tidy Swan

means that grammar is made up of sets of rules that will help students work language

out by solving activities and exercise as practice or drills to master the rules.

3. It is testable: Tests are sometimes very motivating and interesting for students, they

offer the thrill of excitement and anxiety as they are being solved, especially if they

are challenging to the students. In addition, tests help both students and teachers to

track any progress in language or other field of education. Moreover, grammar exams

are very easy to prepare-in the traditional approach. They don’t require teachers to

work hard in preparing them.

Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 6

4. Grammar as a security blanket: because of the fixed nature of grammar and its

structure around rules, many teachers choose to teach it because they feel confident

and sure when dealing with it. This security aspect of grammar teaching and learning

at the same time might lead teachers to focus more on it and ignore other equally

important aspects of a language.

5. It made me who I am: many of us have struggled to learn several things and

grammar is one of them, because so many teachers who have struggled while learning

grammar feel it is of great importance and thus they attempt to include it in their

teaching. They give grammar a great deal of attention and importance.

6. You have to teach the whole system: many teachers have the belief that grammar is

a full system through which different elements and rules; some more systematic than

others, some tightly or loosely linked, and others completely independent; are

accumulated. For these reasons they choose to present grammar to students ignoring

the nature of their students and whether the grammar material being presented in

appropriate or not.

As result Swan (Swan, 2002) poses three crucial questions that would help teacher with

such views to work with grammar:

a. How much of this do the students know already from their native language?

b. How much of the rest is important?

c. How much of that have we got time for?

These questions help teachers recognize their priorities when teach anything and specifically

grammar.
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 7

7. Power: this reason sustains two opposing views, the first view is authoritarian and the

second is communicative. Each of these two views decides on a mode of presentation.

If the teacher plays the role of an authoritarian, he/she will approach grammar from

the same angle. Authoritarian teachers regard grammar as an isolated set of fixed

rules that when taught will empower their users. Whereas, communicative teachers

regard themselves as facilitators and consider grammar a means for communication.

If a student learns in context he/she will be able to communicate through language

successfully.

Swan hence states that when teachers give grammar more attention and focus than other aspects

of language, the learners will acquire the language and its grammar, but can only use it during

activities, tests, and recitation rules; they will never be able to use it for communication

purposes. This will eventually lead students to become less self confident and demotivated.

Therefore, Swan offers a simple explanation of why grammar should be taught to students in

context and a communicative atmosphere. Communication is done through the use of different

types of language whether verbal or body; in both cases it greatly depends on comprehension. If

one side of the conversation is finding difficulty in comprehending the other, then certain

language related measures should be taken. These measures should ensure that both parties

involved in a conversation comprehend and accept each other; otherwise there would be a big

gap that needs to be filled. Therefore, Swan (Swan, 2002) presents two good reasons for teaching

grammar that guarantee its contextualized practice.

a. Comprehension: many of the errors done by ESL students are accepted as long as they

don’t interfere in comprehension. When comprehension becomes vague, then grammar or

form teaching strategies are closely examined. When comprehensibility is at stake, many
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 8

tend to re-evaluate grammar instruction strategies and find ways to enhance form

(structure) and meaning (fluency) together. Grammar instruction presented in context or

task-based grammar shall work on filling this comprehension gap and develop ESL

students’ language in terms of fluency and accuracy. Further explanation of the

advantages of task-based grammar (grammar in context) shall be elicited as we continue.

b. Acceptability: by acceptability Swan means that when a speaker is not good at using

language in communication and many struggle to comprehend what he/she is saying, this

speaker shall not be accepted in a conversation or among people anymore; why? Well,

because many will stereotype him/her as stupid or uneducated. This stereotyping is a

typical example of unacceptability. Many might show much more bias and prejudice and

thus the speaker would be shunned from social communication or any type of social

discourse. Therefore, it is essential for ESL students or any person to possess good

communication skills, which are well developed through proper grammar instruction.

