Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Grammar Proficiency
of Colegio de San Juan
de Letran Calamba
College Students
Dulce T. Barraquio
Human Resource Department
Colegio de San Juan de Letran Calamba
116
NEXO VOLUME 1
Abstract
T
his undertaking quantitatively assessed the grammar proficiency of
Colegio de San Juan de Letran Calamba college students to identify
weaknesses and eventually improve instruction and the quality of
learning of students.
117
Letran Calamba Peer-Reviewed Journal
118
NEXO VOLUME 1
Introduction
Former senator and respected academician Edgardo Angara
(2002) forwards that Filipinos have long stood out for their competence
and proficiency in English. Today, however, he laments that many
Filipinos, even college graduates, are no longer fluent in speaking,
reading, and writing in English. The slide in the Filipinos competence
and proficiency in English distressingly comes at a time when the world
is effectively adopting English as a global language (San Miguel, 2006).
Senator Herrera (2004) asserts that being good English speakers gives
Filipino workers a competitive advantage in the employment market.
He highlights, however, that other countries are fast catching up on
the Philippines with regard to English advantage.
119
Letran Calamba Peer-Reviewed Journal
120
NEXO VOLUME 1
Theoretical Framework
T
his study was anchored on two theories that are of value in the present:
theory of Language Assessment used by the Center for Advanced
Research on Language Acquisition of the University of Minnesota and
Rod Ellis Grammar Teaching Theory (2002).
121
Letran Calamba Peer-Reviewed Journal
his idea by forwarding that explicit instruction can help in many ways:
improve language accuracy, facilitate interlanguage development,
and destabilize interlanguage grammars that have fossilized. Input-
flooding will not lead to fossilization of interlanguage grammars,
provided that explicit instruction and feedback are given.
Conceptual Framework
T
he conceptual framework of this study was patterned after the language
evaluation model of Genessee and Upshure (1996), which highlights the
needs of learners as important element in planning for instruction and
assessment. The paradigm can be adapted to needs assessment of any subject
area or degree program. Results of the grammar proficiency assessment will
give the English subject area an essential view of how the teaching of English
(outcomes) in the Colegio has aided the students knowledge in grammar. The
results of assessment will give the English subject area empirical evidence to
substantiate reforms in the curriculum, syllabi, and instruction delivery. These
changes could also lead to amendments in the goals set by the subject area.
Because the paradigm is cyclical, the changes put into place will, after some
time, be evaluated through another assessment.
122
NEXO VOLUME 1
Page 134
Goals
Instruction Assessment
Outcomes
Page 127
y 85
80
65
80.19 74.25 77.62 80.91 76.22 72.71 81.71 75.03 77.9 70.91
Parts of Sentence Plural Nouns Possessive Pronoun S-V Verb Mood & Adj. & Adv. Pronoun- Sentence
Speech Structure Nouns Usage Agreement Tense Antecedent Construction
Agreement
x
Objectives
L
ong (1998) provides evidence demonstrating that students need to
become explicitly aware of grammar to improve their language learning.
Adnan(2002) forwards that support for form-focused instruction also
comes from educationalists and applied linguists for similar reasons: it increases
accuracy and accelerates the process of acquisition. Similarly, Nunan (2001)
strongly supports grammar teaching and concludes that grammar exists to
enable us to mean and without grammar it is impossible to communicate
beyond a very rudimentary level. Purpura (2001) notes that grammar assessment,
despite changes in grammar teaching approaches, has remained firmly rooted
in structural linguistics, discrete-point measurement, and dichotomous scoring
methods.
124
NEXO VOLUME 1
6.1. writing;
6.2. speaking;
6.3. word choice/vocabulary;
6.4. reading comprehension; and
6.5. listening comprehension, and
125
Letran Calamba Peer-Reviewed Journal
Methodology
T
his undertaking utilized the descriptive method of research to
quantitatively assess the grammar proficiency of Letran Calamba college
students. A 50-item teacher-made test was used to identify grammar
difficulties to improve instruction and the quality of learning for students. It also
presented the demographic profile of students as well as their perceptions on
the importance of grammar to the use of correct English. With a 5% sampling
error, 359 students were tested across all departments and all year levels.
Likewise included was total enumeration of all the nine full-time and three part-
time college faculty.
126
NEXO VOLUME 1
Page 134
Goals
Results and Discussion
Overall, the grammar proficiency level of Letran Calamba
college students scored a grade of 76.69%, which means that they
need improvement in grammar. Among the grammar areas tested, the
highest Instruction
scores were on verb mood and tense followed by possessive
Assessment
nouns, rated 81.71% and 80.91%, Outcomes respectively. The lower scoring
areas were subject-verb agreement and sentence construction, rated
at 72.71% and 70.91%, respectively. These findings conform to the
findings in the study conducted by San Miguel (2006) regarding the
spoken English proficiency of Letran college students. Similarly, her
studyFigure
revealed thatparadigm
1. Conceptual the students were deficient in areas of subject-verb
agreement and sentence structure.
