ENGLISH LANGUAGE ASSESMENT

Grammar and Vocabulary

Dosen Pengampu:

Dr. Hadeli, M.Pd. MA

Lailatul Husna, SS., M. Pd

Disusun Oleh:

Peza Verlita 2114050070

Ariel Akustika Romansa 2114050072

Azizah Mardatillah 2114050077

Azhariyah Khalida 2114050085

PROGRAM STUDI TADRIS BAHASA INGGRIS

FAKULTAS TARBIYAH DAN KEGURUAN

UNIVERSITAS ISLAM NEGERI IMAM BONJOL PADANG

2024 M
 Preface
First of all, thanks to Allah Swt. because of the help of Allah, writer finished writing the
paper entitled “Grammar and Vocabulary” right in the calculated time. The purpose in
writing this paper is to fulfill the assignment that given by Dr. Hadeli, MA., M. Pd and
Lailatul Husna, SS., M. Pd as lecturers in English language assessment major.

In arranging this paper, the writer truly get lots challenges and obstructions but with help
of many individuals, those obstructions could passed. Writer also realized there are still many
mistakes in process of writing this paper. Because of that, the writer says thank you to all
individuals who helps in the process of writing this paper. Hopefully Allah replies all helps
and bless you all. The writer realized the this paper still imperfect in arrangement and the
content. Then the writer hope the criticism from the readers can help the writer in perfecting
the next paper. Last but not the least, hopefully this paper can helps the readers to gain more
knowledge about English language assessment major.

Padang, 25 Juni 2024

Writer
 DAFTAR ISI

CHAPTER I.........................................................................................................................................4
INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................4
A. Background..............................................................................................................................4
B. Formulation of the problem....................................................................................................4
CHAPTER II.......................................................................................................................................5
CONTENT...........................................................................................................................................5
A. GRAMMAR.............................................................................................................................5
1. The Place of Grammar........................................................................................................5
2. To Teach or Not To Teach Grammar................................................................................6
3. Issues About How To Teach Grammar..................................................................................8
4. Grammar Techniques............................................................................................................12
Grammar Sequencing in Textbook and Curiculla......................................................................17
B. VOCABULARY.........................................................................................................................18
1. “Word” about Vocabulary Teaching...................................................................................18
CHAPTER III....................................................................................................................................23
A. Conclusion..............................................................................................................................23
B. Suggest....................................................................................................................................23
REFERENCE....................................................................................................................................23
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Background

The importance of understanding and effectively teaching grammar and vocabulary

cannot be overstated in the context of language education. Grammar, as the system
governing the arrangement and relationship of words in sentences, plays a crucial role in
ensuring clarity and coherence in communication. It involves understanding morphemes,
sentence-level rules, and discourse considerations which help in stringing sentences
together meaningfully

Communicative competence, which includes grammatical competence, is essential for

effective language use. Grammar is one of the three dimensions of language
interconnected with semantics (meaning) and pragmatics (contextual use). These
dimensions ensure that language is not only structurally sound but also meaningful and
appropriate in various contexts.

B. Formulation of the problem

 What is the concept of Grammar and Vocabulary?
 What a Current Issues in Grammar and Vocabulary?
 CHAPTER II

CONTENT

A. GRAMMAR

1. The Place of Grammar

Grammar is the system of sales governing the conventional arrangement and rela tionship of
words in a sentence. In place of "words," I could, for more specificity, have said
"morphemes," but for the moment just remember that the components of words (prefixes,
suffixes, roots, verb and noun endings, etc.) are indeed a part of grammar. Technically,
grammar refers to sentence-level rules only, and not to rules governing the relationship
among sentences, which we refer to as discourse rules. But for the sake of simplicity, I will
include discourse considerations in this discus sion of grammar-focused instruction.

