Faculty of Cognitive Sciences and Human Development

EVALUATION OF GRAMMAR TEACHING APPROACH

IN FORM 1 TO FORM 5 ENGLISH TEXTBOOKS

PRESCRIBED FOR SARAWAK SCHOOLS

TANG SIEW LAN

Bachelor of Education with Honours

(Teaching English as Second Language)

2008

Universiti Malaysia Sarawak

FSKPM

BORANG PENYERAHAN TESIS

Judul:

SESI PENGAJIAN: 2004 – 2008

Saya

(HURUF BESAR)

mengakui membenarkan laporan projek ini disimpan di Pusat Khidmat Maklumat Akademik,

Universiti Malaysia Sarawak dengan syarat-syarat seperti berikut:

1. Hakmilik kertas projek adalah di bawah nama penulis melainkan penulisan sebagai projek

bersama dan dibiayai oleh UNIMAS, hakmiliknya adalah kepunyaan UNIMAS.

2. Naskhah salinan di dalam bentuk kertas atau mikro hanya boleh dibuat dengan kebenaran

bertulis daripada penulis.

3. Pusat Khidmat Maklumat Akademik, UNIMAS dibenarkan membuat salinan untuk pengajian

mereka.

4. Kertas projek hanya boleh diterbitkan dengan kebenaran penulis. Bayaran royalti adalah

mengikut kadar yang dipersetujui kelak.

5. * Saya membenarkan/tidak membenarkan Perpustakaan membuat salinan kertas projek ini

sebagai bahan pertukaran di antara institusi pengajian tinggi.

6. ** Sila tandakan (√)

SULIT (Mengandungi maklumat yang berdarjah keselamatan atau

kepentingan Malaysia seperti yang termaktub di dalam AKTA

RAHSIA RASMI 1972).

TERHAD (Mengandungi maklumat TERHAD yang telah ditentukan

oleh organisasi/ badan di mana penyelidikan dijalankan).

TIDAK TERHAD

Disahkan oleh

(TANDATANGAN PENULIS) (TANDATANGAN PENYELIA)

Alamat tetap:

(Nama Penyelia)

Tarikh: Tarikh: ______________________

CATATAN * Potong yang tidak berkenaan.

** Jika Kertas Projek ini SULIT atau TERHAD, sila lampirkan surat daripada pihak berkuasa/

organisasi berkenaan dengan menyertakan sekali tempoh kertas projek. Ini perlu dikelaskan

sebagai SULIT atau TERHAD.

TANG SIEW LAN

DR. TING SU HIE

LOT 1505,KAMPUNG TUDAN, LUTONG,

98100 MIRI

SARAWAK

EVALUATION OF GRAMMAR TEACHING APROACH IN FORM 1 TO FORM 5

ENGLISH TEXTBOOKS PRESCRIBED FOR SARAWAK SCHOOLS

EVALUATION OF GRAMMAR TEACHING APPROACH

IN FORM 1 TO FORM 5 ENGLISH TEXTBOOKS

PRESCRIBED FOR SARAWAK SCHOOLS

TANG SIEW LAN

This project is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for a

Bachelor of Education with Honours

(Teaching English as Second Language)

Faculty of Cognitive Sciences and Human Development

UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SARAWAK

2008

The project entitled ‘Evaluation of Grammar Teaching Approach in Form 1 To Form

5 English Textbooks Prescribed For Sarawak Schools’ was prepared by Tang Siew

Lan and submitted to the Faculty of Cognitive Sciences and Human Development in

partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Bachelor of Education with Honours

(Teaching English as Second Language).

It is hereby confirmed that the student has done

all necessary amendments of the project for acceptance:

____________________

(Dr. Ting Su Hie)

Date: __________________

i

ABSTRACT

Evaluation of Grammar Teaching Approach in Form 1 to Form 5

English Textbooks Prescribed for Sarawak Schools

Tang Siew Lan

The aim of this study was to evaluate the grammar teaching approach applied in

the English textbooks prescribed for the Sarawak schools by Ministry of Education.

