This is a seminar paper presented to the panelists of English Department (College of Languages, Linguistics and Literature--Philippine Normal University). Disclaimer: Bibliography pages are not included due to technical glitch..

1. APPROVAL SHEET
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts
in Teaching with specialization in English Language Arts, this Seminar
paper entitled ―CONTENT-BASED GRAMMAR EXERCISES FOR
TEACHER EDUCATION STUDENTS‖ prepared and submitted by
MICHAEL M. MAGBANUA is hereby recommended for acceptance.
___________________________ EDILBERTA C. BALA
Date Adviser
Accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts in Teaching with Specialization in English Language Arts.
__________________________ NILDA R. SUNGA , Ph.D.
Date Head, English Department
__________________________ LYDIA P. LALUNIO
Date Dean
College of Language, Linguistics and
Literature
1

2. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This seminar paper would not have been made possible without the help
of a number of people who tirelessly devoted their precious time and expertise
in reviewing the manuscripts, offering valuable suggestions for improvement
and for giving their insightful comments not to mention their selfless sharing of
references and other relevant resources.
Hence, my heartfelt gratitude to the following:
My highly encouraging colleagues in the College of Mary Immaculate, our Administrator;
Ms. Pia Marie Andres, the President; and most especially to Mrs. Cecille Santos-Andres, the
Chairman of the Board, for her endearing moral and financial support while on my way of
completing my MA units till the completion of this much coveted Degree.
My BEEd students, most especially our first batch of graduates—whom I
consider as my inspiration in this undertaking; my former IV – BSEd – English
majors; BSBio; Engineering; and BIT students of Bulacan State University
(Malolos Campus); and STI College-Balagtas, my grass root in college teaching,
whom I also owed a lot, most specifically to kindhearted couples Mr. and Mrs.
Kerwin C. Kaw and the old faculty and staff.
I should also acknowledge my beloved church mates in Balagtas
Christian Church and Ministries for their undying prayers for my household
and myself.
I also would like to remember those former and present ELT classmates and professors
who have enriched my experience in English language teaching. I gained not only pedagogical
enrichment, but friendship as well.
Prof. Edilberta C. Bala of PNU, my patient considerate adviser, who
tirelessly gave her most valued time in proofreading, revising and
recommending this paper for approval
2

3. DEDICATION
To
My beloved family; My most treasured friends;
STI College-Balagtas; BSU-Malolos English Faculty;
My churchmates; my former and present students; and
My CMI family
I wholeheartedly dedicate this humble undertaking…
3

4. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page i
Acknowledgement ii
Dedication iii – iv
Abstract v
CHAPTER I. THE PROBLEM and ITS SETTING 1 - 10
 Introduction
 Statement of the Problem
 Purpose of the Study
 Significance of the Studying
 Scope and Delimitation
 Theoretical Framework
 Conceptual Framework
 Definition of Terms
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 11 - 70
CHAPTER III METHODS AND PROCEDURES 71 - 72
CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION OF MATERIALS 73 -
182
 The Grammar Exercises (with Key to Correction)
CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 183-
185
BIBLIOGRAPHY 186-
192
APPENDICES 193-218
 Appendix A: Schematic Diagram
4

5.  Appendix B: Table of Test Specifications
 Appendix C: Grammatical Descriptions
 CURRICULUM VITAE 219-220
ABSTRACT
Name : Michael M. Magbanua
Title : Content-Based Grammar Exercises for Teacher Education
Students
Key Concepts :
 Content –Based Language Instruction
 Cognitive Academic Language Learning Instruction
Specialization : English Language Arts
Adviser : Prof. Edilberta C. Bala
A. Objectives
This study recognizes the effectiveness of content-based language
instruction in the tertiary level particularly to Teacher Education
students as the pedagogical basis in developing integrative grammar
exercises.
B. Methodology
The researcher gathered related literatures and prepared
bibliographical sketch. He then prepared table of specifications, encoded
reviewed articles. Finally, he utilized various professional literatures in
teacher education as sources of grammar exercises.
5

6. C. The Materials
The teacher education exercises in ten grammatical structures
were categorized into three varying degrees of difficulty, that is, easy,
average, and difficult. The design was patterned after Heaton‘s (1995).
Hence, several of his models on item types like multiple choice,
completion types, and error recognition were used.
D. Conclusions
Specifically, this study found out that it is very tedious to prepare
content-based instructional materials such as this for this entails much
time and skills since grammatical inputs from sources can be practically
limited. That not all teacher education-reading materials contains a
wide-range of grammatical inputs specifically perfect tenses, aspects, and
preposition of movement, among others. Moreover, while the intended
grammatical structures were not treated comprehensively, this may
affect student‘s proficiency in answering the test items since common
structures have been overly-used throughout the items.
E. Recommendations
Prospective researches must pilot the exercises to the teacher
education students to determine the effectiveness of the instructional
material. ESL instructors are encouraged to allow students experience
similar procedure of doing the instructional material as part of the
course requirement in the program. On the other hand, peer critiquing
of the sample exercises is also important. Samples must be viewed and
evaluated by both the language and content instructors to determine the
limitations and/or comprehensibility of the instructional material.
Hence, development of rubrics for evaluation is highly recommended. As
to LET in mind, writers then are encouraged to adapt the approach of
test preparation instead of using the generic approach.
6

7. CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND
INTRODUCTION
This paper was inspired primarily of the teacher education students
(both the old and the present), and the in-service teachers whom the researcher
is indebted to. For one, after gained fruitful years of teaching in both
elementary and high school, he got a chance to teach early adults in college.
Those productive years he spent with four highly reputable college institutions
in his progressing province of Bulacan made him consider writing this humble
paper.
Surprisingly what he found out was, both his present and old college
students did not make any marked difference in language proficiency, or the
facility in grammar usage. ―Never mind the kind of English of vocational –
technical students, or the welder, masons…‖ as one professor, lamented. ―But
do not ignore the ‗how bad‘ our teacher education students ‗ English are,‖ she
argued. Can you think of the wisdom behind this eyebrow – raising statement?
It‘s but whose English is being criticized with a great populace? The favorite
subject of the mimicry and indignation from students, co-teachers, evaluators,
and parents—aren‘t its teacher‘s English? (Gonzales, 2004)
This is a perennial problem in which the researcher believes needs
special attention by almost all teacher education institutions today. Evaluators‘
7

8. feed back to most student teachers‘ demonstration teaching (or even the usual
daily classroom presentation) would always include faulty grammar on top, next
ton teaching methodology, mastery of the subject matter, and classroom
management.
Now that the researcher is already a full-pledged student teacher
supervisor, similarly, he sees how relevant developing instructional materials
be, which would best cater to innumerable student teachers‘ weakness in
grammar usage; since the approach embraces the principle of learning both
language and content. (Brinton, 1997).
To reiterate Gonzales‘ sentiment over our teacher education applicants is
that they might be of course familiar with the teaching techniques, approaches
and all those things, hence, they get high rate. However, they lost the job
because of poor grammar. You would really pity these teacher applicants seeing
them desperately leaving the demonstration room. But who‘s to blame? There
are several factors include. But let me point you to what most educators have
tried out and proven effective at their own respects. Content-Based Instruction
(popularly known as the CBI) has been adapted across the country. In the
Philippines, our present basic education curriculum is patterned after this
innovative approach to teaching and learning. Would-be teachers have to
immediate goals to accomplish, that is, to get a teaching slot, and to pass the
LET. Now, to achieve this, one must be essentially competent in both
communication skills and their understanding about the content of LET.
8

9. Similarly, Colinares (2002) believes that one of the effective strategies
that will focus and nourish the interest of teacher education students is the
utilization of professional education materials for the grammar review lessons.
Needless to state, a prospective teacher has to undergo an intensive review of
grammar because once in the service, s/he would have to use, if not, teach the
subject. The use of the content education subjects as the springboard for
lessons in English enables one to hit two birds with one stone—a review both in
grammar and for the teacher‘ s licensure examination. Thus, this integrative
structuralist trend in language teaching and testing invariably heightens one‘s
interest and subsequently enhances potent learning.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The primary concern of this study is to find the theoretical, and
pedagogical bases of CBI and identify the most frequently used grammatical
structures of professional education subjects.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
This paper points out two major purposes, as follows: Provide the teacher
education students with relevant instructional materials in learning
grammatical structures; alongside keeping them familiarized with important
professional education concepts, and then offer ESL college instructors with
9

