Running Head: GRAMMAR TEXTBOOK REVIEW

Critical Review of an English Language Learner Grammar Textbook

Angela Sharpe
Colorado State University

GRAMMAR TEXTBOOK REVIEW

2
Abstract

Grammar Dimensions is a series of ESL/EFL grammar textbooks developed to teach

North American English. This review will focus on the first book in a four book series. Book
one is intended for a high beginning learner. The niche of this textbook series, in the profitdriven course book publishing industry, is to teach language from grammar to grammaring so
that students are able to use grammar forms and structures accurately, meaningfully, and
appropriately (p. xii). Grammaring is defined, in this text, as a skill that enables the learner to
understand and communicatively use grammar beyond a focus on form.
Introduction
This text is unique in the respect that it explicitly focuses on a multi-dimensional
approach to teaching grammar by separating and combining the forms, uses, and meanings of
language and language structures. Specifically, the form dimension concentrates on the
morphosyntactic and lexical patterns of language along with phonemic and graphemic patterns.
The meaning or semantics dimension accounts for both lexical and grammatical meaning. The
use or pragmatics dimension is concerned with language use in context. For example, many
textbooks that teach the inflectional genitive form {-s} do not describe its meaning or use beyond
showing possession. By separating form, meaning, and use, Grammar Dimensions teaches
learners that the genitive form can also have a meaning that indicates description, amount,
relationship, or part of a whole. With respect to use, Grammar Dimensions helps learners to
realize that showing possession in English can be accomplished with structures other than the
genitive {-s}, and the choice of one over the other depends on the social and linguistic context.
Dealing with use conditions early in learning can also help a learner to understand when to use
forms, such as modals, phrasal modals, and negative comparison, over other forms based upon
context and audience. This three dimensional framework of teaching grammar represents a
bottom-up approach to teaching and learning language. The main goal, then, of Grammar
Dimensions book one, and the main criteria against which I will evaluate this text, is to help
students communicate meaningfully in English by recognizing the interrelatedness of grammar
forms, their meanings, and their uses according to conditions and contexts.
Evaluative framework
I chose to review Grammar Dimensions, and I am framing my selection of criteria, based
upon my desire to utilize a communicative approach in my classroom with a focus on form,

GRAMMAR TEXTBOOK REVIEW

meaning, and use for fluency development. The evaluative framework of criteria comes from
my interpretation of the communicative language approach to teaching and language learning,
and the subsequent content that I feel should be present in a grammar textbook in order to engage
English language learners in purposeful and meaningful communication. I define the
communicative approach in a high beginner classroom as one which emphasizes function over
form, and fluency over accuracy. Learners need to interact in the language and with each other
in order to experience communication successes and the breakdowns that require them to
negotiate for meaning, reformulate, and reevaluate their interlanguage hypotheses; the approach
encourages learners to learn through speaking by emphasizing language use over the rules for
language usage.
Of the 25 units in this textbook, I will focus on units 22 and 23 as they deal with the
grammatical concept of comparison, a topic which I have conducted focused research. The key
criteria from which I will review the text, and the respective units, are summarized as:

The rationale of why this book was developed in the first place;
The intended user of this textbook;
The interactivity of the content to accommodate the communicative approach; and
The accuracy, authenticity, completeness, and appropriateness of material
covering the forms, uses, and meanings of comparison with an emphasis on
comparative forms and structures
The rational of the textbook

The course book publishing industry is a multi-million dollar industry. Teachers,

administrators, and students are the targeted consumers of this industry. Textbooks, then, should
be viewed as commercial products whose development is often more influenced by profitability
than pedagogical demands. According to the front matter of Grammar Dimensions, the rationale
of this textbook seems to be a perception, by the authors, that before the publication of this
series, educators associated the instruction of grammar with teaching form at the expense of
deemphasizing communication which they associated with meaning. This series, therefore, is
founded on the rationale of pedagogically combining the teaching of grammar through the three
dimensions of form, use, and meaning, while utilizing a communicative approach so that
students will recognize the interdependence of grammar forms for meaningful communication
according to context. As this textbook says nothing about accuracy, it is unclear how much this is