The third approach highly regards grammar and values its importance in developing both

accuracy and fluency and guarantees comprehensible communication among students and people

all together. This approach presents grammar to students in a task-based manner, it ensures that

students are working on both form and meaning at the same time. This approach allows the

teacher to present grammar instruction in context and provide students with the most effective

ways to improve their communication and language usage at the same time. Many of the recent

studies have shown preference towards the task-based grammar over the form-focused

instruction and emphasize its effectiveness. This shift towards a task-based approach has offered

teachers the chance to engage students in tasks that will help them determine needed or

necessary grammar concepts to improve and develop students’ accuracy and fluency. This helps
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 9

teacher set suitable grammar instructions based on students’ performance on these tasks and

what have they incorporated from their L1.

Before delving into the details of my findings, it is necessary to say that this new

approach towards grammar has been named differently by several researches, but they all mean

the same thing and are addressing the same approach. Grammar instructions presented in context

are be found by the name of contextualized grammar, task-focused instructions as Swan and

Skehan call it and fluency-based pedagogy as Nunan calls it. The most important fact about all

this is not the names, rather the purpose behind this approach and the benefits it offers ESL

students.

Skehan states the following with regards to task-based instructions:

“The underlying theory for a P-P-P approach1 has now been discredited. The belief that a precise

focus on a particular form leads to learning and automatization (that learners will learn what is

taught in the order in which it is taught) no longer carries much credibility in linguistics or

psychology”.

Skehan’s statement is explains that what was once believed a good practice of grammar teaching

is now discredited. In addition, Skehan refutes the notion that claims that learners acquire

language in a linear way. Nunan confirms and explains that after observing students as they

acquire a 2nd language a different pattern of acquisition is realized. Language does not seem to be

acquired in a linear pattern, rather randomly. It is not a rule that students move from one concept

to the other only after mastering and acquiring the first. Students tend to randomly move from

1
P-P-P approach: Presentation-Practice-Production lesson: traditional way of teaching grammar
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 10

one acquired concept to the other without actually mastering it; the mastering could be done

along the way or as they work on a different concept. It is as unpredictable process.

Nunan as stated by Richards in Addressing The Grammar Gap in Task Work says; “the

communication task [is] a piece of class work which involves learners in comprehending,

manipulating, producing or interacting in the target language wile their attention is principally

focused on meaning rather than form. The task should also have a sense of completeness, being

able to stand alone as a communicative act in its own right.”

What Nunan is trying to state here is that grammar is often taught out of context, through

isolated sentences which are supposed to be internalized and mastered through repetition and

drills. However, this will surely help students acquire the grammar but not use it in different

contexts to maintain a conversation. In addition, this practice will result in developing students

who don’t understand the relationship existing between form, meaning and usage. If students are

presented tasks that focus on fluency as number one and form as complementary component,

instead of practice or drill activities, they will be able to develop and enhance their

communication and their appreciation and the real purpose behind learning a language which is

to be able to carry out certain social tasks; like, socializing, getting services done, buying goods,

and expressing ones’ self, in addition to need to survive in a community The purpose of learning

grammar is to learn the language in which this grammar is present (Byrd, 1998).

Grammar should not be restricted to the classroom, rather extended to communication

inside and outside the classroom. In other words, learners should be presented grammar in

context, otherwise it becomes meaningless, isolated, and a hindrance to communication.

Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 11

There is a huge difference between Grammar-focused activities and Task-focused

activities that teachers should be aware of to modify their grammar teaching techniques (Brumfit,

1979; Ellis, 1994; Skehan, 1996b):

Grammar-focused Activities Task-focused Activities

 Reflect typical classroom use of  Reflect natural language use

language

 Focus on the formation of correct  Call on implicit knowledge

examples of language

 Produce language for display (as  Elicit a vernacular speech style

evidence of learning)

 Call on explicit knowledge  Reflect automatic performance

 Elicit a careful (monitored) speech style  Require the use of improvising, repair

and reorganization

 Reflect controlled performance  Produce language that is not always

predictable

 Practice language out of context  Allow students to select language they

use

 Practice small samples of language  Require real communication

 Don’t require authentic communication

The above list of differences not only shows how different these two practices or approaches are,

but also indicates the benefits of the task-focused activities and instructions and allows teachers
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 12

to draw a clear picture of the kind of grammar explanation they aim at present to their students.