In the widely accepted definition of communicative competence that was reviewed in

Chapters 3 and 4 (see also PLLT, Chapter 9), grammatical competence occupies a prominent
position as a major component of communicative compe- tence. Organizational competence
is an intricate, complex array of rules, some of which govern the sentence (grammar), while
others govern how we string sen tences together (discourse). Without the structure that
organizational constraints impose on our communicative attempts, our language would
simply be chaotic. Organizational competence is necessary for communication to take place,
but not sufficient to account for all production and reception in language. As Diane Earsen-
Freeman (1991) pointed out, grammar is one of three dimensions of language

That are interconnected. Grammar gives us the form or the structures of language, but those
forms are literally meaningless without a second dimension, that of seman tics (meaning),
and a third dimension, pragmatics. In other words, grammar tells us how to construct a
sentence (word order, verb and noun systems, modifiers, phrases, clauses, etc.), and discourse
rules tell us how to string those sentences together. Semantics tells us something about the
meaning(s) of words and strings of words. Then pragmatics tells us about which of several
meanings to assign given the context of an utterance or written text. Context takes into
account such things as

 who the speaker/writer is,

 who the audience is,
 where the communication takes place,
 what communication takes place before and after a sentence in question,
 implied vs. literal meanings,
 styles and registers,
 the alternative forms among which a producer can choose.

It is important to grasp the significance of the interconnectedness of all thre dimensions: no

one dimension is sufficient.

So, no one can tell you that grammar is irrelevant, or that grammar is no longe needed in a
CLT framework. No one doubts the prominence of grammar as an organ izational framework
within which communication operates.

2. To Teach or Not To Teach Grammar

The next question, then, is whether to teach grammar in language classes, and if so, how to
teach it. As noted above, varied opinions on the question can be found in the literature on
language teaching. Reason, balance, and the experience of teachers in recent CLT tradition
tell us that judicious attention to grammatical form in the adult classroom is not only helpful,
if appropriate techniques are used, but essential to a speedy learning process (see Fotos 1994,
Doughty & Williams 1998). Appropriate grammar-focusing

 Are embedded in meaningful, communicative contexts,

 Contribute positively to communicative goals,
 Promote accuracy within fluent, communicative language,
 Do not overwhelm students with linguistic terminology.
 Are as lively and intrinsically motivating as possible.

For adults, the question is not so much whether to teach grammar, but rather, what the
optimal conditions for overt teaching of grammar are. Marianne Celce Murcia (1991) offered
six easily identifiable variables that can help you to determine the role of grammar in
language teaching (see Figure 20.1). Notice that for each variable, the continuum runs from
less to more important; grammar is important to some degree in all the six variables.
1) Age

It is clear that due to normal intellectual developmental variables, young chil- dren can profit
from a focus on form if attention to form is offered through struc- tured input and incidental,
indirect error treatment. Somewhat older children may

benefit as well from very simple generalizations (such as "This is the way we say it when
we're talking about yesterday") and concrete illustrations. Adults, with their abstract
intellectual capabilities, can use grammatical pointers to advance their com municative
abilities

2) Proficiency level

If we force too much grammar focus on beginning level learners, we run the risk of blocking
their acquisition of fluency skills. At this level, grammatical focus is helpful as an occasional
"zoom lens" with which we zero in on some aspect of lan guage but not helpful if it becomes
the major focus of class work. At the advanced level, grammar is not necessarily "more
important." as Celce-Murcia would suggest by her chart. Rather, it is less likely to disturb
communicative fluency. It may or may not be more important, depending on the accuracy
already achieved by learners.

3) Educational background

Students who are non-literate or who have no formal educational background may find it
difficult to grasp the complexity of grammatical terms and explanations. Highly educated
students, on the other hand, are cognitively more receptive to grammar focus and may insist
on error correction to help refine their already fluent skills.

4) Language skills

Because of the permanence of writing and the demand for perfection in gram- matical form in
written English, grammar focus may be more effective in improving written English than
speaking, reading, and writing

5) Style (register)

Informal contexts often make fewer demands on a learner's grammatical accu racy. In casual
conversation among peers, for example, minor errors are acceptable. while more formal
contexts (say, a student consulting with a teacher) usually require greater grammatical
accuracy. Similarly, in writing, tolerance for error is higher in. say, a quick e-mailed message
than in a formal essay

6) Needs and goals

If learners are headed toward professional goals, they may need to stress formal accuracy
more than learners at the survival level. In cither case, message clarity is prime criterion.