10. alternative language teaching-testing materials, other than the conventional
generic approach to testing grammar competence.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
This paper is very useful for several reasons. Different grammar
exercises will make students interestingly discover their strengths and
weaknesses to various grammatical structures. They may acquire grammatical
proficiency both in reading, and particularly in writing. The instructional
material will make English instructor highly motivated as s/he tries to see the
relevance of the approach; since the content is being used as a stimulus in
language learning. This may simplify the teaching procedures since answer
keys to all grammar exercises are given right after each area. This would
certainly be very helpful to English teachers who also mentor grammar areas
(i.e structural analysis and error identification) of LET Review. Moreover, not a
few ESL teachers consider the different grammar exercises as effective
supplementary activities to general approach of teaching and testing of
grammar proficiency. Finally, ProfEd instructors would benefit a lot since
meaningful content learning among his/her students is being achieved; and
S/he could save instructional time and effort since retention of the learned
material or lesson is being maximized through integration.
10

11. SCOPE AND DELIMITATION
This paper primarily involved students who were taking teacher
education programs—Bachelor of Early Childhood Education (BECEd); Bachelor
of Elementary Education (BEEd); Bachelor of Secondary Education (BSEd);
Bachelor of Science in Industrial Education (BSIEd);and Bachelor of Science in
Education (BSE). They were considered in this study for these reasons:
To date the researcher, aside from a professional teacher, also chairs the
Education Department of the College of Mary Immaculate. He also assumes
supervisory duty to thirty off-campus practice teachers. Being the trusted
English instructor of the college, he appropriately put in top of his mind none
other than, but his very own department. Furthermore, on Education student
comparatively lags behind other students of Engineering, Information
Technology, Accountancy, and Nursing as far as grammar proficiency is
concern.
The researcher used professional trends education materials like
textbooks, periodicals, journals, interactive multi media devices, as well as
internet-based articles about teaching and education. Although locally authored
materials were have become the top choice, foreign education books were also
given importance in this study. This is so, since the approach, (CBLI) embodies
functional grammar and contextualization (Halliday, 1976).
Ten (10) core areas of professional education were included, based on the
table of specifications of the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET). These
11

12. include, Foundations of Education; Principles, Methods, Approaches,
Strategies and Techniques of Teaching; Test, Measurement and Evaluation;
Human Growth and Learning Development; Guidance and Counseling; and
Social Philosophies
For grammatical structures, the ten top-most weaknesses of students in
grammar were considered; hence, subject-verb agreement, verbs, prepositions,
verb tenses-aspect system, conjunctions, prepositions, nouns, phrases and
clauses, word form/function, wh-question, and yes- no question. Please refer to
Appendix B for the complete table of specifications of the grammar exercises.
The grammar exercises though higher levels can also utilize primarily
intended for freshman education students—most particularly for review,
mastery, or just for refresher purposes.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Beginning in 1970‘s interest in the teaching of ‗real-language‘ has
increased as scholars have become more and more interested in the language
used in various social and cultural settings. As a result, there has been a rapid
shift of research and practice from audiolingual and grammar-translation
methods to the exploration of communicative language teaching, and much
attention has been paid to focusing on global and integrative tasks, rather than
on discrete structures. Savignon, (1972) makes clear that ―communication
cannot take place in the absence of structure, or grammar, a set of shared
12

13. assumptions about how language works…‖ Therefore, as he continues, Canale
and Swain (1980) included grammatical competence into their model of
communicative competence. However, a review of the research starting from
1970‘s (Ellis, 1997) shows that communicative L2 teaching was perceived as a
departure from grammar in favor of focusing on the meaning only. Comparison
of communicative (also referred as meaning-based) to form-based (also referred
as structure-based) approaches in L2 teaching shows that communicative
language teaching enables students to perform spontaneously, but does not
guarantee linguistic accuracy of the utterances. On the other hand, form-based
approaches focus on the linguistic and grammatical structures, which makes
the speech grammatically accurate. But this accuracy is observed in prepared
speech only, and students lack the ability to produce spontaneous speech.
Integrative grammar teaching, which presupposes student‘s interaction
while learning, cab be viewed as a cognitive process of learning an L2 that
reflects the sociocultural theory proposed by the Russian psychologist Vygotsky
(1978). In talking about the development of a child‘s brain and his
socialization, Vygotsky argues that there is a strong relationship between
learning and cognitive development, in which cognition develops as a result of
social interaction and sharing the responsibility with a parent or a more
competent person.
Similar to Vygotsky‘s theory is the often-criticized Krashen‘s (1981, 1985)
Input Hypothesis¸ also well-known as the ―i+1‖ hypothesis. According to this
hypothesis, i represents student‘s current level of L2 proficiency and +1 is level
of the linguistic form or function beyond the present student‘s level. Krashen‘s
13

14. Input Hypothesis, and Vygotsky‘s Zone of Proximal Development are basically
describing the same cognitive process of social interaction in students‘
development. For Krashen, optimal input should be comprehensible, i.e.
focused on the meaning and not on the form.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
The concept of developing the proposed grammar exercises for teacher
education students is mainly anchored again, on the law of exercise, as well as
several approaches and to the second language teaching, to cite—Cognitive
Academic Language Learning; Language Across Curriculum; Theme-Based
Approach; Whole Language Approach; English for Academic and Specific
Purposes; and the newer method, Content-Based Language Instruction.
The researcher‘s strategy to utilize principles of teaching and testing
grammar catches perforce the interest and attention of the learner who has the
Licensure Examination (LET) in mind. It easily falls within the realm of teaching
English for academic purposes and the content–oriented approach to English
instruction. (Harvey, 1987).
Taking the interest of students into account in terms of over learning of
materials past the point of mastery facilitates retention and learning. This leads
to an emphasis of the importance of teaching all aspects of grammar in context.
Appropriate contextualization can only be achieved if a teacher finds or
creates realistic situations, language texts that are meaningful to students.
14

15. Thus, contextualization is partly a matter of being faithful to the language, by
finding appropriate examples, and partly a matter of being responsive to
student‘s needs. (Murcia and Hilles, 1998)
Fig. 1 Paradigm of Content-Based Instruction in Language Teaching and
Learning
The paradigm above graphically illustrates the significant role of
integrating content in teaching and testing grammar. It is therefore
hypothesized that mastery in both ways can be best achieved in an ESL
instructor uses integrative approaches, hence the CBI. This innovative
approach to language teaching usually come in varied forms respective of the
nature and purpose of target language competency.
Definition of Terms
Content-Based Instruction – is a teaching method that emphasizes learning
about something rather than learning about language. (Davies 2003)
15

16. Content-Based Language Instruction – is an innovative approach in which
second language is used as the medium of instruction for mathematics, science,
social studies, and other academic subjects. Instruction is usually given by a
language teacher or by a combination of the language and content teachers.
English for Academic Purpose – is the teaching and learning of English
specifically to acquire academic proficiency in a particular learning content area.
English for Special Purpose – refers to the teaching of a specific genre of mostly
technical English for students with specific goals, careers or fields of study.
Functional Grammar – is the name given to any of a range of functionally-based
approaches to the scientific study of language.
Whole Language Approach – commonly refereed to as Natural Approach learning
language in a meaningful context. It is developmental language model based on
the premise that youngsters acquire language (speaking, reading, and writing as
naturally as they learn to walk and talk, when they are invited to engage in self-
motivating activities that are stimulating, interesting, social, meaning-based,
purposeful, interactive and most of all enjoyable.)
16

17. CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This part discusses thoroughly the readings done by the researcher as a
result of his surveys of professional books on language teaching and learning,
unpublished theses and dissertations, ESL periodicals, web-based articles, and
locally published textbooks, workbooks and worktexts. This chapter posits two
major concerns: the rationale and development of Content-Based Instruction,
and the theoretical issues in utilizing functional grammar to both language
teaching and testing. Locally made studies were also surveyed; that is to
determine the effect of this innovative approach among ESL teachers,
particularly to college teaching. Specifically, the presentation was organized in a
conceptual order. First part looks at the approach (the CBI)—the proponents;
the origins and precursors; the pedagogical definitions; the rationale; the
linguistic supports; related research conducted; the pedagogical implications;
strengths and limitations. Moreover, the researcher also surveyed related
studies that have been conducted locally and internationally.
Second part presents an in-depth discussion about the grammar usage,
which includes a closer look into definitions given by language
experts; current issues on the teaching and testing of grammar in the tertiary
level. Alongside with this, the researcher also surveyed six different locally
made worktext use in the teaching of grammar to college students.
17

