The Impact of Grammar Knowledge on Student Proficiency in Malaysian Elementary Schools

Authors

  • Ryan Purnomo Universitas Nahdlatul Ulama Sidoarjo
  • Siti Nur Azizah Universitas Muhammadiyah Purwokerto
  • Ahmad Thoyyib Shofi Universitas Qomaruddin
  • Ghanal Arief Rahmawan Universitas Nahdlatul Ulama Sidoarjo
  • Rizki Ramadhan Universitas Negeri Surabaya
  • Muhammad Fauzi Universitas Nahdlatul Ulama Sidoarjo
  • Tri Septianto Politeknik Negeri Madiun

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37329/cetta.v8i1.3741

Keywords:

Explicit Grammar Knowledge, Implicit Grammar Knowledge, English Language Proficiency

Abstract

This study aims to explore the relationship between explicit grammar knowledge and English proficiency levels among students. The study involved nine Indonesian teaching students who were divided into three groups, namely seven new teachers who were teaching English for the first time in elementary schools and two teachers who regularly taught English for communication. Data were collected through interviews and grammar assignments to assess their explicit grammar knowledge as well as their level of language proficiency. The results of the study showed that there was a tendency to associate explicit grammar knowledge and English proficiency. However, explicit grammatical knowledge is not the main determinant of proficiency level. In contrast, proficiency is more influenced by a combination of factors, such as individual preferences and study habits. Students who engage in implicit learning activities, such as regular communication and exposure to language in context, show higher levels of fluency than students who rely on explicit grammar instruction. Nonetheless, explicit grammatical knowledge remains important, especially in academic contexts that demand accurate and formal use of language. An approach that consciously integrates explicit grammar instruction is recommended to support skill development, especially in academic writing. In this way, implicit learning can improve fluency, while explicit learning favors accuracy and formal structure. In conclusion, combining explicit and implicit grammar knowledge into a balanced approach can improve overall fluency and accuracy. Teachers are advised to incorporate explicit grammar instruction into a context-based curriculum that supports immersive learning to optimize student language development.

References

Bialystok, E. (1998). Coming Of Age In Applied Linguistics. Language Learning, 48(4), 497-518.

Burns, A., & Richards, J. (2012). Pedagogy and Practice in Second Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cook, V. (2001). Second Language Learning And Language Teaching. London: Hodder.

DeKeyser, R. (2003). The Nature Of Implicit And Explicit Knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(2), 327-348.

Ellis, R. (2004). The Definition And Measurement Of L2 Explicit Knowledge. Language learning, 54(2), 227-275.

Ellis, R. (2006). Current Issues In Teaching Grammar: An SLA Perspective. TESOL: Quarterly, 40(1), 83-107.

Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., & Reinders, H. (2009). Implicit And Explicit Knowledge In Second Language Learning, Testing, And Teaching. London: Multilingual Matters.

Ercetin, G., & Alptekin, G. (2011). The Explicit And Implicit Knowledge Distinction And Working Memory: Implications For Second-Language Reading Comprehension. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring Implicit And Explicit Knowledge Of A Second Language: A Psychometric Study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(2), 141-172.

Ercetin, G. (2005). The Relationship Between Explicit And Implicit Knowledge Of Grammar And Second Language Proficiency. System, 33(2), 255-269.

Hu, G. (2002). Psychological Constraints On The Utility Of Metalinguistic Knowledge In Second Language Production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(3), 347-386.

Krashen, S. (2003). Explorations in Language Acquisition and Use. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2013). How Languages Are Learned (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Macaro, E., & Martin, L. (2006). Does Intensive Grammar Instruction Make All The Difference?. Language Teaching Research, 10(3), 297-327.

Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching Grammar In Second Language Classrooms: Integrating Form-Focused Instruction In Communicative Contexts. New York: Routledge.

Renou, J. (2001). An Examination Of The Relationship Between Metalinguistic Awareness And Second-Language Proficiency Of Adult Learners Of French. Language Awareness, 10(4), 248-267.

Roehr, K. (2008). Metalinguistic Knowledge And Language Ability In University-Level L2 learners. Applied Linguistics, 29(2), 173-199.

Swain, M. (2005). The Output Hypothesis: Theory And Research. Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

White, L., & Ranta, L. (2002). L2 Grammar And Language Production: The Role Of Explicit Instruction. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Yoshida, R. (2009). The Role Of Explicit Knowledge Of Grammar In Second Language Learning. Language Learning, 59(2), 231-258.

Downloads

Published

04-01-2025

How to Cite

Purnomo, R. ., Azizah, S. N. ., Shofi, A. T. ., Rahmawan, G. A. ., Ramadhan, R. ., Fauzi, M. ., & Septianto, T. . (2025). The Impact of Grammar Knowledge on Student Proficiency in Malaysian Elementary Schools. Cetta: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 8(1), 154–161. https://doi.org/10.37329/cetta.v8i1.3741

Issue

Section

Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)