THE EFFECTIVENESS OF USING GRAMMATICAL CONSCIOUSNESS-RAISING TASK (GCRT) TOWARD STUDENTS’ GRAMMAR COMPREHENSION AT THE FOURTH SEMESTER STUDENTS OF ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT AT IAIN BUKITTINGGI

Veni Roza

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF USING GRAMMATICAL CONSCIOUSNESS-RAISING TASK (GCRT) TOWARD STUDENTS’ GRAMMAR COMPREHENSION AT THE FOURTH SEMESTER STUDENTS OF ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT AT IAIN BUKITTINGGI

Veni Roza

Abstract

Grammar as a micro skill is often deemed as a difficult and boring subject in learning a language inasmuch as it is a study of number of patterns or rules. This judgment unconsciously causes the difficulty for learners to learn in spite of it has been learned in several levels. To cope with this problem, Grammar Consciousness Raising Task (GCRT) strategy was used to help English Education Department students in order to master grammar. The procedure in GCRT includes discovery, consolidation, and use. In this research paper, the researcher explained that the GCRT strategy was effective to be used in grammar class, seen from the students’ test results which was 78,9% and it is categorized into effective based on the effectiveness scale.

Keywords

Effectiveness, GCRT, Grammar Comprehension.

Full Text:

PDF

References

Andrews, S. 2007. Teacher Language Awareness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Celce-Murcia, M. 1995. Communicative Competence: A Pedagogically Motivated Model with Content Specification

Ellis, R. 1993. Second language acquistion research: how does it help teachers? An Interview with Rod Ellis. ELT Journal Vol. 47/1. OUP

Gerngross. G et.al. 2006. Teaching Grammar Creatively. Heilbling Language

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

Larsen-Freeman,D.1995. On the teaching and learning of grammar:challenging the myths' in Eckman et.al (eds).

Newby, D.1998. Theory and practice in communicative grammar: a guide for teachers in R. De Beaugraunde, M.Grosman, B.Seidholfer (eds.) Language Policy and Language Education in Emerging Nations, Series: Advances in Discourse Process Vol. LXIII, 151-164. Stamford

Newby, T et.al. 2000. Instructional Technology for Teaching and Learning: Designing Instruction, Integrating Computers, and Using Media. New Jersey: Prentice Hall

Rutherford,W. E. & Sharwood-Smith, M .1988. Grammar and Second Language Teaching. Newbury House

Sadeghi, F. 2012. The effect of grammar consciousness raising tasks on efl learners performance. International Journal of Linguistics, Vol. 6 No.3 708-720

Sharwood-Smith, M. 1981. Consciousness raising and the second language learner. Applied Linguistics Vol 2. No. 2

Stevick. E. 1996. Memory, Meaning and Method (2nd edition). Canada: Heinle & Heinle

Sugiharto, S. 2006. Consciousness-raising and the acquisition of the simple present tense rule. Paper presented at the sixth Malaysia International Conference on English Language Teaching (MICELT), Equatorial Hotel, Melaka, Malaysia, May 8-10.

Svalberg. A. 2009. Engagement with Language: Developing a Construct. Language Awareness, 18/ 3-4: 242-258.

Thornburry, S. 1998. How To Teach Grammar. New York: Longman

Weaver, C. 1996. Teaching Grammar In Context. Portsmouth: Boyston/Cook

White, L. 1987. Against comprehensible input: the input hypothesis and the development of second language competence. Applied Linguistics 8/2: 95-110

Yip, V. (1994). Grammatical consciousness-raising and learnability. In T. Odlin (Ed.), Perspective on pedagogical grammar (pp.123-139). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.