GRAMMAR TEXTBOOK REVIEW

emphasized as a learning outcome in using this series. The textbook series also seems to be
marketed just as much for helping teachers teach grammar for meaningful communication, as it
does for helping students learn grammar to communicate meaningfully.
The intended user of this textbook
Book one of Grammar Dimensions includes a chart which clarifies the targeted level of
students as high-beginner, however, this level does not appear to be backed by any assessed or
standardized levels such as those identified by, for example, the American Council on the
Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL). The grammar level of the textbook is at the sentence
and sub-sentence level. The major skills emphasized in this text are listening and speaking.
There is no mention of an intended context for this grammar textbook, such as academic English,
English for specific purposes, or General English. It is difficult, then, to unequivocally determine
the intended level, context, or potential transferability between learning contexts that this
textbook would be ideal to teach grammar. This equals to a lot of guesswork and trial and error
on behalf of a teacher and may ultimately not be in the best interest of, or, meet the needs of the
learner.
Example sentences and vocabulary
The example sentences and the vocabulary used in each unit do not have an identifiable
source. Many textbooks derive their vocabulary through qualitative and quantitative analyses of
representative corpora. Academic word lists, such as Coxheads (2000) academic word list or the
General Service List formulated by West (1953), are examples of word lists which include word
forms that are frequency based. These lists include word families analyzed from quantitative
frequency counts along with qualitative frequency distributions from various registers, genres,
and text types. The example sentences, in Grammar Dimensions, do not originate from corpora
and therefore may or may not represent authentic patterns of language and grammar use. The
absence of quantitative or qualitative measurements as a means of displaying representative and
authentic language forms and structures complicates the issues of intended user and intended
context for which this textbook is ideal.
Comparison using adjectives and adverbs: appropriateness and completeness

GRAMMAR TEXTBOOK REVIEW

This book includes 25 units, an appendix, and an index. Each unit starts with clearly
stated unit goals. Unit 22 Comparison Using Adjectives, for example, has four goals which
appear in a blue box on the first page of every unit (p. 362). The goals are stated as a checklist in
the imperative form, for example, use the (regular and irregular) comparative form of adjectives
in statements; ask questions using comparative adjectives; express similarities and differences
with adjectives using asas; make polite comparisons. Each unit also starts with an opening
task. The opening task for unit 22 pertains to using comparison forms to shop for an apartment.
Students are given two advertisements for two different apartments along with a list of
adjectives.
Each unit is further broken down into a focus and a dimension of grammar. Focus 1 in
this unit concentrates on the form dimension of grammar through the introduction of the
comparative forms of adjectives (p. 364-368). The rules for when to use the {er} inflectional
ending and when to use the periphrastic forms of more or less, before the base form of the
adjective, are outlined in charts according to the number of syllables in the base adjective The
charts are arranged with an example sentence in column 1, the base form of the adjective in
column 2, the comparative form with the inflectional {er} ending added to the base form in
column 3 along with the rules for adding the {er} inflectional ending (i.e. spelling) according to
the ending of the base form adjective. A note on use is given in a separate chart which states:
that adjectives with two syllables can take the inflectional ending or the periphrastic form,
comparative forms may vary according to formal and informal English use, and when making a
comparison, two similar things should be the subjects of the comparison. An explanation of
irregular comparative forms states that good, bad, and far have the irregular comparative forms
of better, worse, and farther. The explanation also states that the use of much before a
comparative form makes a comparison stronger, I assume they mean as a matter of degree. A
series of exercises follows the focus section including a sentence completion exercise and fill in
the gap with the appropriate comparative form exercise and another exercise similar to the
opening task where students compare the advertisements of two products and form sentences to
make comparisons between the products. Exercise 4 requires students to make comparisons
based on statistics about two different U.S. cities in order to decide where they would rather live.
This exercise gives students the opportunity to use comparative forms, critical thinking and