18. Definitions and Origins of CBI
What do LAC, WLA, EAP, ESP, EST, CALLA, CALP, CBLI, CoBaLTT have
in common? Obviously, well-read ESL teachers would all agree that they‘re all
but initials buzzed in the field of language teaching and learning. Second,
researchers who share similar interest in studying innovative approaches in
intermarrying content and language in an ESL classroom could easily tell that
all these terminologies are anchored upon the principle of ―integration‖. While
known in various names, one could specifically point it out that all these
approaches are under the umbrella of what most language experts call Content-
Based Instruction.
Different experts in pedagogical linguistics like Blanton (1992), Brinton,
Snow & Wesche (1989), Crandall (1992) to name a few share a general concept
behind CBI. To sum it up, Content-Based Instruction is "...an approach to
language instruction in which the second or foreign language is used as a
medium of instruction for mathematics, science, social studies and other
academic subjects. It is the vehicle used for teaching and acquiring subject
specific knowledge.‖ (Crandall, 2006). Furthermore, it is based on the
underlying principle that successful material in a meaningful contextualized
form, with the primary focus on acquiring information and knowledge.
Likewise, Prof. Niki Peachey, in The British Council (2006) relates that
the focus of CBI lesson is on the topic or subject matter. During the lesson, the
students are focused on learning about something. This could be anything that
interests them from a serious science subject to their favorite pop star or even a
18

19. topical news story or film. They learn about this subject using the language
they are trying to learn, rather than their native language, as a tool for
developing knowledge and so they develop their linguistic ability in the target
language. This is thought to be a more natural way of developing language
ability and one that corresponds more to the way learners originally learn their
first language.
Parallel to Peachey‘s description, the Center for Advanced Research on
Language Acquisition, (CARLA 2006), of the University of Minnesota
enumerated the origins and definitions of CBI from different researchers.
Brinton & Maste (1997, p.2) for instance defined it as, ―…the integration of
particular content with language teaching aims...the concurrent teaching of
academic subject matter and second language skills". They further emphasized
that, ―…CBI views the target language largely as the vehicle through which
subject matter content is learned rather than as the immediate object of study".
Wesche (1993) on the other hand, claimed that, ―…CBI is aimed at the
development of use-oriented second and foreign language skills' and is
'distinguished by the concurrent learning of a specific content and related
language use skills‖.
What qualifies as 'content' in CBI? CARLA (2006) identifies common
viewpoints of the experts as ―a curriculum in which concepts were taught through
the foreign language ... appropriate to the grade level of the students..." Curtain
and Pesola (1994)
19

20. While Genesee (1994) suggests that content '...need not be academic; it
can include any topic, theme, or non-language issue of interest or importance to
the learners'. Met (1991) proposes that "... 'content' in content-based programs
represents material that is cognitively engaging and demanding for the learner,
and is material that extends beyond the target language or target culture"
She further claimed that,"...what we teach in any kind of content-based
course is not the content itself but some form of the discourse of that content—not,
for example, 'literature' itself (which can only be experienced) but how to analyze
literature...for every body of content that we recognize as such—like the physical
world or human cultural behavior—there is a discourse community—like physics
or anthropology—which provides us with the means to analyze, talk about, and
write about that content...Thus, for teachers the problem is how to acculturate
students to the relevant discourse communities, and for students the problem is
how to become acculturated to those communities" (Eskey, 1997).
With regards to its origin, Swain & Johnson (1997) accounts that the
approach is most often associated with the genesis of language immersion
education in Canada in 1965. However, they argued that content-based
instruction is hardly a new phenomenon.
Similarly, Crandall (1992) of the University of Maryland Baltimore
County reported that the number of language minority students in the United
States is dramatically escalating. Consequently, the American classroom now
is multiethnic, and multilingual at all levels. In response, a number of program
models have been developed to meet the needs of language programs that
integrate academic content into language instruction.
20

21. Related to Crandall‘s report, Dr. Thomas G. Sticht, President and Senior
Scientist of Applied Behavior & Cognitive Sciences, Inc. traced the root of CBI in
the early 40‘s. He revealed that in World War II, the military services conducted
extensive programs aimed at providing new recruits with reading skills of a
functional nature. Soldiers and sailors learned to read so they could
comprehend material about military life. Because the time for teaching literacy
was very limited, usually less than three months, the reading instructional
materials had the complexity of materials typically encountered by the end of
the fourth grade of public education, but they did not cover the breadth of
content that a typical fourth grader would have encountered. Rather, they
taught reading by emphasizing a relatively narrow body of content knowledge
about the military. Further, the readers were designed to build on the new
recruit's experiences and prior knowledge about the world acquired before
entering service. For instance, the Private Pete series starts with Pete at home
on the farm. Then he goes to a recruiter and signs up to join the Army, rides a
train to camp and is assigned to a barracks, and so forth. Because that is the
procedure the vast majority of new recruits in literacy programs followed in
joining the Army in the 1940's, this was content: prior knowledge-- that they
could talk about and comprehend, but they could not necessarily read words
like "farm," "recruiter," "train," or "barracks." (NCSALL, 2005)
Natural language acquisition occurs in context; natural language is never
learned divorced from meaning, and content-based instruction provides a
21

22. context for meaningful communication to occur (Curtain, 1995; Met, 1991);
second language acquisition increases with content-based language instruction,
because students learn language best when there is an emphasis on relevant,
meaningful content rather than on the language itself; "People do not learn
languages and then use them, but learn languages by using them" however,
both form and meaning are important and are not readily separable in language
learning (e.g., Lightbrown & Spada, 1993; Met, 1991; Wells, 1994).
CBI promotes negotiation of meaning, which is known to enhance
language acquisition (students should negotiate both form and content)
(Lightbrown & Spada, 1993).
Second language acquisition is enhanced by comprehensible input
(Krashen, 1982; 1985), which is a key pedagogical technique in content-based
instruction; however, comprehensible input alone does not suffice—students
need form-focused content instruction (an explicit focus on relevant and
contextually appropriate language forms to support content learning) (Lyster,
1987; Met, 1991; Swain, 1985).
Cummins' (1981) notion of Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency
(CALP) as contrasted with Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS)
shows that students need to be learning content while they are developing
CALP; there is not enough time to separate language and content learning;
22

23. postponing content instruction while students develop more advanced
(academic) language is not only impractical, but it also ignores students' needs,
interests, and cognitive levels (consider severe time constraints on language
study prescribed by U.S. higher education, (Byrnes, 2000).
CBI provides opportunities for Vygotskian-based concepts thought to
contribute to second language acquisition—negotiation in the Zone of Proximal
Development, the use of "private speech" (internally directed speech for problem-
solving and rehearsal), and student appropriation of learning tasks (e.g.,
Lantolf, 1994; Lantolf & Appel, 1994). Language learning becomes more
concrete rather than abstract (as in traditional language instruction where the
focus is on the language itself) (Genesee, 1994).
The integration of language and content in instruction respects the
specificity of functional language use (it recognizes that meaning changes
depending upon context) (Genesee, 1994). More sophisticated, complex
language is best taught within a framework that focuses on complex and
authentic content.
CBI lends itself to cooperative learning, which has been shown to result
in improved learning (Slavin, 1995; Crandall, 1993). CBI approaches, which
promote the importance of learning strategies, provide the curricular resources
23

24. for development of the strategic language and content learner (O'Malley &
Chamot, 1990).
CBI lends itself to the incorporation of a variety of thinking skills, and
learning strategies which lead to rich language development, e.g., information
gathering skills—absorbing, questioning; organizing skills—categorizing,
comparing, representing; analyzing skills—identifying main ideas, identifying
attributes and components, identifying relationships, patterns; generating skills—
inferring, predicting, estimating (ASCD, Dimensions of Thinking) (Curtain, 1995;
Met, 1991).
Research on extensive reading in a second language shows that reading
coherent extended materials leads to improved language abilities, greater
content-area learning, and higher motivation (Elley, 1991); the Georgetown
German program has based the curriculum on texts and genre and report
exciting results in students' speaking and writing proficiency Support for CBI
from Educational and Cognitive Psychology
Anderson (1990; 1993) has proposed a cognitive learning theory for
instruction that integrates attention to content and language. In this theory
skills (including language) and knowledge follow a general sequence of states of
learning from the cognitive stage (students notice and attend to information in
working memory; they engage in solving basic problems with the language and
24

25. concepts they're acquiring) to the associative stage (errors are corrected and
connections to related knowledge are strengthened; knowledge and skills become
proceduralized) to the autonomous stage (performance becomes automatic,
requiring little attentional effort; in this stage cognitive resources are feed up for
the next cycle of problem solving, concept learning).
The presentation of coherent and meaningful information leads to deeper
processing, which results in better learning (Anderson, 1990) and information
that is more elaborated is learned and recalled better. Information that has a
greater number of connections to related information promotes better learning
(it is more likely that content will have a greater number of connections to other
information) (Anderson, 1990).
Facts and skills taught in isolation need much more practice and
rehearsal before they can be internalized or put into long term memory;
coherently presented information (thematically organized) is easier to remember
and leads to improved learning (Singer, 1990); information that has a greater
number of connections to related information enhances learning, and content
acts as the driving force for the connections to be made.
Content-based instruction develops a wider range of discourse skills than
does traditional language instruction (because of the incorporation of higher
cognitive skills); Byrnes (2000) notes the increasing demands for high levels of
25