Five textbooks from Form 1 to Form 5 were selected for this study. Based on the

weak version of Communicative Approach underlying the KBSM syllabus which

advocates the explicit teaching of grammar in context, a checklist was designed by

the researcher to analyze the grammar teaching approach used in the textbooks. The

results showed that most grammatical items are taught deductively in the section set

aside for teaching grammar. However, grammatical items were found to be mostly

not significant in achieving the purpose of the text in each unit. The analysis also

showed that only Form 1 textbook contains most pre-sections that provide relevant

context for specified grammatical items in each unit. There is also no distinctive

relation of grammar practices to the purpose of the text except Form 4 textbook that

has the most contextualized meaning-focused tasks. Thus, grammar is not taught in

context in the five textbooks as required by the KBSM syllabus. In conclusion, the

results have implications for textbook writers, Ministry of Education, publishers and

teachers.

ii

ABSTRAK

Penilaian Pendekatan Pengajaran Tatabahasa Dalam Buku Teks Bahasa Inggeris

Tingkatan 1 Hingga Tingkatan 5 Yang Diperuntukkan Untuk Sekolah di Sarawak

Tang Siew Lan

Kajian ini bertujuan untuk menilai pendekatan pengajaran tatabahasa dalam

buku teks Bahasa Inggeris yang diperuntukkan untuk sekolah di Sarawak oleh

Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. Lima buah buku teks daripada Tingkatan 1

hingga Tingkatan 5 telah dipilih untuk kajian ini. Berdasarkan versi lemah

Pendekatan Komunikatif yang mengasaskan Sukatan Pelajaran KBSM yang

menyarankan pengajaran tatabahasa secara eksplisit dalam konteks, satu senarai

semak telah direka oleh penyelidik untuk mengkaji pendekatan pengajaran

tatabahasa yang digunakan dalam buku teks. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahawa

kebanyakan tatabahasa diajar secara deduktif dalam seksyen dikhaskan untuk

pengajaran tatabahasa, tetapi banyak tatabahasa didapati tidak signifikan bagi

mencapai tujuan teks dalam setiap unit. Analisis juga menunjukkan bahawa hanya

buku teks Tingkatan 1 yang mempunyai pra-seksyen yang paling banyak

menyediakan konteks yang releven kepada tatabahasa yang ditetapkan dalam setiap

unit. Selain daripada itu, latihan tatabahasa tidak mempunyai hubungan yang nyata

dengan tujuan teks kecuali buku teks Tingkatan 4 yang mengandungi paling banyak

latihan yang dikontekstualisasikan. Oleh sebab itu, tatabahasa tidak diajar dalam

konteks dalam lima buah buku teks yang dikaji seperti yang dinyatakan dalam

Sukatan Pelajaran KBSM. Kesimpulannya, hasil kajian ini mempunyai implikasi

terhadap penulis buku teks, Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, penerbit buku dan

para guru.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Dr.

Ting Su Hie for all her guidance and advice in assisting me to accomplish my final

year project. Thank you for her patience and time in helping me with the problems I

encountered while completing my project.

I would like to thank my friend’s mother, Madam Marie Clare Pui, who is an

English teacher in SMK Tung Hua, Sibu for helping me to get hold of Form 1 to

Form 5 English textbooks as the resource for my project.

Lastly, I would like to express my heartiest love and appreciation to my family,

especially my beloved parents and husband (Chai Wei Ee) for their full support and

encouragement throughout my four years in UNIMAS. My thanks also go to all my

friends for their advice and guidance.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Abstract i

