Category: Grammar

Demonstration of the activity as part of an overall plan for student work

Lesson plan 1

The theme of the lesson: Traveling. The Most Exciting Things and Places

Duration of the lesson: 60 minutes

Language level: intermediate

Number of students: 15

Aims of the lesson:

• to develop students’ speaking skills on the topic,
• to enhance students’ knowledge of the vocabulary on the theme,
• to practice students’ reading skills,
• to enhance students’ knowledge of the formation and use of comparative and superlative adjectives

Intended outcomes:

• students will demonstrate the understanding of the vocabulary on the topic,
• students will be able to enrich their spoken and written language with the help of grammatical rules learned at the lesson,
• students will demonstrate listening skills and the ability to discern specific parts of speech (adjectives) from a piece of a video recording.

Relationship of the lesson with other lessons: the theme of the previous lesson was “Traveling. Countries of the World”; the theme of the next lesson will be “Traveling. Difficulties. Learning how to make a complaint.” The lesson fits in this sequence as it expands the students’ skills and knowledge obtained at the previous lesson and prepares them for a better understanding of the material that will be presented at the next lesson.

Resources and materials: a laptop, wi-fi connection, board (to write the date and mark the groups’ points in a game)

Activities at the lesson:

1. Warming-up (4 minutes). Teacher asks questions about the previous lesson and the students answer them (e.g. “What is the biggest city in Australia?”).
2. Reading and speaking (12 minutes). Students read a short text about the Sidney Opera House. Then, the teacher instructs them to ask and answer each other questions about visiting opera or theater and their best or worst impressions (e.g. “Do you enjoy going to the theater or opera?”, “What is your favorite show?”, “If you hate visiting the theater, can you explain why?”).
3. Listening (10 minutes). The teacher shows students the video “Comparatives grammar animation – mosaic” (OUPSpain 2014). Students are instructed to raise their hands when they hear adjectives (“faster,” “better,” “more surprising”). The teacher asks the students what kind of adjectives they are. The expected answer, taking into consideration the students’ level, is “comparative and superlative.” The teacher continues showing the video and the students either recollect or get acquainted with the rules of formation of comparative and superlative adjectives.
4. Speaking (10 minutes). Integrating cultural context. The teacher invites students to make sentences about their first impression of Australia using the superlative adjectives (e.g. “When I first came to Australia, … seemed the biggest problem,” “… is the smallest market in my neighborhood,” “I found … the most exciting”).
5. Dialogue speaking. Practicing grammar material (12 minutes). Students are instructed to create dialogues about the most exciting place they have visited or the one they want to see. A specific requirement is to use comparative and superlative adjectives. One pair of students roleplay their dialogue, and the rest of the students analyze the adjectives and correctness of their use. The rest of the students are instructed to make the necessary amendments based on the analysis and present their dialogues at the next lesson.
6. Speaking. Group work (9 minutes). Students are divided into two groups to play a game. There are two parts to the game. The first one is aimed at practicing comparative adjectives. In turn, the groups are to suggest statements about some countries, cities, or travel sights (e.g. “Paris is bigger than New York,” “Africa is greener than Australia”). The competitors are to choose whether the statements are true or false.

The second part is aimed at practicing the superlative adjectives. The task is similar: teams are to make statements with superlative adjectives, and their rivals have to guess whether they are true or false (e.g. “Niagara Falls is one of the most popular natural attractions in the US,” “Sydney Opera House is the biggest in Australia”).

7. Summing up the lesson (3 minutes). The teacher evaluates students’ achievements, notes the problematic issues, and gives the home task. Apart from the dialogues, the students need to prepare a short speech “The most memorable event in my life.”

Evaluation of students’ outcomes: the success of the lesson’s objectives will be judged by the students’ adequate response to the tasks and activities of the lesson.

Evaluation of my teaching: teaching may be considered effective if all or the majority of students cope with the tasks. Lesson procedures should not be too easy or too difficult for the learners’ level. If most of the students produce good results, teaching methods may be regarded as successful.

Evaluation of the course: the lesson is well-built in the sequence of lessons. It is connected both with the previous topic and the next one. One of the considerable drawbacks is the absence of direct writing activities. However, at several stages of the lesson, students are required to write while preparing their dialogues or statements. The next lesson will be more specifically writing-oriented.

Lesson plan 2

The theme of the lesson: Traveling. Difficulties. Learning How to Make a Complaint

Duration of the lesson: 60 minutes

Language level: intermediate

Number of students: 15

Aims of the lesson:

• to develop students’ speaking skills on the topic,
• to enhance students’ knowledge of the vocabulary on the theme,
• to practice students’ writing skills,
• to enhance students’ knowledge of the formation and use of connectives.

Intended outcomes:

• students will demonstrate the understanding of the vocabulary on the topic,
• students will be able to enrich their spoken and written language with the help of grammatical rules learned at the lesson,
• students will develop writing skills and the ability to use connectives in their writing.

Relationship of the lesson with other lessons: the theme of the previous lesson was “Traveling. The Most Exciting Things and Places”; the theme of the next lesson will be “Traveling. Types of Transport.” The lesson fits in this sequence as it expands the students’ skills and knowledge obtained at the previous lesson and prepares them for a better understanding of the material that will be presented in the next lesson.

Resources and materials: a laptop, wi-fi connection, board (to write the date), handouts with a list of connectives, and a letter of complaint

Activities at the lesson:

1. Warming-up (4 minutes). To practice grammar material taught in the previous lesson, the teacher tells an adjective, and the chosen student has to produce comparative and superlative forms.
2. Speaking. Pair and individual work (10 minutes). Students present the dialogues prepared at the previous lesson and polished at home and the short speeches.
3. Listening and speaking (5 minutes). The students listen to and watch a short video “Complaints at the hotel room” (EnglishWorks Sequoia 2013). When they stop watching, the teacher asks them whether they have ever had any similar or other problems while traveling.
4. Reading and speaking: grammar practice (10 minutes). The teacher gives students the handouts with the list of connectives and explains the importance of connectives in spoken and written language. The students read the list and identify which of the words from the list they are acquainted with and which of them are new. Then, they try to make sentences incorporating the connectives in them.
5. Reading for specific purposes and writing. Pair work (8 minutes). The teacher gives students the handouts of a letter of complaint. The students have to underline the connectives in the text. Then, in pairs, they are to compose an answer to that letter using as many connectives as possible from the list.
6. Speaking. Revising the material (3 minutes). The teacher asks students to recollect the situations in which they might need to complain about bad service while traveling.
7. Pair work and roleplaying (16 minutes). The students prepare and roleplay dialogues where one of them is a customer dissatisfied with the service, and another is the member of personnel responsible for customer satisfaction.
8. Summing up the lesson (4 minutes). The teacher evaluates students’ achievements, notes the problematic issues, and gives the home task. The students need to write a two-page letter of complaint to the local authorities concerning the environmental issues in the area.

