See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328364582

UNDERSTANDING INDUCTIVE AND DEDUCTIVE APPROACHES IN TEACHING

GRAMMAR IN EFL CONTEXT

Article  in  Jurnal Dinamika Pendidikan · October 2018

DOI: 10.33541/jdp.v9i1.135

CITATIONS READS

0 8,782

1 author:

Hendrikus Male
Universitas Kristen Indonesia
14 PUBLICATIONS   5 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

A Survey on Junior High School Students' Learning Styles View project

Using mind mapping ti Improve Students' Reading Comprehension at SMK BPS&K II Bekas View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hendrikus Male on 18 October 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 UNDERSTANDING INDUCTIVE AND DEDUCTIVE APPROACHES IN TEACHING
GRAMMAR IN EFL CONTEXT

Hendrikus Male
hendriuki@yahoo.com
Universitas Kristen Indonesia

ABSTRACT

Giving instruction for a language class specifically a grammar class can be a problematic issue
of controversy in EFL context for non native speaker (NNS) teacher due to the lack of ap-
proach or strategies implementation and the language problem faced in the teaching and
learning process. The primary aim of this article is to provide some insight for teachers when
conducting or giving instruction to the teaching of English grammar. It also highlights that in
giving instruction, combining deductive and inductive approaches can be beneficial for teach-
ers or faculties who are teaching English grammar in the setting of EFL context. Hence, they
have to vary the strategies whether it should be extensive or intensive as suggested by Hinkel
(2006) in which it might be one of the technique that can be put into account and applied in
order to make the teaching of grammar more effective and efficient.

Keywords: EFL context, deductive and inductive approaches

ABSTRAK

Memberikan instruksi dalam kelas bahasa khususnya kelas tata bahasa dapat menjadi masalah
yang kontroversi pada konteks English as a Foreign Language (EFL) untuk guru non native
speaker (NNS) karena kurangnya penerapan terhadap pendekatan/startegi dan masalah ba-
hasa yang dihadapi dalam proses belajar mengajar. Tujuan utama dari artikel ini adalah untuk
memberikan beberapa masukan bagi guru ketika melakukan atau memberikan instruksi dalam
pengajaran tata bahasa Inggris. Selain itu, artikel ini juga menyoroti bahwa dalam memberikan
instruksi, menggabungkan strategi induktif dan deduktif dapat bermanfaat bagi guru atau in-
struktur bahasa yang mengajarkan tata bahasa Inggris dalam konteks EFL. Oleh karena itu,
dalam hal mengajar, mereka harus bervariasi dalam menerapkan strategi pembelajaran
apakah itu harus ekstensif atau intensif seperti yang disarankan oleh Hinkel (2006) di mana
hal tersebut mungkin menjadi salah satu teknik yang dapat dipertimbangkan dan diterapkan
untuk membuat pengajaran tata bahasa lebih efektif dan efisien.

Kata kunci: konteks EFL, guru non native speaker (NNS), strategi induktif dan deduktif

INTRODUCTION possible in a language. Thus, grammar is a description

of the rules that govern how a language’s sentences
Teaching grammar to the English as a For- are formed” Harmer (1987, p. 1) also defines
eign Language (EFL) learner has always been a main grammar by stating “The grammar of a language is
issue which is often discussed among the language what happens to words when they become plural or
teachers. In the context of EFL, the learners may un- negative, or what word order is used when we make
dergo a number of problems such as the complicated questions or join two clauses to make one sentence.”
rules of the language and the inappropriate implemen- In the past time, the teaching of grammar
tation of strategies. It, therefore, may be the reason was seen as the most prominent technique and it
why the approaches to teaching grammar are debated. might have referred to the teaching of foreign language
Every language has unique rules or grammar. (cf. Rutherford, 1987) before it came to a more com-
Thornbury (1999, p. 1) has defined that “Grammar municative one such as Communicative Language
is partly the study of what forms (or structures) are Teaching (CLT) as the most recommended technique