Abstrak ii

Acknowledgement iii

List of Tables vii

List of Figures viii

List of Abbreviations x

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background 1

1.2 Aim of Study 5

1.3 Significance of Study 6

1.4 Operational Definitions of Terms

1.4.1 Pedagogical Approach 7

1.4.2 Teaching Grammar in Context 8

1.4.3 Purposeful Choice of Grammatical Item 9

1.4.4 Extra Practices 9

1.5 Scope of Study 10

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 What is Grammar? 12

2.1.1 Structural View of Language 14

2.1.2 Functional View of Language 16

2.2 Deductive Approach 18

2.2.1 Grammar Translation Method 21

2.3 Inductive Approach 23

v

2.3.1 Covert Teaching 25

2.3.2 Overt Teaching 30

2.3.2.1 ‘Weak’ Version of Communicative Approach 30

2.3.2.2 Genre-based Approach 37

2.4 Summary 45

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Criteria of Evaluation 46

3.2 Resources for Evaluation 48

3.3 Rating System for Textbook Analysis of

Grammar Teaching Approach 48

3.4 Resource Evaluation Procedures 53

3.5 Data Analysis 59

3.6 Limitations of Study 60

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Results 62

4.1.1 Deductive or Inductive Teaching of Grammatical Items 63

4.1.2 Significance of Grammatical Items 69

4.1.3 Use of Grammatical Items in Pre-sections 72

4.1.4 Practice of Grammatical Items in Post-sections 77

4.1.5 Is Grammar Taught in Context? 89

4.2 Discussion 91

4.3 Summary 94

vi

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION

5.1 Summary 96

5.2 Implications of the Findings 98

5.3 Recommendations for Future Research 99

5.4 Conclusions 100

References 102

Appendices

A Grammar Items List in Form 4 Curriculum Specifications 106

B Deductive Approach 111

C Weak Version of Communicative Approach 119

D Checklist for Textbook Analysis of Grammar Teaching

Approach 126

E Compilation Form for Textbook Analysis of Grammar

Teaching Approach 128

F List of Malaysian Government Secondary English

Textbooks 131

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1 Sentence Table for Subject-Verb Agreement 16

2 Purpose and Sample Activities for Each Stage of

Teaching-learning Cycle 40

3 Rating System for Textbook Analysis of Grammar Teaching

Approach 49

4 Percentage of Deductive and Inductive Teaching of Grammar

in Form 1 to Form 5 English Textbooks 64

5 Significance of Grammatical Items in Form 1 to Form 5 English

Textbooks 70

6 Sequence of Pre-sections in Form 1 to Form 5 English Textbooks 72

7 Percentage of Grammatical Items Used in Pre-sections in Form 1

to Form 5 English Textbooks 74

8 Percentage of Pre-sections that are in Context 75

9 Total of Form-focused and Meaning-focused Practices in

Form 1 to Form 5 English Textbooks 78

10 Percentage of Form-focused Practices that are in Context 82

11 Percentage of Meaning-focused Practices that are in Context 86

12 Grammar Teaching Approach in Form 1 to Form 5 English

Textbooks 89

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1 Deductive approach in teaching Present Simple 19

2 Sample of form-focused practices – text completion

for Present Tenses 20

3 Inductive approach in teaching Simple Present Tense 24

4 Sample of communicative task 27

5 Map of Boston 33

6 Reading text for setting the context for the grammatical item 33

7 Explicit explanation of Prepositions of Place and Time 34

8 Form-focused practices for Prepositions of Place and Time 35

9 Meaning-focused or communicative practices for Prepositions

of Place and Time 36

10 Teaching-learning cycle 39

11 Sample activity for building the context 43

12 Sample activity for modeling stage 44

13 Listening text describing Michelle Yeoh in Form 5 Unit 1

(Reach for the Stars) 54

14 Reading text describing David Beckham in Form 5 Unit 1

(Reach for the Stars) 55

15 Deductive explanation of Tenses in Form 5 Unit 1

(Reach for the Stars) 56

16 Form-focused practices (Sentence and Text completion exercises)

for Tenses in Form 5 Unit 1 (Reach for the Stars) 57

17 Meaning-focused practice (Writing task) for Tenses in Form 5

Unit 1 (Reach for the Stars) 58

ix

18 Deductive Approach in teaching Passive Voice in Form 5 Unit 3

(Poisons in the Air) 66

19 Inductive Approach in teaching Conjunctions in Form 2 Unit 9

(Looking Good, Feeling Great) 67

20 Revision Exercise on Present Perfect Tense and Simple Past Tense

in Form 4, Unit 9 (Facing Teenage Blues) 68

21 Example of form-focused practice – Text Completion in Form 4

Unit 3 (Reaching Out) 80

22 Example of meaning-focused practice – Writing task in Form 4

Unit 14 (Promoting Our Crafts) 80

23 Form-focused exercise which is not in context 83

24 Form-focused exercises which are in context 85

25 Contextualized writing task 88

x

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

UNIMAS = Universiti Malaysia Sarawak

TESL = Teaching English as Second Language

KBSM = Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah

GTM = Grammar Translation Method

ALM = Audio Lingual Method

CA = Communicative Approach

G = Grammar

L = Listening Section

R = Reading Section

S = Speaking Section

W = Writing Section

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

This chapter introduces the background of the study that leads to the aim of

the study. It is followed by the significance of the study, operational definitions of

terms and scope of the study.