Evaluation of students’ outcomes: the success of the lesson’s objectives will be judged by the students’ positive response to the language and grammar material presented at the lesson.

Evaluation of my teaching: teaching will be considered effective if all or the majority of students understand the assignments and cope with the tasks. If the lesson activities correspond to the students’ level of English and if the learners demonstrate a high level of perception and understanding, teaching may be considered successful (Lightbown & Spada 2013).

Evaluation of the course: the lesson is well-built in the sequence of lessons. It is connected both with the previous topic and the next one. Unlike the previous lesson, this one involves the engagement of all basic skills: reading, speaking, writing, and listening. Special attention is paid to pair work and practicing the grammar material.

Discussion and analysis

Acquisition of a second language presents several challenges for students as well as teachers. While at the initial stages of learning English as an additional language children receive help from a bilingual teacher, at further levels, their classroom teachers combine the responsibility both for learning the subjects and the development of language skills (Gibbons 2015). Kong (2009) and Huang (2011) discuss the significance of content-based instruction in ESL lessons. However, many scholars defend the importance of context in language learning. For instance, Breen (2001) emphasizes that it is practically impossible to master a language in a pure classroom environment and states that context-learning is crucial. Kayi-Aydar (2013) also notes that scaffolding greatly enhances teaching instructions and learning outcomes. In the study by El-Dakhs (2015), the importance of appropriate instructions in the classroom is emphasized. Turner (2013) agrees that the context approach is important in teaching English in Australia. A teacher of English should have a large number of competencies and skills (Murray & Christenson 2011a, Murray & Christenson 2011b). Moreover, such teachers should do their best to develop these skills in their students (Harmer 2001).

The popularity of English all over the world has produced a term global Englishes to mark different variations of the language (Murata & Jenkins 2009). May (2014) investigates the necessity of coming up with productive approaches to multilingual education. In her investigation of the plurilingual teachers of ESL in Australia, Ellis (2013) emphasizes that these specialists consider language learning difficult but possible. However, scholars note that bilingual education may produce adverse outcomes both for the native language and the quality of the learners’ standard English (Lee et al. 2016). Thus, language socialization is a crucial aspect of ESL learning (Duff & Talmy 2011). Scholars remark on the positive impact of an ecological approach to language learning (Van Lier 2000). Teachers’ sociocultural identity plays an important role in the students’ socialization (Adjayi 2011; Luk 2012).

By the abovementioned approaches to context learning, I developed my lesson plans in a way that would allow the best accommodation of the students to the learning environment and the lessons’ objectives. Both of the presented lessons are well built in the sequence of lessons in the course. They are connected to the previous and the next lessons due to a similar topic and specific educational and cultural objectives. To put my aims into practice, I need to engage every student in active participation in the lessons. The evaluation of the lessons’ success will be based on the students’ ability to operate the skills and vocabulary presented in the lessons.

For planning their lessons of EAL in Australia, teachers use the companion for English as an additional language (Victorian curriculum and assessment authority 2012). The core stages of language development and curriculum are outlined in this curriculum.

I planned the lessons in this way because I am more or less aware of the students’ abilities and I know what areas they need to enhance. For instance, the little use of technological devices is explained by the fact that not all of the students feel comfortable while searching the internet or even using a laptop. However, I plan to include more technological tools in the future. The choice of the skills developed at each lesson is also associated with the students’ level of preparation. Janks (2004) remarks that it is up to the teacher what access to language students have. The author mentions that the more willing a teacher is to share the knowledge and provide access to the various aspects of English, the better outcomes his or her students will produce (Janks 2004). I want my students to achieve the best results, so I included each of the four core skills in the lessons: reading, speaking, listening, and writing.

Based on the Four Resources Model introduced by Luke and Freebody (1999), the reading task for the lessons expects the students to be meaning makers and text critics. Thus, I included a variety of texts for the students to use and practice their abilities. The importance of practicing speech and writing skills for language acquisition is emphasized by many scholars (Kramsch 1998; Gan 2012). It is noted that the lack of tasks focused on speaking disables the development of such necessary skills if ESL learners. Zhong (2013) remarks that to achieve students’ willingness to communicate in English, the teacher needs to combine such factors as learners’ beliefs, self-efficacy, and linguistic and sociocultural issues. The plan for my first lesson involves many activities focused on the development of speaking skills, as I feel that my students need to practice speaking a lot. The second lesson involves several writing tasks, and this is another crucial aspect that is not developed perfectly in my students yet.

In their study, Yazdanpanah and Khanmohammad (2014) analyze the importance of developing listening comprehension in English lessons. When ESL learners can discern what a foreigner is saying, it means that they can react to the speaker and engage in conversation. That is why I paid particular attention to including listening tasks in the lesson plans. Teaching English grammar is another crucial aspect of learning English (Folse 2009). I am convinced that is necessary to incorporate grammar in absolutely every lesson in the curriculum, as grammar is the skeleton on which everything is based. Both of my lessons contain grammar activities that are not taught out of context but are combined with the vocabulary material and the theme of the lesson.

The use of a laptop at the lessons is a part of CALL (computer-assisted language learning (Warschauer 2004). However, I have to admit that my lessons lack the use of such productive tools as PowerPoint presentations and some others (Oommen 2012). Another effective means of improving the students’ grammar and writing skills, as outlined by Suthiwartnarueput and Wasanasomsithi (2012), is Facebook. In a couple of weeks, when I make sure that all of my students can use the Internet for searching the material and using social websites, I will incorporate these techniques in the lessons.

Reference List

Adjayi, L 2011, ‘How ESL teachers’ sociocultural identities mediate their teacher role identities in a diverse urban school setting’, The Urban Review, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 654-680.

Breen, M 2001, ‘The social context for language learning’, in CN Candlin & N Mercer (eds), English language teaching in its social context: a reader, Routledge, New York, NY.

Duff, P & Talmy, S 2011, ‘Language socialization approaches to second language acquisition: social, cultural, and linguistic development in additional languages’, in D Atkinson (ed), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition, Routledge New York, NY, pp. 95-116.

El-Dakhs, DAS 2015, ‘The integration of form-focused instruction within communicative language teaching: instructional options’, Journal of Language Teaching and Research, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 1125-1131.