Page 127
y 85
80
75
70
65
80.19 74.25 77.62 80.91 76.22 72.71 81.71 75.03 77.9 70.91
Parts of Sentence Plural Nouns Possessive Pronoun S-V Verb Mood & Adj. & Adv. Pronoun- Sentence
Speech Structure Nouns Usage Agreement Tense Antecedent Construction
Agreement
x
127
Letran Calamba Peer-Reviewed Journal
y
77.5
76
75.5
75
75.95% 76.27% 77.34
A/S C/A 77.36% Nursing
Engrng
128
NEXO VOLUME 1
Page 129
78
x represents the course
77.5 y represents the grammar
proficiency level in percent
77
76.5
76
75.5
75
74.5
74
76.84% 77.80% 75.54% 76.24 75.77%
1st y ear 2nd y ear 3rd y ear 4th y ear 5th y ear
x
129
Letran Calamba Peer-Reviewed Journal
Page 130
y 77.5
77
x represents the gender
76
75.5
77.10% 76.28%
Females Males
x
130
NEXO VOLUME 1
131
Letran Calamba Peer-Reviewed Journal
Page 133
Table 2. Percentage of importance of grammar to correct use of English according to year levels.
YEAR LEVELS Extremely Important Undecided Slightly Not
important important important
1st Year 50.7 46.4 2.9 0 0
2nd Year 58.8 41.3 0 0 0
3rd Year 56.0 44.0 0 0 0
4th Year 64.8 33.8 1.4 0 0
5th Year 59.1 40.9 0
OVERALL AVERAGE PERCENTAGE 56.5 42.1 1.4 0 0
Page 133
132
Table 3. Percentage of importance of grammar to correct use of English according to gender.
GENDER Extremely Important Undecided Slightly Not
important important important
Female 65.2 34.2 .5 0 0
Table 1. Percentage of importance of grammar to correct use of English according to degree programs.
Table 1. Percentage of importance of grammar to correct use of English according to degree programs.
Table
Page 2.133
DEGREE Percentage
PROGRAMS of importance
Extremelyof grammar to the correctSlightly
Important Undecided use of Not
important important important
English according to year levels
Arts & Sciences 57.1 39.0 3.9 0 0
Commerce
Table & Accountancy
2. Percentage 62.2 to correct37.0
of importance of grammar 8.0
use of English according to year 0levels. 0
Engineering 56.6 42.5 9.0 0 0
YEAR LEVELS Extremely Important Undecided Slightly Not
Nursing 44.1 55.9 0 0 0
important important important
OVERALL AVERAGE PERCENTAGE 56.5 42.1 1.4 0 0
1st Year 50.7 46.4 2.9 0 0
2nd Year 58.8 41.3 0 0 0
3rd Year 56.0 44.0 0 0 0
4th Year 64.8 33.8 1.4 0 0
Page 133
5th Year 59.1 40.9 0
OVERALL AVERAGE PERCENTAGE 56.5 42.1 1.4 0 0
Table 2. Percentage of importance of grammar to correct use of English according to year levels.
YEAR LEVELS Extremely Important Undecided Slightly Not
important important important
Page
1st Year 133 50.7 46.4 2.9 0 0
2nd Year 58.8 41.3 0 0 0
3rd Year
Table 56.0 to correct 44.0
3. Percentage of importance of grammar 0
use of English according 0
to gender. 0
4th Year GENDER 64.8
Extremely 33.8
Important 1.4
Undecided 0
Slightly 0
Not
5th Year 59.1
important 40.9 0 important important
Female
OVERALL AVERAGE PERCENTAGE 65.2
56.5 34.2
42.1 .5
1.4 0 0
Male 47.5 50.3 2.3 0 0
OVERALL AVERAGE PERCENTAGE 56.5 42.1 1.4 0 0
Table 3. Percentage of importance of grammar to the correct use of
Page 133
English according to gender
Table 3. Percentage of importance of grammar to correct use of English according to gender.
GENDER Extremely Important Undecided Slightly Not
important important important
Female 65.2 34.2 .5 0 0
Male 47.5 50.3 2.3 0 0
OVERALL AVERAGE PERCENTAGE 56.5 42.1 1.4 0 0
133
Letran Calamba Peer-Reviewed Journal
134
NEXO VOLUME 1
Page 150
135
Letran Calamba Peer-Reviewed Journal
3. The Arts and Sciences students are the poorest in the area of
subject-verb agreement compared to students from other
departments. The fifth year students are the poorest in
identifying parts of speech compared to students in other year
levels. Letran Calamba female college students are better than
the male Students in identifying the parts of speech.
136
NEXO VOLUME 1
137
Letran Calamba Peer-Reviewed Journal
138
NEXO VOLUME 1
Literatures Cited
A. Books
139
Letran Calamba Peer-Reviewed Journal
Long, M.H. & P. Robinsons (1998). Focus on Form, Theory, Research, and
Practice in C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds) Focus on Form in Classroom
Language Acquisition. Campbridge: CUP.
B. Researches
C. Journals/Magazines
140
NEXO VOLUME 1
Bilgera, N. (2004). Interface of English 100 and 101. Newslett. Vol. 13,
No. 39. Institutional Communications Office dela Salle, Dasmarias,
Cavite.
D. Educational Policy
141
Letran Calamba Peer-Reviewed Journal
142