1.1 Background

Over the years, many approaches to English language teaching have been

developed. It is obvious that there has been a shift of the language teaching

approach from the structural approach (based on structural view of language) to

the communicative approach (based on functional view of language).

As mentioned above, the structural approach was the mainstream with the

structural view of language. It sees language as “structurally rule-governed”

(Chung, 2005, p. 34) and the activities provided focus on the correct

pronunciation, spelling convention and grammatical forms. The most popular

methods of language instruction under structural approach include grammar

translation method and audio lingual method which involve the use of language

drills and the memorization of dialogues (Richards & Rodgers, 1986, p. 17).

However, Nunan (1998) claimed that by using structural approach, students

are denied the opportunity to see the “systematic relationships that exist between

2

form, meaning and use” (p. 102). In other words, students are taught about the

forms but not on the way to use the forms to communicate meaning. Thus, the

functional view of language gained prominence in the late 1960s and this had led

to the emergence of the communicative approach to language teaching. According

to Chung (2005), the communicative approach in Malaysia was adopted as early

as the 1970s (p. 33). Nunan (1988) claimed that a basic principle underlying all

communicative approaches is that “learners must learn not only to make

grammatically correct, propositional statements about the experiential world, but

must also develop the ability to use the language to get things done” (p. 25). This

is supported by Widdowson (1990) who stated that communicative approach

stresses on the “communicative ends of learning” rather than the “structural

means of teaching” (p. 159).

One of the major issues in debate is the role of grammar in language

teaching (Ratnawati Mohd Asraf, 1996). In language learning, grammar is a

concern to the students because “it fulfills a cultural expectation of what

constitutes a language class” (Celce-Murcia & Hilles, 1988, p. 7). Since grammar

is a part of the contents of a language, the teaching approach has also changed

from deductive approach to inductive approach. Nevertheless, empirical evidence

found had shown that grammar is still taught using the deductive approach.

Case study by Pillay (1995) in five Malaysian secondary schools found that

“the teachers appear to be unclear of the role of grammar in the new curriculum

and also reveal a lack of understanding of how grammar is to be integrated into

the English lesson” (cited in Pillay & North, 1997).

This finding is supported by Ratnawati Mohd Asraf’s survey (1996) on the

Selangor secondary school English teachers’ perceptions towards the different

aspects of the Integrated Syllabus. From the survey, only 31% of the teachers felt

that grammar should be taught in context. This indicated that teachers participated

in the study preferred the traditional method of teaching grammar.

Likewise, Farrell and Lim (2005) showed in their study the beliefs and

actual classroom practices of two experienced primary school English language

teachers in Singapore. The teachers were said to prefer the deductive approach

though they had been exposed to alternative approaches because they believed

3

that the traditional method is less time-consuming and can bring about accurate

language use.

Whereas in Malaysia, a study was done by Ting (2007) specifically in

UNIMAS (Universiti Malaysia Sarawak), Kuching, on whether the teacher

education makes an impact on TESL teacher trainees’ beliefs and practices of

grammar teaching or not. The findings showed that the deductive approach is

more popular among the trainees although they have been exposed to the

inductive teaching of grammar. Ting’s findings also revealed that the trainees will

be able to teach grammar in context when they have discarded the structural view

of language and traditional view of teaching grammar.

From all the studies above, there is a possibility that the teachers are still not

teaching grammar in context, perhaps due to the textbooks used. Thus, next part

will discuss on the changes in approach in English language teaching world that

have affected the design of the English syllabus in Malaysia and that the English

textbooks approved and published are supposed to reflect the changes as well.

In Malaysia, the language syllabus development seems to have followed the

developments in the field. In the 1970s, the Structural Syllabus that stressed on

grammar rules was used for Forms 1, 2 and 3 (Ministry of Education of Malaysia,

1973). According to Pillay and North (1997), “a structural syllabus takes

grammatical structures as its starting point and other components are not

necessarily neglected, but are fitted into units that are based on structural content.”