26. literacy in languages other than English. When planned thoughtfully, content-
based activities have the possibility of leading to "flow experiences," i.e., the
optimal experiences emerge when personal skills are matched by high challenge
(Csikszentmihalyi, 1997, in Grabe & Stoller, 1997 and Stoller, 2002).
Content-based instruction provides for cognitive engagement; tasks that
are intrinsically interesting and cognitively engaging will lead to more and better
opportunities for second language acquisition; this is particularly important
when one considers the inherent complexity of adult learning (Byrnes, 2000).
Content-based instruction emphasizes a connection to real life, real world skills
(Curtain, 1995); in content-based classes, students have more opportunities to
use the content knowledge and expertise they bring to class (they activate their
prior knowledge, which leads to increased learning of language and content
material).
Joann Crandall of the University of Baltimore County, in CAL Digest
(2006) concluded that integrated and content instruction offers a means by
which English as a second language (ESL) students can continue their
academic or cognitive development while they are also acquiring academic
language proficiency. It also offers a means by which foreign language students
can develop fuller proficiency in the foreign language they are studying. In
foreign language or two-way bilingual immersion programs, in which a portion
of the curriculum is taught through the foreign language, some type of
integrated language and content appears to be essential.
26

27. Research conducted in a variety of program models (Grabe & Stoller,
1997) has shown that content-based instruction results in language learning,
content learning, increased motivation and interest levels, and greater
opportunities for employment (where language abilities are necessary)—the
research has emerged in ESL K-12 contexts , FL K-12 (immersion and bilingual
programs), post-secondary FL and ESL contexts, and FLAC programs. CBI
allows for greater flexibility to be built into the curriculum and activities; there
are more opportunities to adjust to the needs and interests of students.
ERIC Digest (2006) also supports Sticth‘s (2006) claim on the principle of
CBI. ERIC further emphasized that an integrated language and content
instruction provides opportunities for learners to acquire a new language
through the study of academic discipline such as mathematics, science and
history. Also known as content-centered or contend based language learning
(CCLL/CBLL), this approach is an effective way for both English language
learners and learners of other languages to develop their language skills and
their academic skills at the same time. Programs that use content-centered
language learning include total and partial immersion, two-way (dual)
immersion, bilingual education, and sheltered English.
Stitch in NCSALL (2006) reflects that in adult education, including the
learning of English for speakers of other languages (ESOL), content-based
27

28. instruction is an instruction that focuses upon the substance or meaning of the
content that is being taught. He refuted that this is in contrast to "general
literacy" or "general language" instruction, which use topics or subject matter
simply as a vehicle for teaching reading and writing, or the grammar or other
"mechanics" of English language, as general processes (Brinton, Snow, &
Wesche, 1989). Various "general literacy" programs may also emphasize the
learning of general processes such as "learning to learn," "critical thinking," or
"problem solving" skills. In such instruction, the emphasis is upon developing
the general processes, and the content that is used is generally treated as of
only incidental interest.
Niki Peachey, teacher, trainer, and materials writer of The British
Council (2006), identified the advantages and disadvantages of CBI. Among the
advantages, he claimed that, this can make learning a language more
interesting and motivating. Students can use the language to fulfill a real
purpose, which can make students both more independent and confident.
Furthermore, students can also develop a much knowledge of the world
through CBI, which can feedback into improving, and supporting their general
educational needs.
CBI is also very popular among EAP (English for Academic Purposes)
teachers as it helps students to develop valuable study skills such as note
taking, summarizing and extracting key information from texts. Taking
information from different sources, re-evaluating and restructuring that
28

29. information can help students to develop very valuable thinking skills that can
then be transferred to other subjects.
Though the approach is perceived to be very effective, yet offers several
challenges to ESL/ESOL teachers. Again The British Council identified four
major limitations, like it does not focused on language learning, some students
may feel confused or may even feel that they aren‘t improving their language
skills. Deal with this by including some form of language focused follow-up
exercises to help draw attention to linguistic features within the materials and
consolidate any difficult vocabulary or grammar points.
Particularly in monolingual classes, the overuse of the student‘s native
language during parts of the lesson can be a problem. Because the lesson
explicitly focused on language practice students find it much easier and quicker
to use their mother tongue. Try sharing your rationale with students and
explain the benefits of using the target language rather than their mother
tongue.
It can be hard to find information sources and text that lower levels can
understand. Also the sharing of information in the target language may cause
great difficulties. A possible way around this at lower levels is either to use
texts in the student‘s native language or then get them use the target language
for the sharing of information and end product, or to have texts in the target
29

30. language, but allow the students to present the end product in their native
language. These options should reduce the level of challenge.
Some students may copy directly from the source texts they use to get
their information. Avoid this by designing tasks that demand students evaluate
the information in some way, to draw conclusions or actually to put it to some
practical use. Having information sources that have conflicting information can
also be helpful; as students have to decide which information they agree with or
most believe.
The Precursors of Content-Based Instruction
This is to reiterate what most language experts claimed about the
existence behind the principle of integration across discipline, and likewise,
emphasize that concept behind CBI is, actually no longer foreign to English
language teaching. (Crandall, 1992; Brinton, 1997; & Stitch, 2006). The
approach may somehow package in different box, but shows semblances in
substance; hence, the program models by Joann Crandall. Alongside with
Crandall‘s models, the researcher personally compiled these related ―integrative
approaches‖ and includes specific background for each. The first ten
approaches may have popularized prior to the widespread utilization of CBI
across the globe. Likewise, newer modifications of CBI would be dealt later of
the presentation, such as Language Across the Curriculum; Theme-Based
Approach; Whole Language Approach; Cognitive Academic Language Learning
30

31. Approach Cognitive; English for Academic Purposes; English for Specific
Purposes; Sheltered Subject Matter Teaching; Sheltered Instruction; and
Adjunct Model
Languages Across the Curriculum (LAC)
The LAC movement follows the example set by the Writing Across the
Curriculum (WAC) movement of the 1980s, which sought to use writing as a
central learning tool in classes outside the English department. Rather than
relegating writing instruction to classes in literature or composition, WAC
provides advice and assistance to students for the inculcation of the skills
needed for writing in each curricular specialty. Similarly, LAC works with
faculty to identify the specific vocabulary and genres that students need in
order to function effectively in another language in their respective disciplines
(Fichera & Straight, 1997).
LAC also draws upon the content-based language instruction movement
of the 1990s (Brinton, Snow, & Wesche, 1989; Krueger & Ryan, 1993; Stryker &
Leaver, 1997). Instruction that emphasizes purposeful comprehension and
communicative production yields superior receptive and expressive accuracy,
31

32. complexity, and fluency. In brief, students who learn language for a purpose
learn it better.
LAC aims to facilitate the use of languages in a variety of meaningful
contexts and to motivate and reward students for using their multilingual skills
in every class they take at each level in the university curriculum, thus
preparing them for the cross-cultural and multilingual demands and
opportunities of a global society (Consortium for Languages Across the
Curriculum, 1996).
Theme-Based Approach (TBA)
In these programs, a language curriculum is developed around selected
topics drawn from one content area (e.g. marketing) or from across the
curriculum (e.g. pollution and the environment). The goal is to assist learners in
developing general academic language skills through interesting and relevant
content.
Similarly, Brewer (2000), claims that theme-based approach is believed
to be the most productive in helping teachers design a developmentally
appropriate curriculum since the idea of integration is not a new one, ever since
the turn of the century when John Dewey (1859-1952) advocated the
organization of curriculum around projects that would interest and involve
children. This is grounded upon the premise that children in elementary days
32

33. had their reading class first thing in the morning, math right before lunch, and
science, in the afternoon. Yet when children learn outside of school, they learn
in wholes. For example, a child visiting tide pools could learn about many
things at once: language arts (learning vocabulary for the animals and plants
of the tide pools); physical skills (staying on top of the slippery rocks);
classification (noticing which animals are related; the environment (noticing
pollution or litter); family stories (hearing parents tell about when they visited
these tide pools as children); and so on. Thus, a child‘s learning experiences
outside school are not divisible into subject-matter areas. She further
suggested that organizing learning experiences around a theme can be
productive but if thematic teaching is to be successful, the theme must be
carefully selected, activities carefully planned, and evaluation of the theme and
of individual children‘s progress carefully monitored.
Whole Language Approach (WLA)
According to Smith (1982), whole language approach is commonly
referred to as natural approach of language learning in a meaningful context. It
is developmental language model based on the premise that youngsters acquire
language (speaking, reading, and writing) as naturally as they learn to walk and
talk; when they are invited to engage in self-motivating activities that are
stimulating, interesting, social, meaning-based, purposeful, interactive and
most of all, enjoyable.
33