GRAMMAR TEXTBOOK REVIEW

opinion statements. The use of pictures in each exercise supports learners in making formmeaning connections.
Focus 2 (p. 369-370) is also centered on the form dimension through an explanation, and
subsequent exercises on yes/no and Wh-question formation with comparative adjectives. There
are three exercises that follow for written practice with question formation. This section could
be extended, in my opinion, to include the use dimension by detailing for learners the conditions
which dictate the choice between yes/no and Wh-questions with comparative forms.
Focus 3 (p. 371-373) combines the form and meaning dimensions and contrasts the as
+adjective + as structure to mean two things are equal or the same from the not as +adjective +
as structure to mean that there is a difference between two things. Interestingly, one of the
exercises within this focus gives 5 idiomatic expressions that use the as.as comparison. There
is a picture depicting one construal of the meaning from which students can infer that meaning.
On the bottom of page 373, five literal interpretations of the expressions are given, which could
help learners to make the connection that the meaning of idiomatic statements comes from the
sum of all the parts of the statement, not through individual word meanings. For example,
Look at the baby sleeping in the stroller matches with as snug as a bug in a rug, however a
picture of a cat curled up and sleeping is shown next to the expression which I think may confuse
learners as to how the literal and idiomatic meanings are connected. In an empirical study,
Boers, Eyckmans, Kappel, Stengers, and Demecheleer (2006) found that a learners use of
idiomatic expressions strongly correlates to their perceived level of proficiency, in that the more
idiomatic expressions a learner is able to produce the higher their proficiency level is perceived
by interlocutors. Therefore, I think that idiomatic expressions are important linguistic structures
to teach learners, however, I found this texts handling of them a bit confusing. I do think,
however, that the comparative structure is suitable for introducing students to idiomatic
expressions, but the choice of which expressions to teach should be based on frequency (e.g.
from a corpus). I also think it is important to clarify to students which register or genre the
idioms being taught are associated with so that they may increase their sociolinguistic
competence while increasing their language ability. This information would also help to
interrelate the use dimension and introduce focus 4.
Focus 4 (p. 374-375) centers on the use dimension detailing how to make polite
comparisons. In the first explanation, two semantically similar examples sentences are

GRAMMAR TEXTBOOK REVIEW

juxtaposed by comparing the adj + than structure with the not as + adjective + as negative
equative structure, with the second structure explained as more polite than the first. The
following activity has students work in pairs where one student is Blunt Betty and the other
student is Polite Polly, the two must make statements according to the politeness of their
character. This exercise allows for good communicative practice with comparative forms and
their uses.
Unit 23 has an identical format as unit 22 but deals with comparison using adverbs. The
exercises in the unit seem to require more reading and writing from students, but the unit is
shorter with only three foci. Both units conclude with a Use Your English section, referred to
by the authors as the purple pages. This section includes activities that students can do on their
own or a teacher could assign as homework. Each purple pages section ends with a reflection
activity where students must use their form, use, and meaning knowledge from the chapter to
self-assess the growth of their language skills. In my teaching experience, I have found that very
motivated students would benefit from the reflective activities in the purple pages and, in turn,
with this population of students, these pages can contribute to the development of learning
strategies and can support learner autonomy. However, these pages may not function for
students who take a less active role in their learning.
Sufficiency for a communicative approach to teaching
This textbook is a grammar textbook and is not intended to teach vocabulary, however, I
feel that some of the vocabulary, especially the adjectives and adverbs themselves, would require
extra explanation which may impede the acquisition of the grammatical structures by the learner.
Based upon their learn a little, use a lot principle, Nation & Newton (2009) advise teachers to
not overload beginning learners with too much new language and instead give beginning learners
plenty of opportunities to gain control over small amounts of new language before introducing
more. I also feel that the exercises do not offer enough group and pair work and the teacher
would have to provide ancillary activities such as role plays or meaning-focused dialogues to
give learners an opportunity to use receptive and productive language skills, to learn from one
another, and experiment and make mistakes without a penalty. Hypothesis testing, according to
Swains (1985) output hypothesis, involves the learner testing new language and then confirming
or modifying it on the basis of feedback or perceived success (Nation & Newton, 2009, pg. 6).