Ellis, E 2013, ‘The ESL teacher as plurilingual: an Australian perspective”, TESOL Quarterly, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 446-471.

EnglishWorks Sequoia 2013, Complaints at the hotel room, online video, Web.

Folse, K 2009, Why K-12 teachers need to know about ESL grammar issues, Web.

Gan, Z 2012, ‘Understanding L2 speaking problems: implications for ESL curriculum development in a teacher training institution in Hong Kong’, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 43-59.

Gibbons, P 2015, Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning: teaching English language learners in the mainstream classroom, Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH.

Harmer, J 2001, How to teach English: an introduction to the practice of English language teaching, Longman, Essex.

Huang, KM 2011, ‘Motivating lessons: a classroom-oriented investigation of the effects of content-based instruction on EFL young learners’ motivated behaviours and classroom verbal interaction’, System, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 186-201.

Janks, H 2004, ‘The access paradox’, English in Australia, vol. 139, pp. 33-42.

Kayi-Aydar, H 2013, ‘Scaffolding language learning in an academic ESL classroom’, ESL Journal, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 324-335.

Kong, S 2009, ‘Content-based instruction: what can we learn from content-trained teachers’ and language-trained teachers’ pedagogy?’, The Canadian Modern Language Review, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 233-267.

Kramsch, C 1998, Language and culture, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.

Lee, P, Fasoli, L, Ford, L, Stephenson, P & McIrney, D 2016, Indigenous kids and schooling in the northern territory: as introductory overview and brief history of aboriginal education in the northern territory, Batchelor Press, Batchelor.

Lightbown, PM & Spada, N 2013, How languages are learned, 4th edn, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Luk, J 2012, ‘Teachers’ ambivalence in integrating culture with EFL teaching in Hong Kong’, Language, Culture and Curriculum, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 249-264.

Luke, A & Freebody, P 1999, A map of possible practices: further notes on the four resources model, Web.

May, S 2014, ‘Disciplinary divides, knowledge construction, and the multilingual turn’, in S May (ed), The multilingual turn: implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education, Routledge, New York, NY.

Murata, K & Jenkins, J (eds.) 2009, Global Englishes in Asian contexts: current and future debates, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY.

Murray, DE & Christinson MA 2011a, What English language teachers need to know, vol. 1, Routledge, New York, NY.

Murray, DE & Christinson MA 2011b, What English language teachers need to know, vol. 2, Routledge, New York, NY.

Oommen, A 2012, ‘Teaching English as a global language in smart classrooms with PowerPoint presentation’, English Language Teaching, vol. 5, no.12, pp. 54-61.

OUPSpain 2014, Comparatives grammar animation – mosaic, online video, Web.

Suthiwartnarueput, T & Wasanasomsithi, P 2012, ‘Effects of using Facebook as a medium for discussions of English grammar and writing of low-intermediate EFL students’, Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 194-214.

Turner, M 2013, ‘CLIL in Australia: the importance of context’, International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 395-410.

Van Lier, L 2000, ‘From input to affordance: social-interactive learning from an ecological perspective’, in JP Lantolf (ed), Sociocultural theory and second language learning, Oxford University Press Oxford.

Victorian curriculum and assessment authority 2012, English as an additional language (EAL) companion to AusVELS, Web.

Warschauer, M 2004, ‘Technological change and the future of CALL’, in S Fotos & SN Browne (eds), New perspectives on CALL for second language classrooms, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

Yazdanpanah, M & Khanmohammad, H 2014, ‘Sociocultural theory and listening comprehension: does the scaffolding of EFL learners improve their listening comprehension?’, Theory and Practice of Language Studies, vol. 4, no. 11, pp. 2389-2395.

Zhong, Q(M) 2013, ‘Understanding Chinese learners’ willingness to communicate in a New Zealand ESL classroom: a multiple case study drawing on the theory of planned behavior’, System, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 740-751.

Handout 1. The list of connectives

Teaching is a significant element of any academic process, since it plays a vital role of passing information from one individual to another. However, in order to ensure that the learning process is effective, it is essential for teachers to understand various teaching methodologies and their perfect application.

Some of the teaching methodologies that should be embraced by teachers include grammar translation, communicative approach, audio lingual, natural approach (Coleman & Klapper, 2005).

A detailed understanding of these methodologies ensures a quality outcome within the educational system. Excellent execution of these various learning methodologies also makes it easier for students to acquire the knowledge needed for productive purposes.

In order for teachers to, adequately, understand these various teaching methodologies, they should critically compare and contrast these learning methodologies such as the communicative approach with grammar translation method (McDonough & Shaw, 2003). They should compare various aspects of these learning methodologies in an extensive capacity.

This enables them to single out and employ the best learning methodology applicable to varied situations. Therefore, in support of their understanding efforts, this document is going to, critically, asses the communicative approach to language learning and teaching. However, this evaluation process will proceed with an extensive comparison with other teaching approaches.

Communicative approach was first noted in the 1900 century (1970) (Arnold, 1999). A renowned psychoanalyst, Robert Langs, was the individual behind this theory. He employed his psychoanalysis thoughts and came up with an incredible learning methodology, the communicative approach (Richards & Rodgers, 2001).

However, over the years, there have been various myths about Robert’s ideologies. Many people including scholars have interpreted this learning approach in their own perspective thus encouraging bad press on the subject.

Communicative approach begins with the theory of language, regarded as an element of communication. The most significant objective of the communicative approach is to promote excellence in communication (Wilkins, 1974).

Halliday’s functionalist account is also among the theories embraced by the communicative approach. An example of communicative approach is whereby the learner repeats the words said by the instructor. Teachers give their pronunciation of terms as learners repeat or imitate.

Communicative method of learning emphasizes on the use of communication, while in the learning process. In this method, a language is assessed by one’s ability to communicate in the language (Hawkey, 2005). A student’s competency in a language is measured by his effectiveness in communicating in the second language.

Therefore, in teaching English, students’ competencies are measured by their ability to, effectively communicate, in the language. This approach encourages teachers to use communication as the best way to evaluate their students, who wishes to acquire the second language.

Therefore, in learning English, communicative approach encourages the use of communication in teaching English students. In other words, students should communicate more in English for effective understanding of the language.

It is imperative to make some significant considerations, when developing a communicative approach design. One should consider the various levels of objectives. These levels include the integrative level, learning needs, linguistic, interpersonal relationship and general level of education (McKay, 2006).

Communication approach is associated with numerous characteristics. Some of these characteristics are what differentiates this approach from the others. For instance, the communication approach actively engages students in the learning process.