34. Goodman (1986) supports the definition above. He said that the
philosophy of whole language is based on the concept that students need to
experience language as an integrated whole. It focuses on the need for an
integrated approach to language instruction within a context that is meaningful
to students. The approach is consistent with integrated language and content
instruction as both emphasize meaningful engagement and authentic language
use, and both link oral and written language development (Blanton, 1992).
Whole language strategies that have been implemented in content-centered
language classes include dialogue journals, reading response journals, learning
logs, process-based writing, and language experiences stories (Crandall, 1992).
In relation to this, Goodman, Calkins, and Atwell (1986) and Smith
(1987) in Villamin, et.al. (1994), identified the attributes of whole language
approach as follows: A language arts is an integrated curriculum; language
arts is learner-centered; language and life experiences are inseperable; language
learning is natural; language is used under real communication situations to
express ideas and feelings, thus encouraging social and personal development.
According to these researchers, whole language approach has two
fundamental goals, that is: (1) to use communication situations to express ideas
and feelings, and (2) to foster love of reading for enjoyment.
34

35. In this integrative approach, the teacher and the students work
collaboratively. Authentic texts or real children‘s literature—fairy tales, and
folktales, fables, legends, myths, poems, parables, and riddles—are used for
reading purposes. The teacher provides a lot of group interaction through a
variety of strategies: speech choir, jazz chants, chamber theater, reader‘s
theater, and finger plays. Comprehension is supported by active interpretation,
and is also enhanced by activating prior knowledge, using advance organizers
and prediction techniques. Listening and speaking activities pave the way for
setting the purpose, surveying the text, predicting outcomes, and considering
literary elements.
Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach (CALLA)
This approach combines language, content, and learning strategy
instruction into a transitional ESL approach for upper elementary and
secondary students of intermediate or advanced English proficiency (Chamot &
O‘Malley, 1987).
English for Academic Purposes (EAP)
The emergence of subject content-based (as opposed to skill-based) EAP
courses in the 1980s (Brinton, Snow & Wesche 1989) raises the issue of which
types of skills and knowledge are necessary for EAP trainers to deliver effective
35

36. and professional courses for ESL/EFL students intending to follow college
degree programs in English speaking countries. By definition, English for
academic purpose is an integrative approach to teaching and learning in order
to achieve proficiency in a particular content area using the English language
as the medium of instruction. Krashen (1985) identified what he calls a
‗transition problem‘ to a perceived gap in the English Language and study skills
abilities of learners who have passed through traditional language classes, and
those required for study purposes within universities. He argues that subject
content-based curses can impart both subject knowledge and language
competence at the same time.
More recently, the work of Kasper (1997) has greatly strengthened the
evidence for effectiveness of content-based courses. She has reported both
improved language and content performance among students exposed to
content-based EAP programs, higher scores on measures of reading proficiency,
and higher pass rates on ESL courses. She also provides quantitative evidence
that such students establish and retain performance advantage over students
exposed to non-content-based EAP training. He work supports the views of
Benesch 1988, Guyer & Peterson 1988, and Snow & Brinton 1988, that
content-based programs facilitate ESL students‘ transition to academic
mainstream college courses, increasing the likelihood that such students will
gain a college degree.
The trend towards content-based EAP training program presents a clear
challenge to EAP instructors. How much longer will EAP training be done by
36

37. instructors who may lack specific background knowledge of their learner‘s
specialist disciplines? How much longer will the traditional emphasis on
training in language and study skills be regarded as adequate in the face of the
growing body persuasive evidence for the effectiveness of subject content-based
programs? It may therefore be necessary for EAP trainers to possess a certain
level of background knowledge in their students‘ academic subjects in order to
meet this challenge.
Timothy Bell of Kuwait University in The Internet TESL Journal (2002)
reveals the revised version of his paper given at the British Council – LAN-
ECSCS during a Project Conference in Bali on December 1996. The program
consisted of content-based English Language and study skills training in the
field of Biotechnology. The research, ―Do EAP Teachers Require Knowledge of
Their Students‘ Specialist Academic Subjects?‖ aimed to explore the issue of how
much, if any, subject content knowledge is required for EAP teachers to
successfully prepare their learners for academic study at tertiary level. It will
begin by considering the research evidence for the effectiveness of subject
content-based courses, and then proceed to describe two EAP programs given
at the Universities of Indonesia. Bell (2002), points out that in traditional, skill-
based, EAP courses, it has generally been thought that the trainer does not
require specialized academic knowledge of the learner‘s major subject of study.
This is because such training focused on developing language and study skills
and not on the academic subject itself. The learners, it is often argued, an deal
with complexities of terminology and ambiguities of subject content that may be
beyond the trainer‘s knowledge of the specialist subject. EAP trainers were
37

38. typically told to exploit queries about subject content, so as to provide
opportunities for the students to develop their fluency, produce extended
spoken discourse, and effectively share their knowledge of the subject.
English for Specific Purposes (ESP)
Laurence Anthony of the Department of Information and Computer
Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, of Okayama University of Science reported
that from the early 1960‘s, English for Specific Purposes (ESP) has grown as
one of the most prominent areas of EFL teaching today. Its development is
reflected in the increasing number of universities offering an MA in ESP and the
number of ESP courses offered overseas students in English speaking
countries. There is now a well-established international journal dedicated to
ESP discussion, ―English for Specific Purposes: An international journal‖, and
the ESP SIG groups of the IATEL and TESOL are always active at their national
conferences. In Japan, for instance, the ESP movement has shown a slow but
definite growth over the past few years. In particular, increased interest has
been spurred as a result of the Mombusho‘s decision in 1994 to largely hand
over control of university curriculums to the universities themselves. This has
led to a rapid growth in English courses.
In the Philippines, ESP had been a controversial issue particularly in the
eighties. Lucero (1984) in Carreon (1992) reported that some of the problems
associated with ESP ―theory‖ stemmed mainly from confusion and disagreement
38

39. over the definition of English for Specific Purposes: What is ESP—is it an
approach, a method, or a theory? Is it the teaching of technical and scientific
language? Are its aims purely utilitarian? How specific is it—are the students
taught English only for the performance of engineering? How much knowledge
of, say, engineering should the ESP teacher have? Why can‘t the ESP teacher
confine herself to the teaching of language instead of venturing into the
discipline of science and technology?
In her report, Carreon (1992), roughly classified the definitions and views
about ESP as register analysis, ESP as a rhetorical or discourse approach, ESP
as a communicative approach, and ESP as target situation analysis.
She further argued that those who viewed ESP in terms of register
analysis focused on the teaching of the grammatical and lexical features of
scientific and technical language. Lacking the sophisticated background for
linguistic analysis, however may have interpreted this mainly as teaching
grammar using technical or scientific subject matter; others interpret it as
teaching the vocabulary items their students encounter in their engineering of
biology class.
Now, those who defined ESP in terms of the rhetorical approach, Carreon
(1992) explained that these advocates acknowledged the importance of teaching
Filipino students to view language in the context of discourse units and
39

40. situations. Lessons focus on the teaching of rhetorical forms acknowledged
being the most commonly used in science, technology, and business. In
addition to textual features, the more enlightened view of this approach stresses
the importance of teaching second language learners the organization and
logical process underlying particular discourse forms. It, however, has placed a
rather heavy emphasis on production and the completion of whole tasks or
texts. As a result, ESP has been viewed as mainly task-oriented and product-
oriented.
On the other hand, ESP‘s association with the communicative approach
had resulted in creative and lively English classes. This is one feature of ESP
that has been well-received by Filipino language teachers. In fact, some of them
according to Carreon (1992) tend to think that the two approaches are one and
the same. Unfortunately, the focus on the use of language for communication
had also become associated with the notion of de-emphasizing grammar of with
teaching grammar ―incidentally‖. Many teachers who have known no other
approach to language teaching than the grammatical and structural often use
this last point as an argument against ESP. Their assumption in this case is
that linguistic competence or the knowledge of rules and correct linguistic
forms necessarily precedes language use. So that those who may accept ESP
―in principle‖ and accept the communicative approach ―in principle‖ do so only
as far as they apply to Filipino student who are already fairly proficient in the
English language. For students who can barely express themselves in English,
many of those teachers diagnosed that what they need is more practice in
grammar, not ESP.
40

41. Finally, Carreon (1992) recommended that there is a great need for needs
analysis. According to her, there is much argument, however, regarding whose
needs are to be investigated, how the analysis is to be conducted; what model
should be used; and how the results ought to be used. More interesting is how
the interpretation of ―target situation‖ and ―authenticity‖ has sometimes
followed the extreme case of using whole texts lifted directly from textbooks,
professional books, and journals without consideration for factors such as
intended audience, level of difficulty, potential for creative language lessons.
Carreon (1992) concluded in her report that to a non-restricting view of
ESP and the integration of educational goals in ESP program, the acquisition of
a solid background in basic linguistics and the principles and practices of
second language learning and teaching appears to be the key to a better
understanding of ESP and consequently, it is hope, to more effective ESP
teaching.
Another program model related to CBI is the sheltered subject matter
teaching. Crandall (2006) in Brinton, Snow & Wesche, 1989 describes that this
approach involves adapting the language of texts or tasks and use of certain
methods familiar to language teachers (demonstrations, visuals, graphic
organizers, or cooperative work) to make instruction more accessible to students
of different English proficiency levels. This type of instruction is also called
41

