1. Implicit and Explicit teaching
1.1. Explicit
1.1.1. Krashen not a fan
1.1.1.1. that conscious learning could not become part of the acquired store available for spontaneous production.
1.1.2. DeKeyser
1.1.2.1. has argued that explicit knowledge can become proceduralised if sufficient meaningful practice is provided.
1.1.3. Ellis
1.1.3.1. Explicit knowledge can convert to implicit knowledge if the learner is ready to aquire the feature and if aqusitional processes such as noting the gap are triggered
1.2. Implicit
2. Input-based Approaches
2.1. Ellis
2.1.1. "seek to draw learners' attention to the targeted structure(s)"
2.2. Schmidt
2.2.1. The difference between input and intake: Input: the language the learner is exposed to Intake: the part of the input which becomes part of the learner's potential productive repertoire
3. The non-interventionist position
3.1. States that grammar teaching plays only a very minor role
3.2. Theoretics
3.2.1. Thornburry
3.2.2. Howatt
3.2.2.1. The strong version of CLT
3.2.3. Joseph Webbe
3.2.3.1. By exercise of reading, writing, and speaking [...] all things belonging to Grammar, will without labour, and whether we will or no, thrust themselves upon us”.By exercise of reading, writing, and speaking [...] all things belonging to Grammar, will without labour, and whether we will or no, thrust themselves upon us”.
3.2.4. Krashen
3.2.4.1. You only learn grammar by input
3.3. Input is key
3.4. No instruction or structure
4. Output-based approaches
4.1. Two ways to see output-based approaches
4.1.1. those in which output is fundamentally about practising a particular target feature or features intensively
4.1.2. those in which the output is seen as a general stimulus to acquisition where different learners might actually acquire or notice different features in the course of the same activity.
4.2. DekKeyser
4.2.1. is that learners can, through intensive meaningful practice, develop automatic control of structures which have initially been learned explicitly.
4.3. Swan
4.4. Ellis
4.5. Thornburry
4.6. Cullen
5. Proactive Grammar Teaching
5.1. PPP - Present-practice-produce
5.2. This procedure often involves explicit instruction and active practice
5.3. Ellis
5.3.1. notes the advantages of intensive grammar teaching involving practice: “[...] recent research (e.g. Spada/Lightbown 1999) indicates that even if learners are not ready to learn the targeted structure, intensive grammar teaching can help them progress through the sequence of stages involved in the acquisition of that structure”.
6. Reactive Grammar Teaching
6.1. Long
6.1.1. distinction between “focus on forms” – proactive, planned instruction of discrete items’ and “focus on form”, where grammar points are dealt with as and when they create difficulty in the context of a communicative activity
6.2. Spada and Lightbrown
6.2.1. “Both isolated and integrated FFI [Form-focused instruction] can include explicit feedback on error, metalinguistic terminology, the statement of rules, and explanations”.
7. The interventionist position
7.1. States that focus on form (grammar teaching) is beneficial
7.2. Gregg
7.2.1. Critizes Krashens method
7.3. Scheffler
7.3.1. Adults are more cognitive developed, and it is therefore easier for them to focus on grammar
7.3.2. Problem-solving mechanism is understanding more cognitive
7.4. Swain
7.4.1. argues that output can facilitate acquisition by helping learners to notice gaps between what they want to say and what they are able to say, and by allowing them to test out hypotheses about features they have noticed in input.