It encourages students to interact in the foreign language, in order to be proficient (Douglas, 2000). Students must engage in active communication among themselves in order to gain the needed skills in the language.

Another characteristic of this approach is that the learning process encourages the use of authentic English texts. These texts assist in making teaching processes effective. In communicative approach, students do not only concentrate on understanding the second language (English), but also insist on the understanding of various strategies required for using this methodology (McKay, 2006).

Understanding learning strategies assist in their perfect execution of learning processes thus ensuring that the methodology is effective while conducting the learning process. This communicative methodology further lays more emphasis on the learner’s encounter with various situations and experiences.

These encounters display various circumstances whereby students are expected to communicate in the nonnative language, English (Wilkins, 1974). Experience with various situations plays a vital part in the lesson or learning process. The unique context of situations provides excellent opportunities for the learning process outside the doors of classrooms.

There are various disadvantages in using the communicative approach, in conducting learning activities. The communicative approach does not encourage the correction of the committed errors (Richards & Nunan, 1990).

This is because students practice with their fellows who are also incompetent in the language. Such students find it hard to correct their mistakes, since the interaction does not engage professional assistance.

Moreover, many students find it frustrating to communicate with their other counterparts from other countries, due to the varied nature of their pronunciation abilities. Since their accents differ, they often have difficulties in communicating with their fellow students (Richards & Nunan, 1990).

Another disadvantage of this method is that it concentrates on fluency but disregards accuracy. This approach does not aim at reducing the errors committed but rather encourages learners to formulate their own methods or tactics of evading the correct language usage. Teachers also often have problems in evaluating their student using this learning approach (McKay, 2006).

This is because most tests are often done in written format, yet this approach proposes for oral evaluation. This thus complicates the evaluation process. Moreover, it is difficult for teachers to correct their students’ errors on grammar, while using communicative approach (Zamel, & Spack, 2002). Teachers cannot correct their students on grammar, since this method only concentrate on communication.

In this approach, any correction is done after the communication exercise. Therefore, teachers using this approach must be brilliant to be able to identify the mistakes while the communication activity process and refer to them later at the end of the process.

Communicative approach is linked to a number of advantages. For instance, the communicative approach gives the real life reflection of the experiences one would find outside classrooms. It gives students an opportunity to have a taste of real communication that will be experienced outside classrooms (Richards & Farrell, 2005).

This enhances the student’s ability to communicate effectively on the various contexts encountered outside classrooms. Another advantage is that communicative approach develops a student’s interest on the non-native language, since it creates various communication scenarios that often seem interesting to students.

In communicative theory, every stakeholder has his own role to play in the learning process. Teachers and students have their specified roles to play for the process to be successful. Learners often act as negotiators between object of studying, self and the studying process itself (Henkil, 2011). Students also act as joint negotiators in various activities within the group or in classrooms.

On the other hand, teachers also have their specific roles. However, they have two roles, which are regarded as extremely significant, while employing communicative approach. One of the major roles for teachers is to facilitate the learning process (Yule, 2010). Teachers should ensure the communication process proceeds with minimal hitches and with the at most cooperation from every stakeholder in the learning process.

In addition to this facilitation role, teachers also act as autonomous participants in the communication process. They also assume other roles such as counselors and analysts while conducting the communication process.

Communicative approach involves a number of steps or procedure for the process to be effective. The first step is by conducting a number of mini-dialogs. A number of oral practices on the content to be presented during day follow the mini-dialog. This is closely followed by another step, which involves the use asking and answering of questions (Zamel & Spack, 2002).

Questions regarding the dialog topic are always asked first followed by questions about the learner’s personal experiences. This is then followed by the learner’s studying various communicative expressions and the underlying rules. Oral recognition and activities then follows, after which students copy the modules. A session is allocated for sampling assignments, which is closely followed by the final step, the evaluation process.

Aside from communicative approach, grammar translation is also a significant methodology of studying nonnative languages. Grammar translation method is among the oldest and most traditional approach used for teaching nonnative languages (Yule, 2010). It traces its origin from Germany, in a place known as Prussia.

Grammar translation was discovered late in the 1700’s and found its way to the headlights in the beginning of the 19^th century. It was initially understood as the Prussian method or the classical method before it was named as the Prussian method (Richards & Farrell, 2005). Grammar translation gained significant fame with many schools and teachers adopting the language as a suitable teaching methodology.

It is currently used by various schools in assisting student grasp the concepts of new languages or non-native languages. Therefore, grammar translation method is a teaching approach whereby students learn foreign or new languages via translation and studying of grammar in their learning processes (Larsen-freeman, 2000).

There are various characteristics associated with grammar translation. Grammar translation approaches the study of a foreign language by conducting an extensive study on grammar rules. This process is then closely followed by its application on translating one language to another. Grammar translation concentrates on mastering rules for converting one language to another.

Another characteristic is that grammar translation focuses on writing and reading and not on speaking or listening. This teaching methodology involves the direct translation of words or vocabularies using certain texts, word list or dictionaries (Doughty & Long, 2003). In conducting lessons using grammar translation method, most of the time is devoted to translation of words and sentences.

Grammar translation method insists on accuracy. Students are expected to uphold high translation standards while conducting their learning activities. In Grammar translation, the study of grammar takes a logical analysis perspective thus deductive analysis. This and any other learning process of grammar translation method uses the local language while instructing learners.

The purpose of using grammar translation method was to help learners recognize and learn some of their nonnative languages and literatures. Learning foreign language using grammar translation method was also a strategy to enhance the grammatical understanding of local languages among learners (Henkil, 2011). Moreover, learning foreign languages was a way of growing the intellectual capacity or abilities of learners.

There are various examples that can explicate the use of grammar translation approach of learning the second language. Grammar translation method entails the direct translation of words and sentences from one language to the next. Therefore, a perfect example is the following translation whereby a local language is being translated to English.

English local language. Gardi boy. Randos floor

Several disadvantages emerge when employing grammar translation method. This language learning methodology gives students a reflection of the meaning of languages. It portrays languages as autonomously grouped words that must be pronounced in a certain manner to pass a message.

Grammar translation method insists on using only translation method thus giving language an awful approach or perspective that it can only be well understood by translation method. According to sources, it is noted that students with average intelligent quotient on grammar may fail to comprehend the language effectively (Coleman & Clapper, 2005). Students studying under this learning method often feel frustrated and bored.

This is due to the boring and difficult nature of this learning method. Grammar translation method is extremely unnatural since it ignores the oral part.