42. sheltered English or language sensitive content instruction and is given by the
regular classroom or content teacher, or by a language teacher with special
expertise in another academic area.
On the other hand, in a sheltered instruction, a content curriculum is
adapted to accommodate students‘ limited proficiency in the language of
instruction. This model was originally developed for elementary foreign
language immersion programs to enable some portion of the curriculum to be
taught through the foreign language (Geneseee, 1987 in Crandall 2006). It is
commonly used in immersion and two-way bilingual programs (Met, 1991) and
has been adapted for use in second language programs with large numbers of
limited English proficient students or intermediate or advanced English
proficiency.
This model links a specific language learning course with a content
course in which both second language learners and native English speakers are
enrolled (Crandall, 2006). The courses share a content base, but the focus of
instruction differs. The language teacher emphasizes language skills, such as
academic or writing, while the content teacher focuses on traditional academic
concepts. This model requires substantial coordination between the language
and content teacher; usually the ESL teacher makes the extra effort of
becoming familiar with the content. An adjunct program is usually limited to
cases where student shave language skills that are sufficiently advance to
42

43. enable them to participate in content instruction with English speaking
students.
Margueritte Ann Snow, professor at California State University & Donna
M. Brinton, Academic Coordinator of EFL Service Courses and lecturer in the
Department of Applied Linguistics & TESOL at the University of California in
CATESOL News 1986 defined adjunct model of language instruction as a cross-
curricular instructional program designed to meet the linguistic and academic
needs of university students. In this model, students are enrolled concurrently
in two linked courses—a language course (e.g. Intermediate ESL) and a content
course (e.g., Introductory Psychology). The rationale underlying the model is
that the two courses share a content base and complement each other in terms
of mutually-coordinated assignments (Wesche , 1985 in Snow & Brinton, 1986).
An important feature of the model is the integration of nonnative speakers with
native speakers in the content course to insure the authenticity of the academic
demands placed upon the students. Equally important, however, is the
―sheltering‖ of non-native speakers in the ESL component in the model. In this
way, the particular language needs of second language learners, such as
persistent grammar and writing error patterns, can be addressed directly.
They further explained that the adjunct model of language instruction
provides an ideal framework for an English for academic purpose setting. With
the focus in the language class on essential modes of academic writing,
academic reading, study skill development, and treatment of persistent
43

44. structural errors, students are being prepared to transfer these skills to their
content courses. The activities of the content-based language class are geared
to stimulate students to think and learn in the target language by requiring
them to synthesize information from the content-area lectures and readings.
These materials provide content for students to discuss and write about, thus
providing and authentic context for integrating the four traditional language
skills.
An underlying pedagogical assumption of this framework is that student
motivation in the language class will increase in direct proportion o the
relevance of its activities, and, in turn, student success in this content course
will reflect the carefully coordinated efforts of this team approach.
Furthermore, the adjunct model offers ESL students a critical, but often
neglected, option. It gives them access to native speaker interaction and the
authentic, unsimplified language of academic test and lectures in the content
course, yet enables them to benefit from ESL instruction where their particular
language needs can be met.
According to Crandall, (2006) there are a variety of strategies and
techniques used in content-centered second language instruction. Here, the
discussion will be limited only to three types of strategies—cooperative learning
and other grouping strategies, task-based or experiential learning, and graphic
organizers—that increase attention to academic language learning, contribute
to content learning, and encourage development of thinking and study skills.
44

45. In cooperative learning, students of different linguistic and educational
backgrounds and different skill levels work together on a common task for a
common goal in either the language or the content classroom. Cooperative
groups encourage students to communicate, to share insights, test hypotheses,
and jointly construct knowledge. Depending on their language proficiency,
students can be assigned various roles as facilitator, recorder, reporter, or
illustrator. Other grouping strategies involve peer tutoring or pairing a second
language learner with a more English-proficient peer.
While in the task-based or experiential learning method, appropriate
contexts are provided for developing thinking and study skills as well as
language and academic concepts for students of different levels of language
proficiency. Students learn by carrying out specific tasks or projects: For
example, ―doing science‖ and not just reading about it. (Roseberry, Warren, &
Conant, 1992 in Crandall, 2006).
Villamin, Salazar, Bala & Suñga (1994), suggested five steps used in
constructing a graphic organizer as follows:
Identify the major objectives and concepts to be taught;
Summarize the key concepts in the form of a diagram or a table;
Have the students explain the graphic organizer. Ask them to discuss
the relationship among its parts. Have them provide some more examples;
45

46. Have them use graphic organizers in surveying text. Present an
incomplete diagram then ask the students to complete it by recalling or locating
appropriate terms and concepts; and
Give more examples for practice until the students learn to make graphic
organizers, which will aid them in making simple outlines.
This part tries to present the surveys and reviews of related researches
and studies, which have been conducted about the use of content-based
approach to language teaching and learning. The journal articles as well as e-
zines were reviewed in order to support of its pedagogical implications both
locally and across the globe.
Peter Master (1991), an associate professor in the Department of
Linguistics and Language Development at San Jose State University in San
Jose, California made a report about experimental content-based adjunct
program. The study, which was created by The English Institute at Cañada
College in California, was primarily for resident ESL students. The content
areas included the social sciences, western civilization, the natural and physical
sciences, and mathematics, each of which had an adjunct ESL component. The
students were initially required to take the whole series of courses, including a
college study skills class, and a counselor worked with the students to help
with personal problem during the program.
46

47. The apparent success of this pilot program speaks to the effectiveness of
both content-based instruction and the adjunct (or team teaching) model. It
also demonstrates how the principles of EAP (English for Academic Purposes)
instruction are perfectly reflected in the content-based approach, which relies
on needs analysis, (student, institutional, and professional), authentic
materials, and the communicative approach to language teaching in addressing
the language needs of nonnative-English-speaking students in public
education.
Pally Marcia‘s (in ERIC, March 1999) paper entitle ―Sustained Content-
Based Teaching for Academic Skills Development in ESL/EFL‖ discusses the
rationale for using content-based instruction (CBI) to teach English for
academic purposes to non-native speakers, drawing on recent research and
theory and on both personal experience and s small-scale study of college
students. Discussion begins with a look at college and graduates students‘
needs for both language skills and skills in argumentation, particularly in the
conventions of Anglo-American rhetoric. Topics addressed here include,
political, and psychosocial questions about English hegemony and the question
of who should learn these rhetorical conventions. Literature on sustained CBI
is then reviewed, offering support for it from experience with student
frustration, research on its effectiveness, and interviews with students who had
studied English in sustained CBI classes.
47

48. Loreta Kasper‘s New Technologies, New Literacies: Focus Discipline
Research and ESL Learning Communities on Language Learning & Technology
(Sept. 2000) describes a study of a content-based instructional model that
engages high intermediate English-as –a-Second Language students in
sustained content study within collaborative learning communities and uses
information technology resources to hone linguistic, academic, socioaffective,
and metacognitive skills through an activity called focus discipline.
In Forum, Oct-Dec 1997, ―Into, Through, and Beyond: A Framework to
Develop Content-Based Material‖, Donna M. Brinton & Christine Holten‘ s
described a lesson planning framework that content-based instruction teachers
can adapt to their instructional materials, student populations, and classroom
settings. Applying the framework to an authentic reading passage, the sample
lesson illustrates how teachers can develop activities that supplement the
content, increase student access to and comprehension of core materials, and
foster students‘ linguistic skills.
Fredricka Stoller in Forum (Oct-Dec 1997) provides a rationale for
content-based instruction and demonstration how project can be integrated
into content-based English-as-a-Second-Language classrooms. In her article,
―Project Work: A Means to Promote Language Content‖, she outlined the primary
characteristics of project work, introduced project work in its various
configurations, and presents practical guidelines for sequencing and developing
a project.
48