These six categories should be looked on as general guidelines for judging the need for
conscious grammatical focus in the classroom, but none of these sugges tions is absolute! For
example, you can probably think of numerous situations where it is important to focus on
form with beginners, or to get learners away from too Intense a grammatical focus in the
context of a formal register.

3. Issues About How To Teach Grammar

While the professional community in general agrees on the importance of form focused
instruction, there are still degrees of opinion on what kind of instruction should be offered to
learners. Four primary issues characterize this ongoing pro fessional discussion

a) Should grammar be presented inductively or deductively?

Do learners benefit from an inductive approach in which various language forms are
practiced but in which the learners are left to discover or induce rules and generalizations on
their own? Or would they be better off being given a rule/gen eralization by the teacher or
textbook and then allowed to practice various Instances of language to which the rule apphes?
These two approaches are са contrasted with each other when questions about grammar
teaching arise In most contexts, an inductive approach is more appropriate because

 it is more in keeping with natural language acquisition (where rules are absorbed
subconsciously with little or no conscious focus).
 it conforms more easily to the concept of interlanguage development in which leatocis
progress, on variable timetables, through stages of rule acquisition.
 it allows students to get a communicative "Feel for some aspect of languagebefore
possibly being overwhelmed by grammatical explanations
 it builds more intrinsic motivation by allowing students to discover rules rather than
being told them.

There may be occasional moments, of course, when a deductive approach-or a blend

between the two-is indeed warranted. In practice, the distinction is not always apparent.
Consider the following excerpt from a low intermediate class room (the T has asked Ss to tell
the rest of the class about a recent journey):

 51: And so, you see, I tell the, eh, uh, stewardess, to bring me hot tea!
Well, she doesn't! T: Uh huh, okay. (pause, Kamal raises his bam Kamal?
 52: Yes, ch, well, 1 am also very, eh, frustrated last week. When I, eh, travel in the
airplane, I get no sleep...
 T. Okay, Kamal, before you go on, since we need to review the past tense anyway, let
me remind you that you should be using the past tense here, okay? So, you want to
say "I was frustrated," "I got no sleep," "I told the stewardess" Okay, Kamal, go ahead
and continue your story.

After Kamal finished his story, this time with a little more accurate use of the past terse, the
teacher put the verbs they used on the board, listed their past tense fornis, and had students
practice them. While you might question the appropriateness of the interruption here, the
point is that the lesson's objective was to use the past tense, and the teacher's focus on the past
tense in this particular instance was deductive for the rest of the students in the class who
were listening. But it was inductive in that the focus on the past actually was triggered by
students meaningful performance.

b) Should we use grammatical explanations and technical terminology in a CLT

classroom?

Our historical roots in Grammar Translation methodology) placed a strong emphasis on

grammatical explanations (in the mother tongue) and on the termi nology arcessary to carry
out those explanations. Many foreign language learners in the US have remarked that their
first and only encounter with grammatical con cepts was not in English (language arts
classes) liut in a foreign language class, where that they learned abonn subjects, predicates,
direct objects, and intransitive

In CLT classes, the ine of grammatical explanation and terminology must be approached wah
care. We teachers are sometimes so capes to display our hand carned metalinguistic
knowledge that we forget that our students are so busy past learning the tangruge isell that the
added load of complex rules and terms is too much to beat hut clearly, adults can beneït from
necasional explanations Following a few simple (but not always easily interpreted) rules of
thumb will enhance any gramatical explanations you undertake.

 Keep your explanations brief and simple. Use the mother tongue if students cannot
follow an explanation in English.
 Use charts and other visuals whenever possible to graphically depict grammatical
relationships.
 Illustrate with clear, unambiguous examples.
 Try to account for varying cognitive styles among your students (for example.
analytical learners will have an easier time picking up on grammatical explanations
than will bolistic learners). c. Do not get yourself (and students!) tied up in knots over
so-called "excep tions to rules
 If you don't know how to explain something (for instance, if a student asks you about
a point of grammar and you are not sure of the rule), do not risk giving false
information (that you may have to retract later, which will cause even more
embarrassment). Rather, tell students you will research that point and bring an answer
back the next day.
 c) Should grammar be taught in separate "gramumar only" classes?