In 1975, the Communicational Syllabus that dealt with the situational or

communicative use of language was introduced to Forms 4 and 5 students

(Ministry of Education of Malaysia, 1975) to offer opportunities to use the

language for various purposes, for instance, giving instructions and conversing

through English in a telephone call, and cater to their needs in relation to job

market and further studies. Communicational Syllabus “starts with an

organization based on functions, and structures, microskills and so on are

arranged around those functions” (Pillay & North, 1997). Although some sample

lesson plans in the Communicational Syllabus contain the grammatical structures,

the emphasis is not on the grammatical forms but on the expression of meaning or

communication.

4

Due to this deficiency, Ministry of Education of Malaysia had implemented

Integrated Secondary School Curriculum English Language Secondary School

Syllabus or known as KBSM English Language Syllabus in 1990 which integrates

the language contents with the skills (Ministry of Education of Malaysia, 2003).

This syllabus has “its theoretical base in the communicative approach” and it

intends to “equip students with communicational ability and a competency to

perform language functions, using correct language forms and structures”

(Ratnawati Mohd Asraf, 1996). The arrangement of KBSM syllabus is done in

accordance to themes which are drawn from familiar contexts, mainly people,

environment, health, social issues, science and technology, and values. These

themes provide the context for the integration of language skills and content.

While the Communicational Syllabus did not specify the grammar items to be

taught, KBSM syllabus does contain a list of grammar items should be covered in

each form. An example of Form 4’s grammar items list is shown in Appendix A.

Moreover, teachers are encouraged to teach those grammar items in the context of

topics and only in isolation if extra practice is needed (Ministry of Education of

Malaysia, 2003, p.22). However, the syllabus itself does not suggest “how

particular grammar items might be integrated with particular skills” (Pillay &

North, 1997). Therefore, textbook plays a great role as a resource to help teachers

to plan their lessons effectively on how to structure and sequence their teaching

content. In other words, textbook helps “define the curriculum” (Pillay & North,

1997). Thus, the revised textbooks should aid teachers in teaching grammar in

context.

Nevertheless, some researches that have been done showed that the

textbooks or materials have not changed much. Chung (2005) found that the

grammar presented in three Malaysian textbooks does not reflect the

communicative approach that underlies the KBSM Syllabus. Traditional grammar

teaching practice is still very much reflected in most of the grammar activities

with the grammar-rule explanation even though there is attempt to integrate the

communicative elements in some parts of the textbooks. Traditional practice

patterns such as sentence transformation, substitution tables and gap filling

activities are reflected throughout the three textbooks.

5

Pillay and North (1997) also examined four textbooks and found out that

grammar is often treated in isolation and not derived from any of the texts used. In

each unit, the skills and grammar items are treated separately in different sections.

There is hardly any link between one section and the next. Furthermore, the texts

found in the textbooks are able to reflect the topic, but not the skills or grammar.

So, Pillay and North (1997) concluded that it may perhaps “arise from the nature

of the syllabus specifications, in which grammar is listed separately from the

skills and topics”, thus causing the textbook writer to “force the grammar into

units where it does not naturally fit, in order to fulfill the requirements of the

syllabus.”

Overall, there is not much research done on the textbooks but more research

has been done on grammar teaching in the classroom. The two researches on

textbooks mentioned above have a similarity in the analysis of the textbooks

published in the mid-1990s when the new KBSM syllabus was introduced.

However, this syllabus has been revised in year 2003 and new textbooks which

have been published in between year 2002 to 2004 would have possibly followed

this revised KBSM syllabus more closely. Therefore, there is a need to evaluate

the current textbooks to find out the approach used in teaching grammar.

1.2 Aim of Study

This study was carried out to evaluate the pedagogical approach used in

grammar teaching in the English textbooks used in the Sarawak state from Form 1

to Form 5. The objectives of this study are to find out:

(i) whether the grammatical item itself is presented in deductive or inductive

approach;

(ii) whether the grammatical item in each unit is significant for achieving the

purpose of the text in the unit;

(iii) whether the grammatical item is used in the sections before the grammar

teaching section;

(iv) whether the extra practices where the grammatical item is reused are related

to the purpose of text; and

6

(v) whether the approach used in the textbooks matches “the teaching of

grammar in context” as stated in the KBSM syllabus.