49. Jodi Crandall, in her ESL Magazine (July-Aug 1998) discusses the new,
expanded role of elementary English-as-a-Second Language (ESL) teachers,
focusing on content-based language instruction in elementary ESL and
examining the challenges of content-based language instruction for elementary
ESL (e.g. scarcity of good materials, and limited class time). Her article ―The
Expanding Role of the Elementary ESL Teacher: Doing More than Teaching
Language‖ described how to develop two sidebars thematic units and present a
simple thematic unit.
Wood Richard in ADFL Bulletin (Win 1999) suggested in his article, ―The
Imperative of Integrating Language Instruction with Instruction in Other Fields‖,
that, in order to prepare college students for the global marketplace, language
learning must be more fully integrated with the liberal arts. This means
rethinking the relationship between language competency and the study of
languages and literature. Literature in the target language should be studied at
the advanced level, because this offers students a chance to learn the subtleties
of the language.
―Trends and Issues in Content-Based Instruction‖ by Marguirette Ann
Snow in Annual Review of Applied Linguistics (1998) contains a review of
literature on content-based second-language instruction, in both English and
other second languages, describes the impact of content-based instruction on
49

50. instructional, assessment, and teacher-training practices and examines its role
as a setting for research and methodological innovation. It concludes with a
discussion of ongoing challenges.
The Philippine Normal University houses several studies related to
content-based instruction. It is interesting to note that these are but recent
studies. This is not doubt since the approach was only introduced to Philippine
language teaching context just a decade ago. The researcher surveyed twelve
(12) related studies from 1995 to 2005.
Tequillo (1995) identified in her prototype ESP-based lessons the
language functions in science and mathematics needed by teacher education
students. To determine the scope of the lesson, she developed her own needs
analysis through Survey Questionnaire.
Cortez (2002) used contents from Science/Nutrition and Dietetics,
Mathematics, Psychology, Education, Research, Tourism and Values Education.
In developing her materials, she made use of authentic materials taken from
newspapers, magazines, brochures, journals, and Internet downloads in which
she claimed as illustrative of single-text, multi-text, and whole chapter
strategies.
50

51. Estacio (2002) reported in her ESP-Based Instructional Materials
revealed that, fourth year high school students need to learn the correct form of
the following grammatical structures: subject-verb agreement, verb tenses, and
verb forms, transitional devices, prepositions, articles, modals, fragments and
adverbs. She further concluded that students need to understand how English
operates in science and technology, and learn the language uses, structure and
form. She also hypothesized that since the ESP instructional materials adapt
approach different from the traditional grammatical approach, the students
may encounter difficulty in using them without the teacher‘s guidance.
Calica (2003) found out that students are weak in the construction of
sentences using phrases and clauses as modifiers; using connectives and
transition expressions; and using the verb tense forms. She also discovered
that paramedic practicum in particular failed to learn well the use of clauses
and phrases as modifiers in the sentence; correct use of adjectives, connectives;
and construction of imperative sentences and prohibitions. The researcher
suggested that language teachers integrate need analysis into the lesson plan in
order to draw up a profile of communication needs and to validate specifically
the skills and linguistic forms to be taught. She further commented that
textbook writers and designers of instructional materials should identify the
needs of the specific group of learners and the educational and curriculum
setting into which the teaching of English must fit. She suggested too that
course designers should make course decisions based on the interpretation of
language needs analysis in order to conceptualize and organize the content of
every language program in an institution. School administrators should make
51

52. information about the learners‘ current state, and preferences and their desired
goal to identify the present language situation in view of the future language
needs. Finally, she reported that students themselves should be made to reflect
on their learning, to identify their needs and to gain more sense of ownership
and control of their learning through dialogue between them and the teachers
and among themselves.
Villalva (2004) in his study of integration of content and language
activities to fourth year high school students, he utilized Hutchinson‘s & Water‘
s Materials Design Model in analyzing the existing needs and difficulties of the
English teachers on having an integrated lesson based on the interviews
conducted and observation of classes.
Valerio, Mañgahas & Milan (2004) reported on their study that the
students had little difficulty in answering the items about reading
comprehension and vocabulary in a science-based reading text. In other words
students can understand a reading test using science as content material. In
their content-based language test for high school English, the researchers
further discovered that the students experienced difficulty in answering the
proofreading test and cloze test because these tests are seldom given to them.
They plainly suggested that in giving cloze test, there should be no deletions on
the first few sentences of the first paragraph in order to prepare the student for
language and reading proficiency. Lastly, the letter of the deleted word should
be given so that the student can have an idea on what it‘s all about.
52

53. Ramos (2004) offered that in preparing instructional materials in
teaching English to a certain group of students, the teacher must take into
consideration the following variables: nature, needs, problems and course
concentration of the students. This study is of great help to ministerial
students in preparing them for the vocation—e.g. preaching, leading, arguing,
counseling, teaching, explaining, among others. He used the activities in
English which are for ministerial students—ministerial-based. The contents
(e.g. grammar exercises, vocabulary and reading comprehension) of the material
are mostly taken from the Holy Bible.
Cunanan (2004) in his Content-Based Prototype Lesson Plans for Fourth
Year High School Students used varied authentic text type from the content
areas in teaching English. The selection and design of the lesson plan was
based on the observations of English classes, interview of teachers,
interpretation of answers to the questionnaires given to teachers regarding their
classroom practices especially in the use of content-based materials in English
language teaching, and the analysis of the PSSLC (Philippine Secondary
Schools Learning Competencies) which was the basis for the objectives. He
supports the experts‘ viewpoint that the use of integrated approach to English
language teaching provides for the development of listening, speaking, reading,
writing, and grammar skills. ESL teachers according to him should be well-
oriented to the field of their target users. They also need to collaborate with
content area teachers for better planning of their teaching. Similar to Cortez
53

54. (2002), the researcher also authentic materials ranging from recipes, medicine
labels, brochures, processes, diary entries, journals, biographies,
documentaries, news reports, etc.; all of which were taken from the content
areas and purposely for a more extensive type of listening, speaking, reading
and writing skills typically required in content disciplines.
To date, the most recent study which have been conducted by PNU ESL
researchers—Content-Based Supplementary Vocabulary Instructional Materials
for Freshmen Business Students (Bernardo, 2005) presents a collaborative work
between the researcher and the mathematics professors. He designed his Peer
Validation Questionnaire as to the evaluation of his instructional materials.
Part Two: On the Teaching and Testing of Grammar
This part reviews the different operational and conceptual definitions of
grammar given by various experts in language teaching. The researcher also
tries to present various literatures on the linguistic foundations of grammar, its
nature and types. This section also discusses issues and problems in the
teaching and testing of grammar, like—Should we teach grammar in school?;
What should include in the study of English grammar in college?; What type of
grammar should be taught in college?; What method or approach best fits in the
teaching of grammar?; How should grammar test look like? These, and a lot
more shall be the major concern in the discussion. Aside from the local
unpublished studies about developing instructional materials on grammar, the
researcher also cited the works of Larsen-Freeman--Celce-Murcia (1998), Rob
Batstone (1996) for the pedagogical approaches, and John Heaton (1998) and
54

55. Arthur Hughes (1996) for testing procedures and techniques. The researcher
also surveyed six different locally authored textbooks used in the teaching of
grammar in college—particularly to freshmen students.
Furthermore, the review posits three essential points of analysis: the
content, the approach used, and the inputs.
A. On the definitions, nature, and theoretical foundations of grammar
Language experts define grammar in several different ways. To sum,
grammar is the study of language which deals with the forms and structure of
words and with their customary arrangement in phrases and sentences or the
system of rules in speaking and writing a given language.
The Oxford American Dictionary in Ayoob (2006) defines grammar as:
―the study of words and the rule for their formation and their relationships to
each other in sentences; the rules themselves; speech or writing judged as good
or bad according to these rules‖
Why grammar? There is distinctly familiar about grammar. Linguists
have been studying it for centuries, and it remains an object of learning for
countless schoolchildren across the globe; To quote, Batstone (1994): ―It is an
integral part of the language we use in everyday communication. Although we
are probably not conscious of grammar in our own language use, as language
teachers, we can hardly fail to be aware of its influence. Grammar is a major
influence in syllabus design, the focal point of many classroom exercises, and the
key behind that familiar student query: Please, what is the rule here?‖‖
55

56. Moreover, Batstone (1994) claimed that language without grammar would
certainly leave us seriously handicapped. He clarified that language is not
random, but orderly. He explained that grammar is not a single, homogenous
‗object‘ but immensely broad and diverse phenomenon. He even identified what
he called perspectives on grammar, which he believed important for language
teaching; hence grammar as a product and a process. According to him, a
product perspective on grammar probably the most familiar to the majority of
teachers. The emphasis is on the component parts of the language system,
divided up into separate forms. Each form is the product of the grammarian‘s
analysis, and this product perspective on grammar can be of great value to
teachers and learners. By focusing on particular grammatical forms and their
associated meanings, teachers can help learners to develop their knowledge of
the grammatical system, and the meanings, which it helps to signal.
On the other hand, Batstone argued that this process is only one side of
the coin, because grammar is also a key element in the process of language use.
Grammar as process, is likewise thinking of the myriad ways in which it is
deployed from moment to moment in communication.
Sysoyev in the Internet TESL Journal addresses the issue of L2 grammar
teaching to ESL students with focus on form and meaning. A method of
integrative grammar teaching, consisting of three major stages (a) exploration,
56