The collective experience of the last two decades or so of CIT practice, com bined with the
research on the effectiveness of grammatical instruction (see Fotos 1994, Long 1983,
Eisenstein 1980), indicates the advisability of embedding gram- matical techniques into
general language courses, rather than singling grammar out as a discrete "skill" and treating it
in a separate course. Grammatical information, whether consciously or subconsciously
learned, is an enabling system, a component of communicative competence like phonology,
discourse, the lexicon, etc. Therefore, as courses help students to pursue relevant language
goals, grammar is best brought into the picture as a contributor toward those goals.

In some curricula, however, certain class hours, workshops, or courses are set aside for
grammar instruction. In a language-teaching paradigm that stresses com- municative,
interactive, meaningful learning, such courses may appear to be anachronisms. Under certain
conditions, however, they can provide a useful func tion, especially for high intermediate to
advanced learners, where a modicum of flu- ency is already in place. Those conditions
follow:

 The grammar course is explicitly integrated into the total curriculum so that students
can readily relate grammatical pointers to their other work in English
 The rest of the curriculum (or the bulk of students' use of language outside of the
grammar class) controls the content of the grammar course, and not vice versa. That
is, the grammar course "serves" (enhances) the curriculum. For example, a significant
portion of the agenda for the grammar class should come from students' work in other
courses.
 Grammar is contextualized in meaningful language use
 The course is tailored as much as possible for specific problems students are
experiencing. For example, in grammar "workshops for intermediate and advanced
students, grammatical topics come from the students' own perfor mance in other
classe rather than being nostet by a curriculum or textbook.
 Sometimes grammar modules in a standardized test preparation course serve as
helpful reviews of grammatical principles that may be incorporated into the test.
 The ultimate test of the success of such courses is in the improvement of students
performance outside of the grammar class, not in their score on discrete-point
grammar tests.

Under these conditions, then, grammar assumes its logical role as one of several sup porting
foundation stones for communication.

d) Should teachers correct grammatical errors?

Many student errors in speech and writing performance are grammatical. It is interesting
that little research evidence shows that overt grammatical correction by teachers in the
classroom is of any consequence in improving learners' language. Bit we do have evidence
that various other forms of attention to and treatment of grammatical errors have an impact
on learners. (Sec Chapter 17 for a detailed dis cussion of error correction.) Therefore, it is
prudent for you to engage in such treat ment, as long as you adhere to principles of
maintaining communicative flow, of maximizing student self-correction, and of sensitively
considering the affective and linguistic place the learner is in.

The treatment of grammatical (and discourse) errors in writing is a different matter. In

process writing approaches, overt atention to local grammatical and rhetorical (discourse)
crrors is normally delayed until learners have completed one or two drafts of a paper. Global
errors that impede meaning must of course be attended to earlier in the process. Studies have
shown (Ferris 1997) that certain attention to errors does indeed make a difference in the final
written products.

4. Grammar Techniques

Following are some sample techniques for teaching grammar, using Sandra McKay's (1985)
classifications.

a) Charts

Charts and graphs are useful devices for practicing patierm, clarifyingt gran matical
eclationships, and even for understanding sociolinguistic and discourse con straints. The
exercise in Figure 20.2 stimolates students to practice frequency adverbs.
Annother grammatical system
 b) Objects

Objects brought into the classroom not only bren up the context but provide a kinesthetic,
hands-on dimension to your teaching. By engaging students in com munication with each
other, you also stimulate them to practice conversation nides and other discourse constrains.
To reach the posesive to beginning level stu dents, for example, hring in a few small itestus
such as a necklace, a purse, and some glasses. Then ask students to put two or three of their
own things on their desks. Then do something like the three cxercises in Figure 20.4. Notice
that embedded In grammatical attention to possessives are politeness forms (Excuse me") and
di coursal ellipsis rules that allow a резми to say "No, it's Lacy's," rather than "No, it's Lucy's
handbag”
 c) Maps and Drawings