The translation process also consumes a lot of time thus wastage of resources. Sentences that are directly translated from other languages often sound funny and with many grammatical errors. Ultimately, this learning process also does not help students learn how to develop excellent pronunciation of words (Gass & Selinker, 2008).

Aside from disadvantages, grammar translation method has a number of advantages, which makes the approach sometimes easier to implement. This method is uncomplicated in implementing thus easy time for teachers to perform their various roles (Wilkins, 1974). It does not require facilitators to be fluent in speaking the non-native language.

Moreover, it does not require facilitators to be proficient or perfect in the language; only basic skills are necessary for the lesson to be a success. Additionally, since learning instructions are given in mother tongue, learning process is relatively easier thus minimizing the time consumed in the learning process (Arnold, 1999).

Grammar translation is extremely common in the current times especially in lessons that contain large number of students. It is the easiest approach to use in a large classroom in order to ensure that the learning process is effective.

Moreover, the method is reliable and effective in proving learners adequate skills for learning and understanding. Students are also able to learn various aspects of their languages as well as mother tongue. Ultimately, it is relatively easier test or evaluates students when using this learning method.

In grammar translation method, teachers have certain significant role that plays a vital role in the success of the learning process. Teachers often act as a symbol of authority, while conducting various learning sessions (Larsen-freeman, 2000). They ensure that order maintains in classes and with minimal hitches. Additionally, teachers also have a lot of talking time thus more attention to their instructions and words.

Aside from the role of teachers, students also have their various roles (Zamel, & Spack, 2002). One of the basic roles for students is to follow the instructions given by their instructors. They must follow each of the directions given by the teacher in order for the learning process to be a success. Moreover, students are expected to be passive and not necessarily active.

In contrasting communicative approach with grammar translation method, communicative approach majorly concentrates on communication between learners, whereas, in grammar translation method, much focus is given on the translation of one language to another (Coleman & Klapper, 2005).

Additionally, in the evaluation process of communicative approach, students are evaluated by their abilities to communicate in foreign language. On the other hand, the evaluation process in grammar translation method takes the written format.

There exist some significant dissimilarity between the characteristics of communicative approach and grammar translation approach. In communicative approach, students are actively engaged in the learning process, whereas, in grammar translation, learners are not actively engaged in the learning process. Their activity is considered as passive (McDonough & Shaw, 2003).

In communicative approach, there is a lot of interaction among students as they conduct their various learning activities. This is in contrary to grammar translation, which does not allow active interaction among students.

In communicative approach, students become proficient by his experiences with varied instance that encourages his or her communication in foreign language, whereas, in grammar translation, learners become proficient by his or her ability comprehend the translation tricks (Wilkins, 1974).

In grammar translation, students must also grasp the grammar rules in order to be successful in the learning process, whereas, in communicative approach, students only have to understand the strategies for communicating in the foreign language.

There also exist considerable differences between the disadvantages and disadvantages of the communicative approach and grammar translation approach. For instance, the communicative approach does not encourage the correction of grammatical mistakes, whereas, in grammar translation, much attention is dedicated to the correction of grammatical errors and mastering of grammatical rules (Doughty & Long, 2003).

Another difference is that, in the communicative approach, there is less concentration on the accuracy of the language; much attention is given to fluency instead. This is contrary to grammar translation method, which put much attention on grammar accuracy and correction of errors.

In communicative approach, facilitators often find it difficult to assess their students, since the assessment is done orally, whereas, in grammar translation, the assessment is done in written format thus easier for teachers to conduct the evaluation process (Gass & Selinker, 2008).

Communicative approach provides students with the opportunity to experience the possible communication instances that they may face outside school (Coleman & Klapper, 2005).

On the contrary, grammar translation method does not give students opportunity to experience real life communication instances that they may meet outside classrooms. As noted before, most students often enjoy studying foreign language using communicative method, since it is very interesting.

This is different in grammar translation process whereby students often feel bored due to the uninteresting nature of the learning methodology (Zamel, & Spack, 2002). Therefore, most students learning foreign language using the communicative approach often develop interest on the language, which is a contrary to the ones using grammatical translation.

In communicative approach, teacher often have difficulties in conducting lesson activities, since they are responsible for various significant roles. In grammatical translation, however, teachers often find it easy to conduct various learning activities. This is because it allows the use of mother tongue thus easier for teachers to give students instructions (Hawkey, 2005).

Moreover, in communicative approach, teachers are expected to be fluent or proficient in the foreign language, whereas, in grammatical translation method, facilitators only need to have basic knowledge about the foreign language.

It is easier for teachers to evaluate or test their students using grammar translation method, since the test is offered in written form. This is not the same in communicative approach since it uses oral tests, which is extremely difficult for teachers to use as an evaluation process.

References

Arnold, J. (1999). Affect in language learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Coleman, J. & Klapper, J. (2005). Effective learning and teaching in modern languages. London, LDN: Routledge Falmer.

Doughty, C. & Long, M. (2003). The Handbook of second language acquisition. Malden, MA: Oxford Blackwell.

Douglas, D. (2000). Assessing languages for specific purposes. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: an introductory course. London, LDN: Routledge.

Hawkey, R. (2005). A modular approach to testing English language skills: the development of the Certificates in English Language Skills (CELS) examinations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Henkil, E. (2011). Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

Larsen-freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

McDonough, J. & Shaw, C. (2003). Materials and methods in ELT: a teacher’s guide. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

McKay, P. (2006). Assessing young language learners. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. & Farrell, T. (2005). Professional development for language teachers: strategies for teacher learning (Thomas Sylvester Charles). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 2005.

Richards, J. & Nunan, D. (1990). Second Language teacher education. Oxford, OX: Oxford University Press.

Richards, J. & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. (1990). The language-teaching matrix. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Wilkins, D. (1974). Second-language learning and teaching. London, LDN: Edward Arnold.

Yule, G. (2010). The study of language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Zamel, V. & Spack, R. (2002). Enriching Esol Pedagogy: Readings and Activities for Engagement, Reflection, and Inquiry. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

Introduction

Since writing is a crucial skill for an educator, a person working in this sphere is to pay attention to a number of rules and details, improve, practice, and perfect their writing skills. There are various types of writing and each of them has a certain list of requirements. In order to master writing, one is to combine the knowledge of Grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, orthography, and syntax.

Besides, in order to form a well-balanced paper, one is to work on writing style, word usage, logic, and connections. When all of these aspects are taken into consideration, the final result is flowing and easy to read the academic text. The purpose of this paper is to present the self-evaluation of my Grammar knowledge and writing skills according to the Grammar quizzes and to the information, I learned about writing and formatting academic papers on the advanced level.