However, when choosing to adopt the task-focused on contextualized grammar teachers need to

pay attention to several crucial points, these implications will help teachers to present

contextualized grammar in the best ways. These implications are elicited by two Nunan (Nunan,

1998) and Byrd (Byrd, 1998):

First I shall start with what Byrd has presented:

 Students need overt instruction that connects grammar points with larger communication

contexts.

 Students do not need to master every aspect of each grammar point, only those that are

relevant to the immediate communication task.

 Error correction is not always the instructor’s first responsibility.

These implications will now be looked at closely;

 Overt Grammar Instructions: many students appreciate and benefit from direct

instruction that allows them to apply critical thinking skills and teachers need take

advantage of this fact and provide explanations that give students a descriptive

understanding of each point of grammar. This implies that teachers could teach grammar

in the target language or the students’ native language or both because the purpose of

grammar is to facilitate understanding. In addition, teachers should limit the time devoted

to explain grammar concepts to 10 minutes, especially for lower level students. Finally,

teachers can present the grammar using the different students’ learning styles; written and

oral. Along the way teachers need to make sure that they provide ample examples which

should be planned around two basic principles; first, the chosen examples need to be
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 13

appropriate and accurate; precise and straight forward not causing confusion and

misconceptions. Second, use the examples as teaching tools to facilitate understanding

and engage students in exploration and contact with more specific information and

vocabulary.

 Relevance Grammar Instruction: under this point Byrd identifies the “communicative

competence model”, this model ensures that students are engaged in communicative

activities that will make them more competent in using language. This prescribes a

context based explanation and work.

Byrd here presents two models, a traditional model which she calls “grammar for grammar’s

sake and the communicative competence model which she calls “grammar for

communication’s sake”.

Traditional model: grammar for grammar’s sake:

 Teach the regular -ed form with its two pronunciation variants

 Teach the doubling rule for verbs that end in d (for example, wed-wedded)

 Hand out a list of irregular verbs that students must memorize

 Do pattern practice drills for –ed

 Do substitution drills for irregular verbs

As you see, the purpose of the traditional model is to teach grammar for the sake of grammar

only and this will not lead to the improvement of language as a unified structure, rather the

improvement of one aspect over the other.

Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 14

Communicative Competence model: grammar for communication’s sake:

 Distribute two short narratives about recent experiences or events, each one to

half of the class

 Teach the regular –ed form, using verbs that occur in the texts as examples. Teach

the pronunciation and doubling rules of those forms that occur in the texts.

 Teach the irregular verbs that occur in the texts.

 Students read the narrative, ask questions about points they did not understand.

 Students work in pairs in which one member has read Story A and the other Story

B. Students interview one another; using the information from the interview, they

then write up or orally repeat the story they have not read.

 Error Correction: correcting students’ errors is a very central point along the

process of language acquisition and teachers need to be aware of the criticality of

this issue because error correction or feedback needs to be presented in the most

suitable and positive manner, otherwise students would become demotivated and

frustrated and this could affect their acquisition negatively.

Byrd informs teachers of the need to be careful about the way they present

feedback to students and advices them to inform students of when they are

making errors so that they can work on improving themselves and at the same

time work on building students’ confidence in their ability to use language by

focusing on the content of their communication rather than grammatical form.

Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 15

Nunan has presented the following implications:

 Teaching language as a set of choices

 Providing opportunities for learners to explore grammatical and discoursal

relationships in authentic data

 Teaching language in ways that make form/function relationships transparent

 Encouraging learners to become active explorers of language

 Encouraging learners to explore relationships between grammar and discourse

Each implication will be briefly explained below and some will be accompanied by illustrating

examples.

 Teaching language as a set of choices: leaner will be provided with opportunities to

make certain choices in language, i.e. they will be exploring with language in terms of the

meanings they wish to make and their choices of tenses accordingly.