Maps, also mentioned in Chapter 12 in the discussion about group work, are practical and
simple visual aids in a classroom. Useful for jigsaw, information-pap and other interactive
techniques, they can also serve to dlustrate certain grammat ical structures. For example,
maps can stimulare learners' use of prepositional phrases up the street, on the left, over the
bill, etc.), question forms (ebere, how do I get to, can you tell me, in this, etc.), imperatives
(go, walk, look out for, etc.). appropriate decourse for getting someone's attention, asking for
directions, receiving and clarifying given information, and terminating the conversation.
Sandra McKay suggested using drawings of circles, squares, and other familiar shapes in
teach locative words (see Figure 20.5)
 d) Dialogues

Dialogues are an age-old technique for introducing and practicing grammatical points.
Consider the dulogue in Figare 206, with the suggestions for teachers in Figure 20.8 (both
from H. D. Brown 1992)

e) Written Texts

At the very simple, mechanical level, a text might be used to get at a certain verb teme, such
as in the passage in Figure 20.7, or simply to illustrate a grammat ical category, as in Figure
20.6 (both from HD Brown 1992). In the latter written discourse rules for pongraphing and
sequencing ideas can also be stended to.
Grammar Sequencing in Textbook and Curiculla
Grammatical sequencing received a great deal of attention in the 1950s and '60s when
curricula and textbooks were organized around grammatical categories Some language
professionals were of the opinion that difficulty could be predicted (especially if the native
languge were taken into consideration) and that therefore grammar in a curriculum should be
sequenced in a progression of casier to more dificult items. Yet no one had been able to
verify empirically such hierarchies of difficulty by the time the debate over grammatical
sequencing whimpered to a halt and situational and notional functional curricula assumed
popularity. At that point the question shined more to whether or not there was an optimal
functional sequence.

In recent years, we have witnessed a return to a more balanced viewpoint is which

gramnur is seen as one of several organizational aspects of communicative competence, all of
which should be considered in programming a textbook ora em riculum, în dis perspective,
the question of an opunal sequence of grammatical structures is not unelevant, but with our
current disciplinary matunty, we scem to agree that

 grammatical categories are one of several considerations in curricular sequencing

 a curriculus usually manifests a bacal sequence of basic grammatica structores (such
as introducing the past perfect tense after the past tunic, relative clauses aher question
Rirution), but such a sequence may be meer a factor of frequency and sachoiness than
of clearly identified degrees if linguistic difficulty
 beyond those basic structures, a few permutations here and them will make little
ifference in the eventual success of students as long as lan sage is being learned in the
context of a communicative curriculum
 Please turn back to pages 104-7 in Chapter 7 and review the sequence of grammatical and
communication skills of the Vater series OLD. Brown 1992) This "scope and sequence" chart
is illustrative of a typical sequence of grammatical structures in a basd ESL series. In
arranging the order of structures, the principles of simplicity and frequency were followed.
Therefore, the more "comples" tenses and clause formations come later in the series. Whale
one could quible with cer ate denents and suggest alternative permutations, nevertheless
camers succes in a course like this seems to be more a factor of 60 deat waambiguous presen
tion of material and (h) opportunity for meaningful interactive practice, nther than a factor of
a grammar point presented a week earlier or later.

B. VOCABULARY

1. “Word” about Vocabulary Teaching

One of the casualtics of the early approaches to CLT was a loss of a concerted focus on the
lexical forms of language. While traditional language teaching methods highlighted vocabulary
study with lists, definitions, written and oral drills, and flash.
cards, there was a period of time when "the teaching and learning of vocabulary (wert)
undervalued (Zammerman 1997. 5). In the zeal for natural, authentic class room tasks and
activities, vocabulary focus was swept under the rug. Further, as teachers more and more
perceived their role as facilitators and guides, they became more reluctant to take the directive
and sometimes intrusive steps to turn students' Focus to lexical form.

Toward the end of the twentieth century, we saw a revival of systematik atten tion to
vocabulary learning across a number of proficiency levels and contexts. Kanging from very
explicit focus, such as that found in Michael Lewis's (1995, 1997) Lexical Approach, to more
indirect approaches in which vocabulary is incorporased into communicative tasks, attention to
lexical forms is now more central to the devel opment of language curricula (see Nation &
Newton 1997). Research confirms that more than incidental exposure may be important for
second language acquisition. with "good grounds for intervening at the metacognitive level"
(Singleton 1997:222)

Current practices in teaching vocabulary, however, are not simply a rebirth of the same
methods of half a century ago. Rather than viewing vocabulary items as a long and boring list
of words to be defined and memonized, lexical forms are seen in their central role in
contextualized, meaningful language. Learners are guided in specific ways to internalize these
important building blocks of language. Below are some guidelines for the communicative
treatment of vocabulary instruction.