GRAMMAR TEXTBOOK REVIEW

Likewise, interaction between learners, and interaction between learners and teachers, both serve
an important function in allowing learners to negotiate with each other, and with a teacher to
clarify meaning. The feedback that a learner receives during negotiation improves the
comprehensibility of the input and can result in a more meaningful output. In short, I think the
comparative units are accurate and appropriate but maybe not as thorough or communicatively
based as I would treat the subject.
Conclusion
Some teachers use instructional materials as their primary teaching resource. Some
programs require teachers to use pre-selected instructional materials as their primary resource.
For the purpose of this evaluation, I reviewed Grammar Dimensions in terms of its role as a
primary material from which high beginners could begin to integrate the dimensions of form,
use, and meaning. This textbook would be one I that I would consider for use as my primary
instructional material for language teaching and learning, however, I would tweak and
supplement the activities to make them more communicative. Although the text describes its
approach as communicative, McGrath (2013) describes materials, in terms of the communicative
approach, as those which stimulate a desire in the learners to learn a language in order to
understand and be understood, which in my opinion, implicates the language learning material to
be engaging and encourage interaction, both qualities that I feel Grammar Dimensions is slightly
lacking. Due to a lack of clearly defined context for which this book is ideal, it is difficult for me
to envision this text as a primary classroom material. Although the text does not include any
corpus derived language or authentic material, it does allude to scenarios that pertain to real
world situations, like apartment and job searching. More authentic language examples could
benefit the learner by exposing them to formulaic sequences and collocations, which, if
incorporated in real world scenarios, could provide learners with relevant language forms, uses,
and meanings inside and outside of the classroom.
The absence of corpus-based authentic language examples in the text, an unspecified
context for learning, and a generic cultural element are reasons for my resistance to this using
this textbook as the singular text for teaching listening and speaking skills in a high-beginner
classroom. McGrath (2013) and Tomlinson et al. (2003) point out that course books cannot
accommodate the diversity of each learner, and likewise they cannot engage every learning style;

GRAMMAR TEXTBOOK REVIEW

as inanimate objects of study for animate subjects they are innately insufficient at making use of
the learners ability to learn from physical, emotional, and conceptual experiences of using and
doing in the language. Similarly, Pienemann (1989) states that the classroom is only one source
of language learning with the other being the unguided learning which takes place outside of
the classroom in the target language; it follows then that a classroom that builds upon and
incorporates these learning sources will be more successful in guiding students to acquisition.
To this end, I think this course book has advantages in its dimensions approach, but the activities
are not as communicatively focused as I would expect and the lack of authentic language
somewhat inhibits a learners ability to understand meaning and use outside of the classroom.

References
Boers, F., Eyckmans, J., Kappel, J., Stengers, H., & Demecheleer, M. (2006). Formulaic
sequences and perceived oral proficiency: Putting a lexical approach to the test.
Language Teaching Research, 10(3), 245-261.
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL quarterly, 34(2), 213-238.
McGrath, I. (2013). Teaching materials and the roles of EFL/ESL teachers: Practice and theory.
London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Nation, I.S.P., Newton, J. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking. New York:
Routledge.
Pienemann, M. (1989). Is language teachable? Psycholinguistic experiments and hypotheses.
Applied linguistics, 10(1), 52-79. Retrieved from:
http://sun.iwu.edu/~cisabell/courses/spanish410/pienemann.pdf
Savignon, S. J. (1991). Communicative language teaching: State of the art. TESOL quarterly,
25(2), 261-278. Retrieved from: http://quicklinks.library.colostate.edu/?q=sbzwi
Sheldon, L. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT Journal, 42(4), 237-246.
Retrieved from: http://quicklinks.library.colostate.edu/?q=sbzwim
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and
comprehensible output in its development. In S.M. Gass, & C.G. Madden (Eds.), Input
in
second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

GRAMMAR TEXTBOOK REVIEW

10

Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., &
Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating Instruction in Response to Student Readiness,
Interest, and Learning Profile in Academically Diverse Classrooms: A Review of
Literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2), 119-145. Retrieved from:
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ787917.pdf
West, M., & West, M. P. (Eds.). (1953). A general service list of English words: with semantic
frequencies and a supplementary word-list for the writing of popular science and
technology. Addison-Wesley Longman Limited.