1.3 Significance of Study

It is hoped that the findings from this study will benefit certain groups of

people, especially the Curriculum Development Centre of the Ministry of

Education, textbook writers, teachers and teacher-educators.

The Curriculum Development Centre of the Ministry of Education is the

centre that develops the syllabus and selects the official textbooks to be used by

each school. In textbooks selection, they have to be very precise so that the

textbooks follow what is in the syllabus. Thus, the findings from this study might

help them to evaluate the textbooks first before they approve the books to be

published. This will help them to select the best textbooks for English language

learning in Malaysia.

Besides that, the findings will benefit the textbook writers. In order to get

their books published, it is best that they follow the syllabus. The findings will

benefit them in a way that if the textbooks do not adhere to the syllabus, then they

have to familiarize themselves with the syllabus and improvise their material

development skills.

Moreover, the findings from this study might be useful for teachers. Since

the textbooks are the main reference for the teachers and empirical studies have

shown that most teachers are unclear of how to teach grammar in context, it is

hoped that these officially selected textbooks might guide the teachers to teach

grammar in context. Therefore, the approaches applied in the textbooks are very

important. If the textbooks are good or do follow the syllabus, then the teachers

are encouraged to follow the approach used in the textbooks. In contrast, if the

textbooks do not follow the syllabus, then the teachers have to try to adapt the

materials to suit the aim of the syllabus.

Other than that, another way of helping the teachers in teaching grammar in

context is through the teacher-educators. Thus, the findings might be useful for

the teacher-educators as well. Again, the teacher-educators can use the good

7

textbooks to train the teacher trainees to teach grammar in context and to select

pedagogically sound textbooks for use in class. This is because there are too many

teaching materials published for the teachers in the market. The selection of the

best one of course will benefit both teachers and students.

1.4 Operational Definitions of Terms

1.4.1 Pedagogical Approach

Pedagogical approach in this study concerns the teaching approach used in

grammar teaching. It includes the deductive and inductive approach.

According to Thornbury (1999), the deductive approach in teaching

grammar “starts with the presentation of a rule and is followed by examples in

which the rule is applied” and it is also known as “rule-driven learning” (p. 29). In

other words, grammar is taught explicitly or directly as what it is. So, in the

teaching materials, deductive approach can be seen through the sequence of

presentation of the grammatical items from rules to examples in substitution

tables or drills. The practice activities provided are mostly form-focused like

blank-filling tasks, sequencing tasks, expansion tasks, transformation tasks and so

forth.

As for the inductive approach, teaching grammar “starts with some

examples from which a rule is inferred” and it is also known as “rule-discovery

learning” (Thornbury, 1999, p. 29). In other words, implicit or indirect grammar

teaching is used to show how grammar is used to make meaning. Thus, in the

teaching materials, the learners are presented with the examples in which the

grammatical items are used and they have to derive the rules from the given

examples by themselves before applying the rules in the practice activities. The

examples can be in minimal sentence pairs, texts and concordance data.

8

1.4.2 Teaching Grammar in Context

In this study, the teaching of grammar in context refers to teaching grammar

in relation to the situation in which it happens or exists. To teach grammar in

context, there are two main contexts that the learners need to know. They are the

context of culture and context of situation (Butt, Fahey, Feez, Spinks & Yallop,

2000; Feez, 1998; Thornbury, 1999).

The first context is called the context of culture. Feez (1998) explained that

language occurs simultaneously in a broader cultural context in which

recognizable patterns of structure and language within texts have evolved to

achieve particular purposes (p. 6). Butt et al. (2000) further explained that when

the differences in forms of address, ceremonies, festivals, politeness, and

significant activities between one culture and another are obvious, the context of

culture in shaping meanings is important. Thornbury (1999) stated that

understanding will be inhibited when one lacks of familiarity with certain culture.