Example 1:

In groups of 3 or 4, study the following conversational extracts. Focus in particular on the part of
the conversation in italics. What is the difference between what Person A says and what Person
B says? When would you use one form, and when would you use the other?

1. A: I’ve seen Romeo and Juliet Twice

B: Me too. I saw it last Tuesday, and again on the weekend.
2. A: Want to go to the movies?
B: No. I’m going to study tonight. We have an exam tomorrow, you know.
A: Oh, in that case, I’ll study as well.
3. A: Looks wet outside. I’m supposed to go to Central, but I don’t have an umbrella. If I
went out without one, I’d get wet.
B: Yes, I went out a while ago. If I’d gone out without an umbrella, I’d have got wet.
4. A: I finished my essay just before the deadline for submission.
B: yes, mine was finished just in time as well.
5. A: My brother, who lives in New York, is visiting me here in Hong Kong.
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 16

B: What a coincidence! My brother, who is visiting me in Hong Kong, lives in New York,
too.
6. A: I need you to look after the kids. You’ll be home early tonight, won’t you?
B: Oh, you’ll be late tonight, will you?
7. A: I won a prize in the English-speaking competition.
B: Yeah? I won the prize in the poetry competition.
8. A: The baby was sleeping when I got home.
B: So, he’ll be sleeping when I get home, then?
9. A: Are you hungry?
B: No, I’ve already eaten.
A: Well, I’ll have already eaten by the time you get home.

Compare explanations with another group. What similarities and differences are there in you
explanations?

 Providing opportunities for learners to explore grammatical and discoursal

relationships in authentic data: here Nunan explains that it is not wrong to use non-

authentic texts while teaching grammar or other concept, yet it is unfavorable because it

would make learning difficult, since students are not being exposed to “real world”

expressions and experiencing language from that same perspective. If they are exposed

on authentic material on the other hand, they will be able to see how language functions

in the real world.

Example 2:

Study the following extracts. One is a piece of genuine conversation; the other is taken
from a language teaching text book. Which is which? What differences can you see
between the two extracts? What language do you think the non-authentic conversation is
trying to teach? What grammar would you need in order to take part in the authentic
conversation?
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 17

Text A Text B

A: Excuse me, please. Do you know A: How do I get to Kensington Road?

where the nearest bank is? B: Well you go down Fullarton Road…
B: well, the City Bank isn’t far from A: ….what, down Old Belair and around…?
here. Do you know where the main B: Yeah. And then go straight…
post office is? A: …past the hospital?
A: No, not really. I’m just passing B: Yeah, keep going straight, past the
through. racecourse to the roundabout. You know the
B: Well, first go down this street to big roundabout?
the traffic light. A: Yeah.
A: OK. B: And Kensington Road’s off to the right.
B: Then turn left and go west on A: What, off the roundabout?
Sunset Boulevard for about two B: Yeah.
blocks. The bank is on your right, A: Right.
just past the post office.
A: All right. Thanks!
B: You’re welcome.

 Teaching language in ways that make form/function relationships transparent: this

section is vividly explained through the example that is provided below:

Example 3:

Look at the picture. Whose apartment is this? Make guesses about the person who lives
here. Circle your guesses and then explain them by circling the clues in the picture.
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 18

1. The person is a man/ a woman.

2. The person has a baby/ doesn’t have a baby.
3. The person has a pet/ doesn’t have a pet.
4. The person is athletic/ not athletic.
5. The person is a coffee drinker/ not a coffee drinker.
6. The person is well educated/ not well educated.
7. The person is a smoker/ not a smoker.
8. The person is middle class/ poor.
9. The person is a music lover/ not a music lover.
10. The person is on a diet/ not on a diet.

 Encouraging learners to become active explores of language: here the teacher needs

to encourage the students to take greater responsibility for their own learning. They are

asked to take part in activities that allow them to better explore language and come up

with their own rules and hypotheses.

