Why does not the British Council in India teach English against a syllabus of grammar?

Question

The British Council in India is the only dependable organization for teaching English to countles toiling and hard-pressed Indians. But it teaches English without supplying syllabus of grammar to these hapless and despaired people. How can we teach English without helping our students in preparing their own handbooks containing rules of grammar? I wrote the British Coucil atleast ten times during the last five years, but I always suffered in dearth of reply. This rather unbelievable stance of a philanthropic entity reminds me Mathew Arnond's words of enchanting veneration about Shakespeare : "Others abide by our questions; thou are free"
. The British Council should not assume the role of the greatest maker of English prose by not supplying the syllabus of grammar and by not replying to queiries of English teaches like me who feed their families by teaching correct and refined English. I shall be much grateful if I receive reply from the Headquarters of the British Council.

Answer 1

I do not know what the British Council's reasoning is, however, there is no research that shows that grammar study actually improves languge, except on a short-term basis!

Krashen's theories of language acquistion posit that to apply grammar we have consciously learned instead of unconsciously acquired (learning vs. acquistion) we need to meet the following condidions:

1. know the rule
2. be aware that the rule applies
3.have time to access and apply the rule
4. care to apply the rule (note the atrocious spelling and grammar on this site. People choose not to take care with their spelling and grammar)

Generally the only times that this occurs is during grammar tests, or during the editing phrase of writing. I remain a fairly hesitant speaker of French because I have never had a true immersion experience and I learned through a grammar syllabus--I keep thinking about how to spell the various silent verb conjugations as I speak!

Moreover, the tradition order of teaching grammar topics (such as keeping only to the present tense for the first year of study) has little or no relation to the actual order of acquisition. Research shows that people acquire grammar in a second languge when it carries meaning. For speakers of English, for example, gender agreement carries little or no meaning and is rather late acquired. The difference in Spanish between ser and estar carries little meaning for an English speaker and, while it is a first year topic in general, it is very late-acquired.

Any standard text will give you the standard grammar topics and the tradtional order that they are taught and you can create your own syllabus.

I'm sorry that this is so long. I was trained to teacher language from a grammar-base, and after years of disappointment in my students I did some research and it was not my students' lack of zeal for studying, it was the method. Since I've swtiched to a more input-based methodology my students' grammar, vocabulary, comprehension and spelling have improved.

Answer 2

Wow, they need to start with you for sure. Send them what you wrote, its very persuasive since your English grammar is atrocious.

Answer 3

Write to their headquarters:

British Council
10 Spring Gardens
London
SW1A 2BN
UK

Answer 4

Q1 All are plausible yet no. 3 may be better as "How a lot is the taxi fare to Taipei Railway Station?" So corrected, this may be how i actual may placed the question. Q2 no longer "this" yet "those", or purely "I ought to pick to modify one thousand money into money" ---yet may you quite need one thousand money' properly worth of money? "damage" doesn't be used in this sense contained in the united kingdom, in spite of the indisputable fact that purely probably "damage down" may: "I ought to pick to break those thousand money down into money." be conscious that "i'd like" stands for "i'd like", yet, a minimum of in south east England, it truly is truly better everyday to apply "ought to" instead of "may" contained in the first individual..