Grammar practice with CALL

To the extent that I might end up being burnt alive, I have always claimed that a language course cannot and should not exist without grammar instruction! However, what I do support is that it does not necessarily have to be overloaded with grammar, following rigid definitions, drilling patterns and strictly pursuing the traditional grammar-translation method!  Believe it or not, grammar can be fun and it is more than necessary.

In support of this claim of mine, I would like to refer to two articles written by two of my favourite authors, Betty Azar and Rod Ellis. 

Both authors strongly recommend the necessity to overcome the rigid distinction between "either-or-approaches". Modern tendencies should be directed at implementing techniques and strategies aiming at teaching both effective and accurate communication adapted to the particular group of students, the level of learning and the unit/ segment being taught. Needless to say, there is far more to teaching than just presenting knowledge and asking for the reproduction of the same.

When asked about the proper teaching method, the exact amount of grammar or the decision on what a class should focus on, Azar says:

„Do both. Those are the two words I write most often in margins when I read academic articles about the teaching of grammar in second-language instruction. Focus on fluency or accuracy? Do both, in proper balance given the students' needs and goals. Have students work with grammar structures inductively or deductively? Do both: you never know where any particular student's "Aha!" is going to come from. Use authentic or adapted language? Students need both. Work with sentence-level vs. connected-discourse material? Both can have good pedagogical purpose and effect. Engage in open-ended communicative interaction or controlled response exercises? Both are beneficial for students. Explicit instruction or communicative exposure? Both.“

Similarly, Ellis points out that research has shown: 

„the overall effectiveness of grammar teaching. Further, there is evidence that, contrary to Krashen’s (1993) continued claims, instruction contributes to both acquired knowledge as well as learned knowledge. There is also increasing evidence that naturalistic learning in the classroom ... does not typically result in high levels of grammatical competence. In short, there is now convincing indirect and direct evidence to support the teaching of grammar." 

Computer-assisted teaching deployed for the purpose of presenting, practicing and producing correct grammar content is more than useful. Apart from ready-made tools available online, I recommend authoring tools. In my article on Skills  (see section on 'Comprehension') I have already mentioned  Hot Potatoes and Quandary as brilliant tools to use. Hot Potatoes is a rather comprehensive authoring tool to use for the purpose of practicing grammar as it includes all the various forms of creating exercises and tests teachers like to use, such as multiple-choice, match, fill-in-the-blanks, etc.

Apart from this, grammar can be taught and practised by means of various tools, available online. 

For starters, here is a selection of three really good grammar tools: 

Daily grammar
Grammar Games
Road to grammar