 Allocate specific class time to vocabulary learning

In the hustle and bustle of our interactive classrooms, sometimes we get so caught up in
lively group work and meaningful communication that we don't pause to devote some
attention to words. After all, words are basic building blocks of lan guage, in fact, survival
level communication can take place quite intelligibly when people simply string words
together-without applying any grammatical rules at all! So, if we're interested in being
communicative, words are among the first priorities.

 Help students to learn vocabulary in context.

The best internalization of vocabulary comes from encounters (comprehen sion or

production) with words within the context of surrounding discourse. Rather than isolating
words and/or focusing on dictionary definitions, attend to vocabulary within a communicative
framework in which items appear Students will then associate new words with a meaningful
context to which they apply.

 Play down the role of bilingual dictionaries.

A corollary to the above is to help students to resist the temptation to overuse their bilingual
dictionaries. In recent years, with the common availability of elec tronic pocket dictionaries,
students are even more easily tempted to punch in a ward they don't know and get an instant
response. It is unfortunate that such prac tices rarely help students to internalize the word for
later recall and use.

 Encourage students to develop strategies for determining the meaning of words.

Included in the discussion of learning strategies in Chapter 14 are referencts to learning

words. A number of clues" are available to learners to develop "word attack" strategies.
Figure 20.9 provides a detailed taxonomy of such strategies with examples.
very important. Sometimes, they are simply brief little pointers; for example, the wond
clumsy once appeared in a paragraph students were reading and the teacher volunteered:

 T: Okay, "chumsy Does anyone know what that means? [writes the wond on the
board Ssc silencel
 T. No one? Okay, well, take a look at the sentence it's in. "His clumsy efforts to
imitate a dancer were almost amusing Now, was Bernard a good dancer! (Mona ntises
ber band. Okay, Monal
  51: Well, no. He was a very had dancer, as we see in the next sentence.
 52: Not graceful
 T. Excellent! So, what do you think "chumsy" might mean?
 T: Good, what else? Anyone?
 53: Uncoordinated!
 T: Great Okay, so clumsy" means awkward, ungracefid, uncoordinated terites
synonyms on the board is that clear now?

Sometimes, such impromptu moments may be extended the teacher gives several examples
and/or encourages students to use the word in other sentences Make sure that such unplanned
teaching, however, does not detract from the cen nal focus of activity by going on and on, ad
nauseans

Unfortunately, professional pendulums have a disturbing way of swinging too far one way or
the other, and sometimes the only way we can get enough perspec tive to see these overly
long arcs is through hindsight. Hindsight has now taught us that there was some overreaction
to the almost exclusive attention that grammar and vocabulary received in the first two-thirds
of the twentieth century. So-called "natural" approaches in which grammar was considered
damaging were overreac ive Advocating the "absorption of prammar and vocabulary wittt no
overt atten Hon whatsoever to language forms went too fhe. We now seem to have a healthy
respect for the place of form focused instruction attention to those basic "bits and pieces of a
language-in an interactive curriculuis. And now we can pursue the business of finding better
and better techniques for getting these hits and pieces imo the communicative repertuares of
our learners.
 CHAPTER III

A. Conclusion

The document emphasizes the importance of integrating grammar and vocabulary teaching
within a communicative framework. It highlights the shift from traditional methods that
isolated grammatical structures and vocabulary lists to more context-based approaches that
facilitate meaningful language use. The revival of systematic attention to vocabulary, along
with balanced grammar instruction, underscores the necessity for learners to internalize
language through practical and engaging activities

B. Suggest

From the material presented by the author, it is hoped that the reader can understand reference
and inference clearly and completely, and can apply it in everyday life if needed.

REFERENCE
Brown h. Douglas (2004) Language Assesment: The Place of Grammar and Vocabulary