57. (b) explanation, and (c) expression (EEE), is proposed. To illustrate how each of
these stages function, several experimental lessons were conducted. The paper
describes and discusses the lessons themselves, their rationale, and their
implementation of the proposed method. An evaluative questionnaire
conducted after experimental lessons, shows that students preferred to learn L2
grammar using the EEE method, as opposed to form-based or meaning based
only approaches.
As a possible solution, integrative grammar teaching combines form-
based with a meaning-based focus. Spada and Lightbrown (1993) have also
argued ―that form focused instruction and corrective feedback provided within
the context of communicative interaction can contribute positively to second
language development in both the short and long term‖. Thus, integration of
form and meaning is becoming increasingly important in current research.
Celce-Murcia, Dornyei and Thurell (1997) call it ―a turning point‖ in
communicative language teaching, in which ‗explicit, direct elements are
gaining significance in teaching communicative abilities and skills‖.
Kumaravadivelu call s this ―a principled communicative approach‖ (cited by
Celce-Murcia, Dornyei and Thurell, 1997). Of course, depending on their
students with different needs in the same group, or having various needs in the
classroom. Musumeci (1997) mentions the idea of connecting form and
meaning in grammar teaching as a developoing trend in reference to the
proficiency oriented curriculum. She points out that students should be able to
learn explicit grammar rules as well as have a chance to practice them in
communication in the authentic or simulation tasks. Interestingly, Musumeci
57

58. advocates giving students a chance to look at the language on a sentence level
to see how certain grammatical rules are applied.
According to Appel, and Lantolf (1994) and Lantolf and Pavlenko (1995),
the role of the mediator in teaching an L2 is placed heavily on an L2 teacher,
whose task is to direct students in the right direction.
What principle then supports the acquisition of grammar? According to
research, children by the age of five or six are usually fluent in their language.
They use it confidently without knowing the names of the parts and structures
they speak. They are users of Hartwell‘s Grammar 1. By the time children
reach school age, they are competent in the use of all five basic sentence
patterns (Hunts 1995 in Patterson 2006). They are able to use negatives,
passives, ellipses, and imperatives, (Gillet & Temple 1984 in Patterson 2006)
and they can use present, past, and future tenses (Loban 1976 in Patterson
2006). These grammatical concepts are first learned through oral speech,
through the immersion process that allows children to develop language. But
one of the traditional elements of a language arts program is isolated grammar
instruction. English teachers have traditionally placed great faith in the direct
benefits of separate grammar instruction. Specifically, they often teach
grammar in isolation from writing. The skills approach to literacy has its
foundation in behaviorist theory, which assumes that literacy is acquired
58

59. through direct separate skills instruction. These skills would then become
integrated through practice.
Atwell 1987, Meyer 1990 in Patterson 2006 reported that some teacher-
researchers found that grammar instruction can be far more effective if it is
incorporated into student-writing instruction.
Martha Kolln in Patterson 2006 stressed that students need to be
consciously aware of their own grammatical knowledge and that this can be
done through studying structures and labeling them. Meckel, on the other
hand, concluded that not enough time had been devoted to teaching grammar.
Meckel pointed out that the formal study of grammar does not have to be
isolated from student writing. (Weaver 1996). Kolln, however, points out that
flaws in the studies that advocate the de-emphasis of Prescriptive Grammar
instruction indicate that grammar should be taught. Her contention that
grammar as application is interesting, but her belief that this is ―proved‖
through pointing out flaws in previous studies is contestable.
Rei Noguchi in Patterson is another newer voice that is asking teachers
to think critically about the role of grammar in the classroom. His book
Grammar and the Teaching of Writing (1991) suggests that teachers limit the
use of grammatical terminology to those elements or features that are necessary
in helping students create fewer errors in their writing and to write more
effective sentences. Noguchi is one of the newer voices who believes students
59

60. must formulate their own operational descriptions of how language functions.
This is a move away from the cult of correctness and recognition that students
already have a vast knowledge of Grammar 1, even though they may not be able
to articulate it. Noguchi is attempting to lead teachers toward more Descriptive
Grammars that recognize the linguistic abilities of students. Noguchi, however,
acknowledges that power structures within the culture demand a level of
―correctness‖ in writers and suggests that teachers focus on the most common
―errors‖ in student writing and those ―errors that seem to most concern those
who wield power in corporate, academic, and political arenas.
According to Weaver, these are essentially errors in subject/verb
agreement, and the failure to recognize subordinate clauses and phrases as
incomplete sentences. Weaver also adds the misuses of commas in certain
situations, such as introductory phrases and the lack of commas with the use
of appositives and interrupters.
Patterson quoted both Susan Hunter and Ray Wallace for teachers to
rethink the role of grammar in the English classroom. They admit that too
great a focus on School or Traditional Grammars is not the answer, but they
add that this is not the only approach to grammar. Wallace believes the issue
has been skirted for too long, especially among college composition teachers,
and that these teachers need to find ways in which to reconnect grammar and
writing.
What should teachers know? Patterson suggests that in order to
understand the complexity of the grammar issue, teachers need to have some
60

61. understanding of the language acquisition process. And they need to
understand that children enter the classroom with thorough grounding in the
internalized system of rules of their language. They already know Grammar 1.
Teachers should also understand that, barring some cognitive impairment;
native speakers use ―good‖ grammar, even though the language they speak may
not be ―standard‖ English. They should also understand the problems in
thinking of grammars as a remedy for supposed inadequacies in students
writing and spoken language.
Bell Hooks (1994) in Patterson 2006 eloquently points out a few
problems with the notion of teaching grammar. In essence she asks ―whose
grammar are we teaching?‖ If the goal of grammar teaching (whether within the
context of writing or not) is to help students speak and write the language of
power, we must ask ourselves if this is a noble goal. And by assuming that
there IS a language of power, and that those who master it have a better chance
of being ―successful‖, what are we saying about those who do not, or will not,
speak that language?
It is but interesting to note in this paper the role of functional grammar,
in which this study used. Functional grammar is the name given to any of a
range of functionally-based approaches to the scientific study of language, such
as the grammar model developed by Simon Dik or Michael Halliday‘s Systemic
functional grammar; another important figure in recent linguistic functionalism
is Talmy Givon.
61

62. According to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, in the functional paradigm
a language is in the first place conceptualized as an instrument of social
interaction among human beings, used with the intention of establishing
communicative relationships. Within this paradigm one attempt to reveal the
instrumentality of language with respect to what people do and achieve with it
in a social interaction. A natural language, in other words, is seen as an
integrated part of the communicative competence of the natural language user.
Because of its emphasis on usage, communicative function, and the
social context of language, functional grammar differs significantly from other
linguistic theories, which stress purely formal approaches to grammar, for
instance Chomskyan generative grammar.
In the ―The Grammar Book (Second Edition)‖, Celce-Murcia & Larsen-
Freeman (1999) identified two approaches to teaching language. One is focused
primarily on language use, while the other is on language forms or analysis.
They clearly discussed what most language experts have been arguing over the
years now. However, they reported that the controversy did not entirely find a
concrete resolution. For, according to them, there is evidence to support both
points of view. They further explained that it is no uncommon to find learners
who, for whatever reason, find themselves in a new country or a new region of
their own country, who need to learn a new language, and who do so without
the benefit of formal instruction. They claimed also that learner‘s language
development may become arrested in an immersion environment, once their
communicative needs have been met.
62

63. They further argued that if the approach focuses on language analysis,
the connection should be easy to make. The more teachers know about
grammar, the more expeditiously they should be able to raise a learner‘s
consciousness about how the language works. They should be able to focus
learner‘s attention on the distinctive features of a particular grammatical form
in less time than it would take for the learner to notice them on his or her own.
They advised teachers to teach grammar explicitly by giving students rules and
exercises with the appropriate grammatical terminology. On the other hand,
they can also teach grammar implicitly as well, like asking students to engage
in particular tasks that require the use of certain structures. In addition, a
teacher might highlight properties of the grammatical structures by providing
negative evidence—that is, helping students to see what is not possible in
English. In this way, learners are encouraged to notice the gap between what
they are producing and what the target language requires. Teachers might also
expose students to language samples in which particular grammatical
structures are highlighted or are more prevalent than they might be in ordinary
communication.
They strongly recommend that ESL/EFL teachers must teach grammar
pedagogically, not linguistically, for linguistic grammars strive only for internal
consistency; are often inaccessible except to those specially trained to work
within a particular paradigm, while pedagogical grammars are eclectic in
nature. They further stressed out that grammar can be implicitly taught to
language students; hence the familiarization to metalanguage and grammatical
descriptions. What ESL/EFL teachers should be helping students to is be able
63