Article published in:
Pedagogical Linguistics
Vol. 4:1 (2023) ► pp. 77–97

Is ‘more’ really more?

Results of a study on extended German grammar teaching

| Ruhr-Universität Bochum
| Ruhr-Universität Bochum
| Ruhr-Universität Bochum
| Ruhr-Universität Bochum

Starting from general problems of teaching grammar in the subject of German language as well as from basic assumptions of so-called ‘more-is-more’ didactics, we discuss demands to continue teaching grammar after the eighth grade (in Germany, that is the eighth year of school). We then present a quasi-experimental study which was carried out in grades 8 to 12 with the same participants for the purpose of finding out whether providing additional and repeated grammar teaching in the subject of German language even after the eighth grade results in improved and explicit long-term German grammar knowledge. At least at one measurement time point during the study, N = 821 students from six different schools were participating. As a crucial result it turned out that additional and repeated grammar teaching resulted in an improvement in explicit grammar knowledge both during individual grades and across grades. These study results support the demands of ‘more-is-more’ didactics, they however require long-term assessment concerning a number of problems, which are discussed.

Keywords: grammar teaching, German grammar, extended teaching
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Exemplary subject area
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Design and random sample
    • 3.2Interventions
    • 3.3Test instruments
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Preliminary analyses
    • 4.2Effects of the intervention
  • 5.Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 04 August 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/pl.21010.rot
References
Alderson, J. & Hudson, R.
(2013) The metalinguistics knowledge of undergraduate students of English language or linguistics. Language Awareness, 221, 320–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S.
(2014) Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 671, 1–48.Google Scholar
Becker, K. F.
(1833) Ueber die Methode des Unterrichts in der deutschen Sprache, als Einleitung zu dem Leitfaden für den ersten Unterricht in der deutschen Sprachlehre. Frankfurt.Google Scholar
Dürscheid, Christa
(2007) Damit das grammatische Abendland nicht untergeht. Grammatikunterricht auf der Sekundarstufe II. In K.-M. Köpke & A. Ziegler (Eds.), Grammatik in der Universität und für die Schule. Theorie, Empirie und Modellbildung (pp. 45–65). Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elsner, D.
(2021) Knowledge about grammar and the role of epistemological beliefs. Pedagogical linguistics. Available online: 23 April 2021. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eisenberg, Peter & Menzel, Wolfgang
(1995): Grammatikwerkstatt. Praxis Deutsch 221, 14–93.Google Scholar
Fabricius-Hansen, C. & Sæbø, K. J.
(2004) In a mediative mood: The semantics of German reportive subjunctive. Natural Language Semantics, 121, 213–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fabricius-Hansen, C., Solfjeld, K. & Pitz, A.
(2018) Der Konjunktiv. Formen und Spielräume. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Glinz, H.
(1952) Die innere Form des Deutschen. Eine neue deutsche Grammatik. Bern: Francke.Google Scholar
Haag, L. & Stern, E.
(2000) Non scholae sed vitae discimus? Auf der Suche nach globalen und spezifischen Transfereffekten des Lateinunterrichts. Zeitschrift für padägogische Psychologie, 141, 146–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hildebrand, R.
(1925) Vom deutschen Sprachunterricht in der Schule und von deutscher Erziehung und Bildung überhaupt. Leipzig: Wiegandt.Google Scholar
Hudson, R.
(2020) Towards a pedagogical linguistics. Pedagogical Linguistics, 11, 8–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Köller, W.
(1983) Funktionaler Grammatikunterricht. Tempus, Genus, Modus: Wozu wurde das erfunden? Baltmannsweiler: Schneider.Google Scholar
Langlotz, M.
(2019) Grammatikdidaktik. In B. Rothstein & C. Müller-Brauers (Eds.), Kernbegriffe der Sprachdidaktik Deutsch. Ein Handbuch (pp. 122–145). Hohengehren: Schneider.Google Scholar
Myhill, D.
(2018) Grammar as a meaning-making resource for improving writing. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 181, 1–21.Google Scholar
Rothstein, B.
(2010) Sprachintegrativer Grammatikunterricht. Zum Zusammenspiel von Sprachwissenschaft und Sprachdidaktik im Mutter- und Fremdsprachenunterricht. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Sangster, P., Anderson, C. & O’Hara, P.
(2013) Perceived and actual levels of knowledge about language amongst primary and secondary student teachers: Do they know what they think they know? Language Awareness, 221, 293–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmitz, U.
(2003) Satzzeigen. Wie oft kann das grammatische Abendland noch untergehen? Mitteilungen des Deutschen Germanistenverbandes, 501, 452–458.Google Scholar
Schmitz, A., Gräsel, C. & Rothstein, B.
(2017) Students’ genre expectations and the effects of text cohesion on reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 301, 1115–1135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwenk, H.
(1976) Welchen Sinn hat der Grammatikunterricht in der Schule? Diskussion Deutsch, 291, 211–227.Google Scholar
Staubach, K., Ripp, S., Hagemann, J. & Rothstein, B.
(2017) Sind Selbstlerneinheiten ein geeignetes Mittel zur nachhaltigen Vermittlung grammatischer Kenntnisse? In D. Goltschnigg (Ed.), Wege des Deutschen. Deutsche Sprache und Germanistik-Studium aus internationaler Sicht (pp. 81–94). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Struckmeier, V.
(2020) Why are there growing divisions between traditional grammars and theoretical and experimental works (and how can they be overcome)? Pedagogical Linguistics, 11, 211–233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thieroff, R.
(2010) Mood in German. In B. Rothstein & R. Thieroff, Rolf (Eds.), Mood in the Languages of Europe (pp. 133–156). Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thißen, J.
(2017) Metasprache und Grammatikunterricht. Eine empirische Untersuchung in den Sekundarstufen I und II. Hohengehren: Schneider.Google Scholar
Trotzke, A.
(2020) Pädagogische Linguistik – jetzt! Linguistische Berichte, 2611, 3–24.Google Scholar
Van Rijt, J., Wijnands, A., & Coppen, P.-A.
(2019) Dutch teachers’ beliefs on linguistic concepts and reflective judgement in grammar teaching. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 191, 1–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Dovalil, Vít & Adriana Hanulíková
2022. Grammar and variation in the classroom. Pedagogical Linguistics DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 02 january 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.