19
J D P, Volume 9, Nomor 1, April 2016: 19 - 24

to be used recently. Richards (2001) states that “Com- successful teaching might be at his/her hand for over-
municative Language Teaching (CLT) is a broad ap- coming difficult situation encountered. Such activity
proach to teaching that resulted from focusing on com- may also lead to effective teaching, in which Richards
munication as the organizing principle for teaching ra- (2001) showed that to become effective teaching,
ther than a focus on mastery of the grammatical sys- there might be a number of aspects involving in the
tem of the language” (p. 36). On the other hand, there teaching such as: 1) Institution - the organization cul-
might be a number of problems emerge when a ture of a school refers to the ethos and environment
teacher or language instructor gives the instruction or that exist within a school. 2) Teachers – those who
conducts his teaching such as the problems of the stu- create a context for good teaching and determine the
dents’ language proficiency and the techniques or success of a program. 3) The Teaching process - the
strategies used. Regarding the students’ language pro- teaching practices that occur within a program that
ficiency, the teacher or language instructor should un- contains teaching model principles, maintaining good
derstand whether his students are beginner – having teaching, and evaluating teaching. 4) The learning
very low language ability, intermediate – having the process – goal that teachers have to be considered in
knowledge of grammar better or advanced in which the planning and delivery process. It contains under-
the comprehension of the students are mostly at high standing of the course, views of learning, learning
level. In so doing, the instruction given can be then styles, motivation, and support.
successful. Concerning the techniques or strategies,
the teacher or language instructor is supposed to not STRATEGIES IN LANGUAGE TEACHING
only build the learners’ character but also to transfer APPROACH
the knowledge. However, when they teach English or
There has been a shift in terms of what ap-
give instruction to a subject, it may pose its own chal-
proach should be best utilized in conducting the lan-
lenge for those who are not native speakers of English
guage teaching specifically in grammar instruction. As
let alone for those who view English as a Foreign Lan-
Huang (2010, p. 29) points out that “grammar
guage (EFL). Hence, they should understand a lot of
instruction has moved from its central position in
techniques or strategies dealing with instructions when
traditional language teaching approaches to playing
teaching language skills although giving instruction
virtually no role in communicative approaches.” An-
may simultaneously occur with the teaching itself. In
other scholar (see Ellis, 2006) also argued against the
addition, in transferring the knowledge, they have to
teaching of grammar. She states that such teaching
vary the instruction or techniques such as repetition or
might not only be based on the traditional approach
drilling, role play, memorizing dialogues and etc in
but also focused on form approach. Despite the de-
their teaching in order that the material being con-
bate, Ellis (2006) has suggested a few forms of gram-
veyed can be varied that may lead to the students’
mar teaching are essential for a communicative lan-
comprehension to be more understandable. There-
guage teaching setting. Other scholars (see; Krashen,
fore, in order to succeed in his teaching, the teachers
1985; Hammon, 1988) also focused on form when
or language instructors must not only have the
grammar is taught. They implicitly proposed that the
knowledge but also possess the ability to instruct his
main aim of focus on form is concern with finding out
material (strategies) in such a way that the material be-
whether this kinds of instruction that helped the learn-
ing conveyed or taught can be comprehensively under-
ers to effectively acquired the structures they had been
stood by the learners. He or she should vary the tech-
taught. This in line with what Morelli (2003, as citied
niques or strategies during his teaching and give a clear
in Al-Mekhlafi & Nagaratnam, 2011, p. 72) states
instruction to it in any circumstance or situation the
that, “Grammar can be taught traditionally or
teacher may undergo. He should also make the teach-
contextually, but student perception should be
ing instruction to be more attractive and fun – thereby
considered by teachers in the decision-making
process.” Additionally, in the teaching of grammar, the

20
 Male, Understanding Inductive and Deductive Approaches in Teaching Grammar in EFL Context

teacher can conduct it inductively or deductively. Ellis APPROACHES TO TEACHING GRAMMAR

