How secondary school students may benefit from linguistic metaconcepts to reason about L1 grammatical problems. (3rd May 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: van Rijt, Jimmy H.M.; Wijnands, Astrid; Coppen, Peter-Arno J.M.
• Is Part Of: Language and education. Volume 34:Number 3(2020)
• Page Start: 231
• Page End: 248
• Publication Date: 2020-05-03
• Subjects: L1 grammar teaching -- linguistic metaconcepts -- linguistic reasoning -- comparative judgement -- secondary education; Language and education -- Periodicals; Native language -- Study and teaching -- Periodicals; Language and languages -- Study and teaching -- Periodicals; Children -- Language -- Periodicals; 407.105
• DOI: 10.1080/09500782.2019.1690503
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0950-0782

Abstract

Abstract: In L1 grammar teaching, teachers often struggle with the students' conceptual understanding of the subject matter. Frequently, students do not acquire an in-depth understanding of grammar, and they seem generally incapable of reasoning about grammatical problems. Some scholars have argued that an in-depth understanding of grammar requires making connections between concepts from traditional grammar and underlying metaconcepts from linguistic theory. In the current study, we evaluate an intervention aiming to do this, following up on a previous study that found a significant effect for such an approach in university students of Dutch Language and Literature ( d = 0.62). In the current study, 119 Dutch secondary school students' grammatical reasonings ( N = 684) were evaluated by language teachers, teacher educators and linguists pre and post intervention using comparative judgement. Results indicate that the intervention significantly boosted the students' ability to reason grammatically ( d = 0.46), and that many students can reason based on linguistic metaconcepts. The study also shows that reasoning based on explicit underlying linguistic metaconcepts and on explicit concepts from traditional grammar is more favored by teachers and (educational) linguists than reasoning without explicit (meta)concepts. However, some students show signs of incomplete acquisition of the metaconcepts. The paper discusses explanations for this incomplete acquisition.