Within the context of culture, speakers or writers use language in immediate

social context which is called “the context of situation” (Feez, 1998, p. 6). This is

the second context which the learners must be aware of. Butt et al. (2000) and

Feez (1998) presented three parameters of context of situation: field (topic), tenor

(relationship between the speaker and listener or writer and reader) and mode (the

text-type, distance in time and space). It is important to know that a slight change

in one of the three parameters will create a substantially different text which has

different purpose.

Hence, in this study, the materials that facilitate the teaching of grammar in

context would show the characteristics of these two contexts. The topic of a unit

tells the reader what to expect from the unit or the main purpose of the unit. This

is the field for that particular unit. For example, the topic “Water Pollution” tells

the readers that they are going to learn about the causes, effects and ways to

reduce water pollution. In this unit, the learners are required to talk about the

effects of water pollution and any situations can be used for teaching the selected

grammatical item from a very informal one (complaining the effects among the

friends) to very formal one (complaining the effects to the public in a letter to

9

Editor column). So, this is where the context of situation comes in. When one of

the three parameters of context of situation changes, different texts are produced

for different purposes. The purpose can change from one of complaining

(essentially argument text) to one of explaining, for example, in a public seminar.

In order to achieve these different purposes, different language structures are

needed. Thus, when grammar is taught for use in different communicative

situations, it is referred to as teaching grammar in context.

1.4.3 Purposeful Choice of Grammatical Item

In order to know whether the grammatical items are taught in context, it is

essential to see whether the items selected for each chapter are connected with the

text or purpose of the unit. In textbooks, there is a separate section for grammar,

hence, the researcher analyzed whether there is a link between this section with

other sections before and after it. If the grammatical items are reflected in the

sections before and are practiced after being taught, then they can be considered to

be related. For example, when the purpose of the unit is giving descriptions of

tourist spots and the selected grammatical item is the prepositions of location

which is essential in giving exact location of the tourist spots, the item is

considered related as it is able to achieve the purpose of the text.

1.4.4 Extra Practices

Extra practices mentioned in this study refer to the activities or exercises

which come after the grammar section in the textbook. Extra practices in the

textbook are usually categorized into two types, namely, form-focused practice

and meaning-focused or communicative practice (Chitravelu, Sithamparan & Teh,

1995).

Form-focused practice is one that “gets the students to focus attention on the

new language to help them to get their tongue around it, learn correct word order,

pronunciation, etc” (Chitravelu, Sithamparan & Teh, 1995, p. 213). Examples of

these kinds of mechanical practice to ensure accurate production are drills,

10

substitution tables, jazz chants, meaningful drills, blank-filling, motor activities

and recombining activities (Chitravelu, Sithamparan & Teh, 1995).

As for meaning-focused or communicative practice, it is the practice where

“the students are given the opportunities to use the new language in freer and

more creative ways” (Chitravelu, Sithamparan & Teh, 1995, p. 217). According to

Ur (1988), communicative practice entails various kinds of gap activities which

require the learners to engage in authentic communication while at the same time

keeping an eye on the structures that are being manipulated in the process. These

kinds of communicative practice where students are put into situations to

communicate with each other in English are problem-solving, stories, songs and

nursery rhymes, using personal experiences, games, using visuals, poems,

information gap activities, role-play, quizzes, puzzles and riddles, as well as

editing and reformulation (Chitravelu, Sithamparan & Teh, 1995).

1.5 Scope of Study

This study covers only the secondary school English textbooks from Form 1

to Form 5. The study only evaluates the textbooks assigned to the state of

Sarawak due to its availability to the researcher. Besides that, the study only

focuses on the grammar as presented in the textbooks and does not look at how

the teachers might use it because even though the textbook applies the inductive

approach, the teachers might teach deductively in classroom and vice versa or the

teachers may not teach grammar at all. Thus, the study focuses on the teaching

materials only.

Generally, this chapter covered the shift in the language teaching approach

and its impact on Malaysian syllabus as well as textbook design. This leads to the

aim of the study where the present textbooks which are published to achieve the

aims of the revised KBSM syllabus need to be evaluated to find out the teaching

approach used to teach grammar and whether it adheres to the approach

recommended in the syllabus. This is followed by the description of the

significance of the study to certain parties like the Ministry of Education, textbook

writers, teachers and teacher-educators. Some terms which are important to this