(2006, p. 84) points out that INSTRUCTION
Grammar teaching involves any instructional
technique that draws learners’ attention to Al-Mekhlafi & Nagaratnam (2011) on their
some specific grammatical form in such a
study of difficulties in teaching and learning grammar
way that it helps them either to understand it
metalinguistically and/or process it in in an EFL context have proposed that there are three
comprehension and/or production so that areas such as “grammar as rules” “grammar as form”,
they can internalize it. and “grammar as resource” dealing with the teaching
of grammar that need to be taken into account. They
Krashen (1981 as citied in Ellis, 2006, p. 85) argued
further state that for many L2 learners, learning
that
grammar instruction played no role in grammar often means learning the rules of grammar
acquisition, a view based on the conviction and having an intellectual knowledge of grammar (p.
that learners (including classroom learners) 70). In accordance with the aforementioned discus-
would automatically proceed along their built-
in syllabus as long as they had access to sion, it is apparent that there has been a change in the
comprehensible input and were sufficiently teaching of a classroom instruction which was focused
motivated. Grammar instruction could on forms such as in the Grammar-Translation Method
contribute to learning but this was of limited
and Audio-lingual Method to functional language com-
value because communicative ability was
dependent on acquisition. municative contexts. This links to what Terrell (1991,
p. 53) calls “explicit grammar instruction … to mean
There has also been pro and contra regard- that the use of instructional strategies to draw the stu-
ing the use of grammar. Horowitz (1990 as citied in dents attention to or focus on form and/or structure.”
Pazaver & Wang, 2009, p. 29) states that there might Hence, the aim of functional language communicative
be a tendency that the mismatch frequently occur context is that the learners may no longer focus on the
between students and teachers on the use of grammar rules of structure (forms) but rather having the ability
resulting in negative effects. To tackle this problem, to communicate and having the capability of applying
the teacher should be the scaffold or as the assistant them in the use of their own use of the language (see
who help the learners with their development of their Brown, 2006). Despite the criticism on focus on form,
language problem. Without any assistance or scaffold- Long (1991) offered the learners to focus on meaning.
ing from the teacher, learners may not succeed in their Additionally, Hinkel on her study about teaching gram-
linguistics problem or when they are introduced with a mar on writing class has proposed some notions deal-
new subject even though they may have good interac- ing with grammar instruction. She states that “Gram-
tion or much input but they might fail because nobody mar instruction based on authentic or simplified
will correct their mistakes when they produce incorrect discourse can provide fruitful opportunities for
utterances for they put their attention to much on teaching tenses, clause structure, articles, and pre
meaning but pay less attention to the form. According positions in context” (1997, p. 195). The instruction
to Pica (2000) that when the learners are concentrated for teaching English grammar that may be offered here
too much on the meaning but less on forms of com- is that deductive and inductive approaches. The de-
municative teaching, there will be not adequate for ductive approach may begin with the arrangement of
learners to become more proficient in terms of native- rules or structures and then followed by examples in
like. Thus, the role of grammar in the class of CLT has which rules are implemented. According to Hinkel
to be well-explained. So, the role of a teacher as scaf- (1997, p. 181) that “Grammar instruction in many
fold is essential to help the learners understand better English as a second language (ESL) and English as a
either with the instruction as well as with their milieu. Foreign Language (EFL) classrooms includes deductive
teaching and learning, when the teacher presents
grammar rules followed by various forms of practice.”
Conversely, the inductive approach firstly starts with

21
J D P, Volume 9, Nomor 1, April 2016: 19 - 24

giving examples and then followed by the presentation Although in teaching grammar both of the approaches
of the rules or structures. Prince and Felder (2006, p. are different, teachers preferred inductive teaching ap-
124) indicated that “Inductive teaching and learning is proach since the focus is more on students - student-
an umbrella term that encompasses a range of centered.
instructional methods, including inquiry learning, Apart from its controversy on what is the best
problem-based learning, project-based learning, case- approach be applied in the teaching of grammar. The
based teaching, discovery learning, and just-in-time following idea is precisely taken and presents the ad-
teaching.” Figure 1 simply illustrates such approach: vantages and disadvantages of deductive and inductive
approaches as clearly described by Adamson (2009):

Advantages of a deductive approach:

 It gets straight to the point, and can therefore
be time-saving. Many rules — especially rules
of form — can be more simply and quickly
explained than elicited from examples. This
Figure 1. Deductive and Inductive Learning will allow more time for practice and
adapted from http://www.sasked.gov.sk.ca/docs/policy/ap- application.
proach/instrapp05.html  It respects the intelligence and maturity of
many - especially adult -students, and
However, when implementing the deductive acknowledges the role of cognitive processes
approach in the teaching of grammar instruction, it is in language acquisition.
merely focused on the teacher – teacher-centered.  It confirms many students' expectations
about classroom learning, particularly for
This old paradigm has shifted to a new approach that those learners who have an analytical
the current approach should concentrate on the stu- learning style.
dent – student-centered learning. As stated earlier in  It allows the teacher to deal with language
points as they come up, rather than having
the introduction section that to tackle this situation, the
to anticipate them and prepare for them in
teacher can be a scaffold for their learners i.e. their advance.
assistance to overcome the difficult situation and their
role to facilitate their learners’ needs to determine Disadvantages of a deductive approach:
 Starting the lesson with a grammar
which could be the best approach to be applied in their presentation may be off-putting for some
teaching. students, especially younger ones. They may
not have sufficient metalanguage (i.e.
language used to talk about language such as
DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE APPROACHES
grammar terminology). Or they may not be
In recent years, it is believed that the teaching able to understand the concepts involved.
of grammar have been largely altered from deductive  Grammar explanation encourages a teacher-
to inductive approach. This happens because when fronted, transmission-style classroom;
teacher explanation is often at the expense
the students are taught in a deductive approach, the of student involvement and interaction.
students would pay less attention to the comprehen-  Explanation is seldom as memorable as other
sion of the language but rather on the rules of the forms of presentation, such as
demonstration. Such an approach
grammar. It is much more conventional since the role
encourages the belief that learning a
of the teacher is merely concentrating more on the language is simply a case of knowing the
rules in the beginning and continues with the examples rules.
at the end. Conversely, in inductive approach, the stu-
Advantages of inductive approach:
dents tend to be more active as they were also intro-
 Rules learners discover for themselves are
duced with grammar rules simultaneously. On the more likely to fit their existing mental
other hand, the aim of grammar teaching is to help the structures than rules they have been
presented with. This in turn will make the
students find the rules themselves from the provided
examples. Rutherford and Smith (1988) stated that

22
 Male, Understanding Inductive and Deductive Approaches in Teaching Grammar in EFL Context

rules more meaningful, memorable, and 2) Should grammar instruction be intensive or

serviceable.
extensive? She further states that when the grammar
 The mental effort involved ensures a greater
degree of cognitive depth which, again, instruction be “massed or distributed”, they should be
ensures greater memorability. taken into account and focused on whether or not the
 Students are more actively involved in the “available teaching time” have to be shorter or longer.
learning process, rather than being simply
passive recipients: they are therefore likely to Whereas when grammar instruction to be intensive or
be more attentive and more motivated. extensive, it should cover a single (many) grammatical
 It is an approach which favours pattern- structure in a single lesson (p. 84). In addition, in terms
recognition and problem-solving abilities
of intensive and extensive of grammar instruction,
which suggests that it is particularly suitable
for learners who like this kind of challenge. Spada & Lightbown (1999) show that even though the
 If the problem-solving is done collaboratively, learners might not be ready to learn the patterns of the
and in the target language, learners get the target language, intensive grammar may help them to
opportunity for extra language practice.
utilize the structure they have been taught and ob-
 Working things out for themselves prepares
students for greater self-reliance and is tained to be more accurate. Henceforth, in intensive
therefore conducive to learner autonomy. grammar teaching, this might assist the learners to de-
velop by the stages involving in the process of acquir-
Disadvantages of an inductive approach include:
 The time and energy spent in working out ing the structure.
rules may mislead students into believing that
rules are the objective of language learning, CONCLUSION
rather than a means.
 The time taken to work out a rule may be at There is a tendency to increase success in the
the expense of time spent in putting the rule
teaching of learning deductively and inductively by se-
to some sort of productive practice.
 Students may hypothesise the wrong rule, or lecting the right approach by considering the profile of
their version of the rule may be either too students and teaching arrangements (see, Brown,
broad or too narrow in its application: this is 1987). Apart from which approaches should be ap-
especially a danger where there is no overt
testing of their hypotheses, either through plied in the teaching of grammar, the teacher should
practice examples, or by eliciting an explicit notice that whether his goal is to make the learners
statement of the rule. understand the rules of the language or to help the
 It can place heavy demands on teachers in
learners discover the rules themselves in which it is
planning a lesson. They need to select and
organise the data carefully so as to guide currently much preferred as well as more student-cen-
learners to an accurate formulation of the tered. Additionally, in order to succeed in teaching of
rule, while also ensuring the data is grammar, well preparation is one of the activities that
intelligible. However carefully organised the
data is, many language areas such as aspect must also be done by the teacher before teaching with-
and modality resist easy rule formulation. out neglecting other elements of teaching strategies. In
 An inductive approach frustrates students addition to implementing all the characteristics as men-
who, by dint of their personal learning style
tioned previously, the teachers must be able to control
or their past learning experience (or both),
would prefer simply to be told the rule. the situation and atmosphere of the class as well as
supposed to be able to combine the methods, or pro-
cedures when teaching in the context of English as a
To conclude, the teacher or the language in- Foreign Language. Furthermore, as role models,
structor may make use of the above approach inter- teachers should both upgrade his hard skills and pro-
changeably so that the instruction can be effectively vide soft skills to build the character of students. Con-
and efficiently done. In addition, among her research cerning the teaching of grammar instruction, it should
questions, Ellis (2006) has attempted to find out some be justified and integrated so that the EFL learners may
techniques for grammar instructions. They include: 1) not only focus on the meaning but also on forms or
Should grammar instruction be massed or distributed vice versa or even depending on their own personal

