Volume 2, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2589-2053
  • E-ISSN: 2589-207x
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Most experts in teaching children state that teaching grammar in the traditional way is inappropriate for children under the age of ten. However, very little research has been done on the effectiveness of consciousness-raising (C-R) with young learners. An action research (AR) project was conducted in a private language school for children, to investigate if a consciousness-raising project would be an effective way to help children notice and correct the ten most commonly made errors they made in their writing of weekly book reports. It was concluded that this consciousness-raising project was effective and a positive experience for children over the age of ten, but sometimes frustrating and less effective for younger learners. The conclusions reached through this action research project led to changes in school policy on error correction, as well as greater efforts to educate the parents of the students.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Altrichter, H., Feldman, A., Posch, P., & Somekh, B.
    (2008) Teachers investigate their work: An introduction to action research across the professions. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Amirian, S. M. R., & Sadeghi, F.
    (2012) The effect of grammar consciousness-raising tasks on EFL learners performance. International Journal of Linguistics, 4(3), 708–720.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Cameron, L.
    (2001) Teaching languages to young learners. Stuttgart, Germany: Ernst Klett Sprachen. 10.1017/CBO9780511733109
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733109 [Google Scholar]
  4. Catling, P. S., & O’Leary, G. F.
    (1952) The chocolate touch. New York, NY: Morrow.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ellis, R.
    (2002) Grammar teaching-practice or consciousness-raising. InJ. C. Richards (Ed.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp.167–174). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511667190.023
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667190.023 [Google Scholar]
  6. Guidelines for Using ELLiE Smiley Questionnaires
    Guidelines for Using ELLiE Smiley Questionnaires 2010 Retrieved from: www.ellieresearch.eu/research.html
  7. Harley, B.
    (2014) Charlie bumpers vs. The teacher of the year. Atlanta, GA: Peachtree Publishing Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Kersten, S.
    (2015) Language development in young learners: The role of formulaic language, 129–145. Hatfield, UK: University of Hertfordshire.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. D.
    (1983) The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. M.
    (2006) How languages are learned [Kindle version]. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Linse, C. T., & Nunan, D.
    (2006) Practical English language teaching: Young learners. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Lobel, A.
    (1992) Frog and toad are friends. London: Heinemann Young Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Pinter, A.
    (2006) Teaching young language learners. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Soseki, N.
    (2013) Young adult Eli readers – English: Botchan + CD. Italy: ELI s.r.l.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Thornbury, S.
    (1997) Reformulation and reconstruction: Tasks that promote ‘noticing’. ELT journal, 51(4), 326–335. 10.1093/elt/51.4.326
    https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/51.4.326 [Google Scholar]
  16. Wiens, K.
    (2012) I won’t hire people who use poor grammar. Here’s why. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2012/07/i-wont-hire-people-who-use-poo
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Wray, A.
    (2005) Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error