 Encouraging learners to explore relationships between grammar and discourse:

through this teachers can make use of grammar to teach students different language skills

and experience and understand the relationship that lies between grammar and discourse.
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 19

Example 4:

Consider the following pieces of information about nursing.

The nursing process is a systematic method.

The nursing process is a rational method.
The method involves planning nursing care.
The method involves providing nursing care.

These can be packaged into a single sentence using grammatical resources of various
kinds:

The nursing process is a systematic and rational method of planning and providing
nursing care.

Task 1: using the above sentence as a topic sentence in a paragraph produce a coherent
paragraph incorporating the following information. (You can rearrange the order in which
the information is presented.)

The goal of the nursing process is to identify a client’s health status.

The goal of the nursing process is to identify a client’s health care problems.
A client’s health care problems may be actual or potential.
The goal of the nursing process is to establish plans to meet a client’s health care needs.
The goal of the nursing process is to deliver specific nursing interventions.
Nursing interventions are designed to meet a client’s health care needs.
The nurse must collaborate with the client to carry out the nursing process effectively.
The nurse must collaborate with the client to individualize approaches to each person’s
particular needs.
The nurse must collaborate with other members of the health care team to carry out the
nursing process effectively.
The nurse must collaborate with other members of the health care team to individualize
approaches to each person’s particular needs.

Task 2: Compare your text with that writtern by another student. Make a note of
similarities and differences. Can you explain the differences? Do different ways of
combing information lead to differences in meaning?

Task 3: Now revise your text and compare it with the original. [This is supplied
separately to the students.]

(All the above examples were adopted from D. Nunan 1996)

Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 20

After examining all the following studies and findings, I think it is evident that task-

focused instruction is much more fruitful than form-focused instructions because it would be

dealing with language as a whole system, not isolating one aspect form the other. It also provides

students and teachers who adopt it a chance to better understand the need of grammar and value

its practice. Grammar should not be presented as a punishment or a feature which seems to be a

burden to the learner and the as well, since grammar is actually very interesting and motivating.

It provides students will a lot of opportunities to work with language and fully develop it.

After my research on this matter, I came to realize that grammar is very interesting and

could be a key component in the learning process because teachers can incorporate it in every

section of the language, whether working on speaking, reading, listening or writing; grammar

can be included in all these to make language more exciting.

Whether you prefer the traditional or the modern approach in teaching grammar I suggest

that you re-evaluate your choices and if you are one of those who favor the traditional, always

remember that if what is called “traditional” was always up-to-date and conveyed the changes in

life, it wouldn’t have been called traditional and thus work for the benefit of your students and

set your educational goal around providing learners with all the possibilities of meaningful

learning that will equip them for their journey into life, whether as students, adults, parents or

workers (employees and employers).

It all began for me with a simple question that lead to many more questions, which lead

to this research and my new perspective on grammar instruction. Is grammar always this boring?
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 21

Are there ways in which grammar can become more interesting and meaningful? If so, have I

been using correct strategies in teaching grammar? If not, what are the correct ones?

As teachers take the time to ask yourselves these questions, maybe you will be able to

find the answers for them and maybe my findings and pave the way for you and me to explore

and discover new ways to raise and improve the quality of teaching in the world.
Running Head: TEACHING GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT 22

References

 Byrd, P. (1998). Grammar in The Foreign Language Classroom: Making Pricipled

Choices. In G. S. Burkart, Modules for the Professional Preparation of Teaching
Assistants in Foreign Langugaes. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.

 Nunan, D. (1998). Teaching Grammar in Context. Oxford University Press , ELT Journal
Volume 52/2.

 Renandya, J. C. (2002). Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current

Practice. Cambridge University Press.

 Richards, J. C. (2002). Addressing the Grammar Gap in Task Work. In R. a. Renandya,

Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice (pp. 153, 154,
155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164). Cambridge University Press.

 Swan, M. (2002). Seven Bad Reasons for Teaching Grammar-and Two Good Ones. In R.
Renandya, Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice (pp.
148, 149, 150, 151, 152). Cambridge University Press.

 Williams, H. (n.d.). Teaching Grammar in Context: One Approach.