23
 J D P, Volume 9, Nomor 1, April 2016: 19 - 24

choice of learning style. It has been stated that it is perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
highly recommended to teach grammar by combining
of both deductive and inductive approach so that the Pazaver, A., & Wang, H. (2009). Asian students’
students would pay more attention when both directed perceptions of grammar teaching in the ESL
classroom. The International Journal of
to grammar rules and meaning were taught at the
Language Society and Culture, 27-35.
same time (Mac Whinney, 1997 cited in Larsen-Free-
man, 2003). Pica, T. (2000). Tradition and transistion in English
language teaching methodology. System, 1-
18.

Prince, M. J., & Felder, R. M. (2006). Inductive

REFERENCES teaching and learning methods: Definitions,
comparisons, and the research bases. J.
Adamson, R. (2009). Retrieved July 12, 2014, from Engr. Education, 123-138.
http://www.educ.ualberta.ca/staff/olenka.B
ilash/best%20of%20bilash/inductivedeductiv Richards, J. C. (2001). Curicullum development in
e.html language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Al-Mekhlafi, A. M., & Nagaratnam, R. P. (2011).
Difficulties in teaching and learning grammar Rutherford, W. E. (1987). Second language grammar:
in an EFL context. International Journal of Learning and teaching. New York:
Instruction, IV(2), 69-92. Longman.
Brown, D. (2006). Teaching by principles. Eaglewood Rutherford, W., & Smith, M. S. (1988). Grammar and
Clifs, NJ: Prentice Hall. second language teaching: A book of
readings. New York: Heinle&Heinle.
Brown, H. D. (1987). Principles of language learning
and teaching. Englewoods Cliffs: Prentice Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. (1999). Instruction, first
Hall. language influence, and developmental
readiness in second language acquisition.
Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of The Modern Language Journal(83), 1-22.
grammar: An SLA perspective. TESOL
QUARETERLY, 83-107. Terrell, T. D. (1991). The role of grammar instruction
in a communicative approach. The Modern
Hammond, R. (1988). Accuracy versus Language Journal, 52-63.
communicative competency: The acquisition
of grammar in the second language Thornbury, S. (1999). How to teach grammar.
classroom. Hispania, 408-417. Harlow: Longman.
Harmer, J. (1987). Teaching and learning grammar.
London: Longman.

Huang, J. (2010). Grammar instruction for adult

English language learner: A task-based
learning framework. Journal of Adult
Education, XXXIX(1), 29-37.

Karshen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: issues and

implication. London: Longman.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2003). Teaching language from

grammar to grammaring. Canada: Heinle.

Long, M. H. (1991). "Focus on form: A design feature

in language teaching methodology". In K. De
Bot, R. B. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch, Foreign
language research in cross cultural

24

View publication stats