INTRODUCTION

This inventory is presented as a reference for both material writers and classroom teachers who are either interested in information on what the current state of textbook activities is or who want to alter the direction of current textbook development with new or different exercise types. The inventory is composed of Heinle and Heinle grammar textbook exercises which were classified into activity type categories by students in the TESL graduate program in the department of Applied Linguistics and ESL at Georgia State University. The project was done with permission from Heinle and Heinle, and we would like to express our gratitude to them for their assistance in obtaining textbooks and for allowing us the freedom to do our own categorization of the activities.

The first step in the process was to look through the textbooks (16 in all) and cut out all the different activities we could find. Differences include both format (e.g., sentence creation and fill-in-the-blank) and also variations of each format (e.g., sentence creation which is completely original and sentence creation in which some of the words are given in the instructions). We began with a list of activity types which we wrote based on our own experiences and what we expected to find. What we actually discovered was that there were some completely new categories that we had not considered and that clear distinctions between some categories were often very hard to draw.

At this point we had to go back and refine our definitions significantly so the boundaries between the groups would be very clear. An example of the difficulty we faced was the distinction between fill-in-the-blank and sentence completion. We started with a classification based on what the activities looked like, and clearly many completion activities look like fill-in-the-blank because a line is drawn after part of a sentence (a prompt) is given. In the process of refining our definitions, however, we had to overcome our own preconceived ideas about what fill-in-the-blank or sentence completion should look like and also examine what the student was being asked to do. Often there is more involved in writing a whole phrase or clause than in writing only one or two words. As a result, sentence completion can be considered more demanding and therefore a cognitive step up from simple fill-in-the-blank. While we felt sentence completion to be simply the end of the fill-in-the-blank continuum, we decided to place it in a separate category based on the consideration of task complexity.

Distinctions between many of the other categories were equally challenging, so we worked with the definition of each category until we felt it represented that group of activities alone and did not cross over to others (e.g., very fine distinctions between fill-in-the-blank and several other categories, including multiple choice and changing word forms). It is important for material writers using this inventory to look at a variety of activities within each category because there are many different ways to construct most activities. We recognize that some overlap between the categories is unavoidable, but we tried to examine both the format of the activity and what the student was being asked to do, then classify the activity based on what was most important in each case. Every activity was considered individually with respect to both of these factors.

After we had established the definitions, we began the task of sorting the activities into their respective categories, then choosing the ones we felt best represented each type. We established subcategories for each significantly different activity we found. In this way we tried not to leave out anything that was particularly distinctive. However, with limited time and space, we could not include every activity, so only a few examples of each type are included in this inventory, these being activities which we considered to be the most representative of each category.

Also, if only one or two examples of an activity were found in all the books but they seemed significantly different or creative, we included them together in an 'Other' category at the end of the inventory. Because they represent such a small percentage of the overall number and types of activities being used in grammar textbooks, we did not feel that they comprised separate categories unto themselves. However, the fact that there are not many of them does not indicate that they should be overlooked in the inventory. Their very uniqueness may inspire others to use some alternative formats or create their own new activities. At this stage we would welcome input from others on additional categories and subcategories which they feel would enhance the overall merit of the inventory.

The issue of grammar in context came up often during our work, and we had a difficult time trying to classify activities which were in context within the same categories as those that were not in context. As a result, we decided to create a separate category called 'Language in Context', in which we included activity types from the majority of categories in the inventory. There were not large numbers of each type of exercise, but we felt they were distinct enough to be presented separately, and the distinguishing feature was the fact that the grammar point being presented or practiced was within a context. The movement in ESL toward integrated language teaching and using more language in context would indicate that this area of grammar will grow in the future, and these types of activities will become more common.

It is important to note that this project does not include any analysis of the activities or ranking of what is better or more effective in the classroom. We simply developed an inventory of types of activities that have already been used in published materials so both writers and teachers can look at what is currently in use. It is for subsequent researchers to study the different categories and develop some correlation between particular activity types and improved learning.

Another significant body of information which is related but is not included in this inventory is activities which involve writing of more than one sentence or composition activities. There is a companion study being done of Heinle and Heinle writing textbooks and an inventory of the activity types, so we chose not to include anything we thought to be crossover material. We do recognize that there is a very close connection between writing and grammar, but we kept our focus on just the activities that were used to practice, teach, or assess grammar points and passed over any writing activities we found in the textbooks.

One important reason for the separation of grammar and writing is the difference in the approach to both selection and implementation of activities for the two types of textbooks. In grammar texts, items to be taught are chosen (i.e., adverbs of frequency) and then activities to enhance or test their acquisition are chosen (e.g., matching) from those available. In writing texts, on the other hand, there is a different tradition concerning activity types, and organization of units. Writing is almost always contextualized and based on a unit topic. Most often the writing activities are based on a reading task, and the writing skills (e.g., summarizing or paraphrasing) are practiced repeatedly in several chapters with different topics. Frequently grammar activities are included in writing texts, but the writing group did not examine them. The focus for both groups was only writing or grammar respectively.

An additional type of instruction we expected to find throughout all the books but did not was information on learning strategies. There is a lot of emphasis in teacher training on helping students learn about the different strategies and practice using them, but the textbooks do not yet seem to reflect this trend. Out of the sixteen textbooks examined, only two dealt with the issue of learning strategies. Applied English Grammar offered some information on strategies and a student self-test in the first chapter, and Grammar Strand I actually had strategies dispersed throughout the whole book and put in boxes to make them stand out. The lack of more explicit strategies was a very surprising discovery for us.

Material writers and teachers working outside the United States should be aware that the materials analyzed for this inventory were aimed at ESL students studying in the U.S. context. All of the textbooks were created for and are used by students in the U.S. Teachers and students in other contexts might find radically different activity types or textbook design, but this information represents a separate inventory of EFL textbooks. The current project does not presume to be representative of all the ESL/EFL textbooks currently in use. Hopefully this product will lead others to do additional analyses of other books so that a more complete picture of the teaching of English all around the world can be established.

Of all the activities we examined, two things seemed to stand out. First was the very small number of true/false and sentence correction activities; only a handful showed up in sixteen books and we had expected there to be as many of these as there were in our other categories. Second was how many activities were clustered in three big categories: fill-in-the-blank, sentence manipulation, and sentence creation. These categories dominated the others by far, and while we expected them to be well represented, we really anticipated a wider distribution of activities across many different types rather than a clustering of activities in only two or three categories. The greatest challenge we faced was trying to define our categories and make each one distinct from the others without much overlap. Even after we made firm decisions about the categories, trying to choose representative exercises forced us to continue to edit and refine until the very end. We could easily have had a hundred more specific subcategories but the task would have been overwhelming, so we limited the breadth of the inventory, focused on the largest categories, and included therein examples which represent a wide variety of different ways to structure activities.

Return to the Table of Content for the Grammar Activities Inventory