Types of Writing I have done Thus Far

Being a student and through my career, I gained experience in writing of various kinds. For example, I have some skills in descriptive writing. This kind of writing requires a lot of stylistic devices such as epithets, metaphors, and similes. Descriptive texts are normally used to communicate one’s impressions about some object, person, or event. Another type of writing I had to use being a student was narrative writing.

It is rather difficult because this kind of writing is used when one is telling a story, so logical connections, a chronology of the events, causes and outcomes have to be put in an appropriate order. Otherwise, the author of the writing is likely to confuse their readers and become the reason for misinterpretation of the events presented in the story. Persuasive writing is one of the most complex types of writing I have ever encountered.

First of all, it has to have a clear point, which needs to be proved. Secondly, the opinion of the author has to be laid out in an accessible and understandable manner. Finally, it has to have logical and evidential support in order to be able to persuade readers. Such writing takes a lot of effort, critical thinking, and preparation. I also have experience in writing comparative papers, which take several objects or events and contrast between them.

This writing requires a critical approach to the subject and reasonable evaluation. According to my experience, writing of any type is only successful when the writer as well-read and educated. Of course, practice makes perfect, so writing skills can be improved when one carefully follows the schemes and rules of writing, watches their word usage and logical structure of the text.

How My Past Writing Compares with the Type Described in the Text

Academic writing according to APA style includes all the most important basic elements of other kinds of writings, yet it is still different in some aspects. The paper written according to the sixth edition of APA is to be well structured, which means they need to include several parts such as introduction, elaboration, conclusion. The paper is to be well put, so none of the parts should be too long. Otherwise, the paper becomes confusing and the reader loses the initial point of it.

Before building the paper, an author is to think it through carefully and create an outline. Academic writing differs from descriptive writing because of its precision. It has to be filled with factual information and evidence. Writing academic papers the authors have to refer to reliable sources of information. Besides, APA requires that papers are formatted in a special way. The author needs to pay attention to how they cite sources reviewed for the paper, they also are to use headings correctly, remember the font and spacing rule, and indent paragraphs. Academic papers cannot have too long sentences containing run-on parts, or colloquial expressions.

Clarity and precision are crucial for this type of writing. They are achieved through the use of short and understandable sentences, the logical structure of the paper, reasonable sequence, relevant examples, demonstrations, and proofs. In academic papers, a writer is to avoid writing from the first person, unless it is required. Besides, the authors of academic papers are to demonstrate a critical and analytical approach, instead of criticizing, judging, and confronting. Opinions communicated in such papers are to be based on logical conclusions and evidence, but not on emotions only.

My Grammar Skills Based on the Capital College Tutorial Quizzes

Quizzes on the Capital College website became a revelation to me. I discovered that I have a number of weaknesses when it comes to my knowledge of English Grammar and writing skills. I spent a couple of hours doing quizzes of various categories such as “verbs and verbals”, “clauses and phrases”, “structural flaws”, “sentence parts”, “punctuation”. It was interesting for me to check my own knowledge of writing and Grammar.

The results were rather unexpected because the tests revealed a number of flaws in some fields. For example, I found it very challenging to accomplish punctuation tasks. I think the avoidance of comma splices is one of my weak areas. Besides, critically evaluation my own writing in my old papers, I noticed that run-on sentences are a typical feature of my writing. I deem these fields to be the aspects I need to pay attention to and correct through practice and evaluation.

I rate my knowledge of the rules of punctuation as average. At the same time, I have 100 % positive results in the tasks that required proper modal verb placement, and word ending correction. I feel confident about my knowledge in these spheres. Finally, just like for many writers, the subject-verb agreement seems to be one of the areas I have difficulties with, especially when a collective noun is used (Subject-Verb Agreement 1996). The results of my tests for this subject were better than average but still contained minor errors.

How I Feel About Writing

I can say without a doubt that writing does not dread me at all. I enjoy expressing myself through writing and I am confident about my writing skills. Of course, there is always something to improve. My writing is imperfect, and there are errors of different types such as typing mistakes, subject-verb agreement, punctuation, run-on sentences, and comma splices. Creating academic papers according to APA writing style makes the writer keep in mind a variety of rules and details.

For me, this is not a burden. I am glad to have my errors pointed out to me, as this is the way towards improvement. I am willing to work on my writing skills, memorize my past errors, and perfect my writing style. I have always admired the art of writing, I value the creativity of written assignment and I am not afraid of details. I believe that all the APA style requirements are reasonable and help the writers compose better and more precise papers. Learning about more professional writing with its advanced rules is inspiring for me.

How this Course will Enhance my Writing Skills and Attitude toward Writing

First of all, I expect this course to make a positive impact on my writing skills, help me build better and clearer papers, explain my opinions, and conduct my research in a more effective way. Secondly, I expect to practice writing and perfect my knowledge of English Grammar and punctuation to avoid future errors in these areas. Finally, I anticipate that taking this course will improve my logical and critical thinking skills, which are crucial for advanced writing and academic papers of good quality. I am aware of the challenges I would have to face during this course, but I know that learning and improvement are worth it. Persistence, patience, and hard work will help me overcome difficulties and obtain better writing skills.

Conclusion

This activity revealed the strong and weak sides of my writing skills and Grammar knowledge. It was fascinating to see how much I do not know in these areas. This activity created a field for my critical self-evaluation and made me excited about learning and improving in the future. Quizzes made me realize that I enjoy the challenge and that every error brings me closer to perfection. APA writing style is complex, and due to this activity, I know how much there is still to learn and explore for me in this area.

Reference

Subject-Verb Agreement. (1996). GrammarCCC. Web.

Introduction

Whether you are referring to it as chatting, texting or even instant messaging, everyone has a rough idea of what we will be taking a keen look at in this essay. With the changes that have been brought about by modern technology, chatting or texting has become a common mode of communication in almost every age group. Children who are not even old enough to go to first grade have mastered the lingo of chartrooms acronyms yet they cannot even write or read their respective language properly.

Even the older generations participate in this craze but most of them do it while they are online and using features like facebook and other social sites. The younger generation prefers to text when they are using their cell phones instead of talking. Even though some of them won’t admit it, this is mostly done to save on cell phone minutes. (Barker, 2009)

Proponents of Chatting

The reality is a regular teenager around the age bracket of 15-17 years old sends an average of 2000 messages a month! It is something most parents do not understand because they fear their kids will have a problem in the future when it comes to commanding the written form of their language. In their defense, most youngsters argue that they can differ as to which language is appropriate when writing an essay or texting their friends.

With the expanded services that have been brought along with the advent of chatrooms, some of them are used to offer lessons on foreign languages whereby the student can communicate with the teacher through chatting. Furthermore, most of the chat services available online incorporate the auto-correct features of Ms. Word which help someone to correct grammatically incorrect sentences. Such features are extremely helpful to users who are learning English as a second language.

However, critics argue that such features only increase laxity in students when it comes to remembering the spelling of certain words and the proper punctuation of sentences. These different viewpoints can be viewed as the pros and cons of the chatting services available. Before we take an in-depth look at these varied viewpoints, we must see if this feature (chatting) serves its core purpose as a communication tool; which is to convey information. (April 2008)

Function as a communication Tool

When Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone, he approached a giant telegraph company, Western Union, to assist him in finding his newfound invention. Western Union did not take him seriously because at that time, communication via the telegraph network was the chosen way and Western Union banked its future on this model instead of the telephone which seemed too complicated for the average user at that particular time.

Looking back at Western Union’s miscalculation, what becomes abundantly clear is that man will choose the easiest and fastest mode of communication when the need arises. It is the reason why the telephone bypassed the telegraph as the chosen mode of communication. Both of them would convey the message, but the difference is the telephone could transmit voice messages which added clarity and a personal touch to the communication. (Hewings, p 259)

The same can be said with chatting. Occasionally someone might feel the need to convey a message quickly and maybe he or she is in a situation where he does not have enough cell phone minutes or he is stuck in a noisy environment. In another scenario, the user might want to communicate a message but wants to keep the entire process brief and impersonal. If you are visiting a dating chatroom and you are not sure as to who is at the other end, most people start with chatting then once they are comfortable with each other, they can start talking on the telephone. What all these examples demonstrate is people will chat or text because they found it more convenient to do so at that particular time.

It can be pretty tedious for the older generation who are not used to doing it but some of them have been stuck in a noisy environment and this was the best way to communicate. The points that have been discussed thus far are the reasons why people prefer to chat in abbreviated words that are punctuated depending on the message of the sender. The topic of discussion in this essay is the language they use in this mode of communication and whether it has a positive or negative effect on the grammar and vocabulary of their respective language. (Hewings, p 259)

Effects of Chatting on Vocabulary and Grammar

Improve Grammar?

It does seem like a far-fetched notion that chatting can improve a person’s grammar and vocabulary. As mentioned earlier, some kids as young as those in the first grade do know how to use a cell phone and some of them can construct a sentence that might be lack the proper punctuation and grammar when texting; but they will convey the message.

When these kids do eventually grow up and they are taught by a teacher as to how to write a grammatically correct sentence; won’t the familiarity of their previous text messages prove helpful in understanding their current curriculum? Although others might argue that the teacher’s workload is increased since he has to “undo” the damage done from all the chatting and texting, it’s not like teaching English or French requires some kind of indoctrination like teaching Marxism. It is a simple and direct approach where the student will realize if they write their sentences a certain way, they will fail the assignment. (26th October 2006)

When it comes to teaching languages, most teachers use the technique of constant repetition to ensure that a certain part is thoroughly understood. Even if the so-called student did not spell the word correctly when texting, he will remember the context in which the word was used and this is equally as important as spelling the word itself. It’s not unusual to read a sentence that has all the words spelled correctly plus proper punctuation but the sentence simply does not make sense.

On the flip side, most people have a problem understanding what the slang and abbreviations used while chatting or texting mean but once they get past that, they will understand the message being conveyed. My point is while a lot of weight is placed on proper punctuation and spelling when it comes to the written language, the context in which the respective words are used is equally as important. While chatting and texting might massively fail on the former, it does get a few points on the latter.

This argument also applies to foreign students who might be learning a respective language like English. When you are texting someone whose English is not that good, you will find yourself writing simple and correctly spelled words that you hope the reader will understand. (26th October 2006)

Changing Writing Traditions

There is a new theory being put forward by psychologists that the real effects of chatting and will be felt later on in life and not now. It is clear that this phenomenon is quite new and its long-term effects are not known due to a lack of research. While psychologists worry about the rate at which human contact and conversations are being replaced by technology especially in the young generation, their writing and reading skills should also be brought into question. As explained earlier, most teenagers can able to distinguish which language to use when writing an essay in class or chatting with their friends on their cell phones. Certain quarters might be proud of themselves in their ability to distinguish the two forms of written language. (Štekauer, p 371)

The question that comes to mind is what happens when these teenagers grow up and join the workforce? The good thing with the school system is that risking a bad grade is a good enough deterrent when it comes to presenting your work in the proper language. Your average workplace might have certain traditions when it comes to writing a memo but the presentation of other documents doesn’t require the writer to follow strict guidelines.

Nowadays, we can read manuscripts that were written hundreds of years back like the bible or Koran. Even if the language is slightly different, the message still gets through because these writers followed certain traditions when punctuating their sentences or the use of certain metaphors. The problem with today’s culture is that the slang and lingo being used today will smell like an old cardigan in a few weeks or months from now. The best example is what if the works of great philosophers or scientists like Socrates and René Des Cartes had written their works in a language that only their close friends could understand? (Štekauer, p 371)

Fast forward to today’s society, we will certainly produce great poets and historians, who would capture our imagination like the previous trailblazers. It would certainly be unfortunate if their private journals were written using “IMHO— in my humble opinion” or “ROFLOL— rolling on floor, laughing out loud”.

Write now these abbreviations are quite common to some of us but what happens if this civilization is ever wiped out by some disease like the bubonic plague and the only records of our history and culture are written in some jargon that the future generations would not be able to decipher? Right now it seems like we are being sensational when we make such speculations but can you imagine how our various written languages would sound like a hundred years from now if we continue on this slippery path? Several words like “Google” and others have already been added to the Oxford dictionary and this demonstrates that our language is evolving.

The only problem would be if the majority of the civilized world is unable to keep up with these changes regardless of how hard they try. Today’s youngsters will certainly pass on this culture to their children who would take it and turn it into something that would sound foreign to us grandparents even if they are using the same language.

History will best judge you if you left it with some form of evidence to pass judgment on. All the ancient civilizations from the Crusaders’ quest to spread Christianity to Hannibal’s invasion of the Roman Empire with his elephants are all well recorded because the authors followed certain traditions when writing these records. These writers certainly had an option of using a language that was more “accommodating” but they went through the trouble of using a language that was probably not their first one, like Latin, because that was the expected norm. (Štekauer, p 375)

Ability to Express Oneself

Another problem that is emerging in today’s generation is their inability to express themselves using the written language. This is evident in today’s classrooms where studies have shown that the creative writing skills amongst students have been declining over the last few years. Maybe this could be blamed on the current curriculum being adopted by most urban schools where the content being covered is so much that the teachers do not have time to fully test the writing skills of each student. Part of the blame is also attributed to the way everybody communicates in today’s society. If you are not calling someone with your cell phone you’ll probably email them or text them.

Most assignments being handed in today are usually typed and the demand for handwritten ones is waning and waning. Typing with the help of auto-correct and spell check features of Ms-Word certainly ease a person’s work but does it affect a person’s creativity? Seasoned writers who started with the plain Bic biro pen and A4 foolscap certainly have an edge over writers who never went through this process and have to depend on the synonym and dictionary features of most word processing programs to find the words to express themselves. (Hewings, p 263)

This is what most of the “chatting and texting generation” use when typing assignments since they cannot use the common slang in their papers. The previous generation on the other hand had to rely on wit and previously acquired knowledge when it came to finding words that express their thoughts. Some teachers can agree that assignments on creative writing being handed in today are a bit “flat” when you compare them to previous works say 20 years ago.

The literature can be grammatically correct with the proper usage of punctuations and pronouns. The problem is the verbs, adjectives, and metaphors used to convey the feelings of the writer just do not show that this author is a budding Ernest Hemmingway or Charles Dickens. There are of course a few students who will always stand out but a large majority of them are handing in “flat” work.

One of the main reasons for equipping a learner with proper reading and writing skills is to give them tools for expressing themselves. This is only possible through constant practice which requires one to read books and be an active writer.

Newspaper sales are declining in most developed countries and this is attributed to the booming online services being offered, or people just stopped reading newspapers. As explained earlier, writing a grammatically correct sentence can be easy with today’s technology; the only difference comes in if the writer was able to convey the message he wanted. How many teenagers growing up today have the skills of using a coma or a semicolon appropriately, in the middle of a sentence, so that the feelings being conveyed by the writer can fully sink in? (Hewings, p 265)

Conclusion

Most job applications require one to fill in some form online or hand in a typed letter of application. Don’t you think a hand-written one has more character and is a far much better barometer for judging someone’s personality? The reality is the current generation is usually lost for words when they are told to describe themselves in 100-150 words. Blaming this on the content being taught in schools is a far-fetched excuse since the curriculum hasn’t changed radically in the last 20 years or so. The weaknesses being observed in the writing skills of students are probably due to the chatting practices they engage in.

Finding harmony between the emerging literature and its traditional norm is necessary if we want to preserve our language traditions. Unless we find a middle ground before the whole communication process becomes a jig-saw puzzle, then the future generations will have to start from scratch and invent a new language that is incorruptible. TTFN— ta for now! (26th October 2006)

Works Cited

Barker T, 2009, “Texting surges as tool for more than just the young.” St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Web.

Teaching writing in online and paper worlds, 2008, “Digital fluency as goal and objective”, New York. Web.

Hewings Martin, Grammar and Context, Routledge, 2005, pp 259-265.

Štekauer Pavol, Hand Book for Word-Formation, Springer, 2005, pp 370-375.

Oxford Learning, 2006, “Texting VS Writing: The Problem with Instant Messaging”. Web.

All jobs involve the use of language as a mode of expressing oneself. This means that, even if coherence in grammar may not be a prerequisite for a job opening, the skill is required to some extent in the physical job environment. Amid this relevance of grammar to job applicants and employees, the question that remains is whether grammar is a critical tool for turning away potential employees with massive capabilities on the key job requirements fields.

Kyle Wiens, the chief executive officer of iFixit and the founder of Dozuki, categorically states that he cannot hire people who do not know their way around maneuvering with grammar. His reasoning for taking this non-flexible stand is that every aspect of the business involves different extents of details. For instance, he argues that in programming, the junk required is a logic flow details. However, programming is one of the areas of the whole business that requires certain specialized details to accomplish the necessary tasks.

Hence, “when it comes to my whole business, details are everything” (Wiens Para.13). Consequently, Wiens believes that the only applicants whose resumes are worth a second glance are the ones who mind details of grammar. He argues that people who are equipped with details of grammar are also likely to make fewer mistakes when executing other tasks not related to writing such as “stocking shelves or labeling parts” (Wiens Para 11).

Therefore, to avoid sloppy mistakes in the company, the CEO argues that grammar test is the litmus for proving the capacity of the potential employs to demonstrate their ability to pay attention to details as claimed in their resumes. Arguably, Wiens deploys zero tolerance approach to the importance of grammar in work settings.

Opposed to the approach of Wiens to the importance of grammar in job applications and employees, Mc Whorter argues that such an approach is questionable. On the other hand, Rushkoff argues, “without grammar, we lose the agreed-upon standards about what means what” (para.1) .For instance, Mc Whorter says that, for jobs that are beyond communication such as technical writing, “requirements that viable candidates write with Strunk and White on their minds are highly questionable” (Mc Whorter Para.2).

The argument here is that, while Wiens thinks that the capacity of employees to pay critical attention to details of grammar may mean that they also posses the capacity to pay attention to other important details not related to grammar, Mc Whorter and Rushkoff think that people have differing capacities to pay attention to differing things. Consequently, the fact that one is proficient in paying details to one aspect of a job does not necessarily imply that he or she would be so in any other aspect.

However, although the authors seem not to agree on the concept of zero tolerance to grammar, they deploy similar lines of view. In this context, Mc Whorter argues, “flubbing the difference between “it’s” and “its” is not a sign of mental laxness or congenital inattention to detail” (Para.3) while Wiens says that “After all, grammar has nothing to do with job performance, creativity, or intelligence” (Para.10). People who do not have fluency in grammar can delegate certain responsibilities to a certain limitation.

For instance, such people cannot be given tasks involving laying down legal documents and or promotional a material (Mc Whorter Para.5). Apparently, this is why Wiens is concerned about the necessity of zero tolerance approach towards hiring people based on their capacity to communicate flawlessly in grammar. This is so since every task of business entails some form of creating awareness and or conducting business in accordance to some laid out legal procedures that often require documentation.

Works Cited

Mc Whorter, John. Good Applicants with Bad Grammar, 2012. Web.

Rushkoff, Douglas. It’s Not Just Rules; It’s Clear Thinking, 2012. Web.

Wiens, Kyle. I Won’t Hire People Who Use Poor Grammar: Here’s Why, 2012. Web.