SPIN! GRAMMAR, VOCABULARY, AND WRITING
Pedagogical Rationale
Components Overview
SPIN! Grammar, Vocabulary, and Writing is a supplementary English language series for
children consisting of six levels, each of which includes a Student Book, Teacher’s Guide, Audio
Program, and reproducible Picture Cards.
Student Book
The Student Book contains ten units and five review units. Each unit features an interesting and
practical theme that provides a meaningful context for grammar and vocabulary study through
the four skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing). Pictures, grammar boxes, language
models, and carefully controlled exercises facilitate learning in a clear, non-threatening way.
Each unit also includes a chant and a game to reinforce and extend target language and grammar.
Teacher’s Guide
The Teacher’s Guide features complete lesson plans, each with a class warm-up, step-by-step
procedures for each exercise or activity, and additional games and activities to extend the lesson
and reinforce the material students have studied. Answers to activities and review unit audio
scripts are included.
Audio Program
The Audio Program consists of a recording on cassette or CD. Vocabulary words, sentences, new
grammar patterns, and chants are modeled by both children and adult native English speakers . In
the later levels, dictation is also included.
Picture Cards
These playing card-sized Picture Cards appear at the back of the Teacher’s Guide. Utilized in
both lesson and expansion activities, they can be reproduced in sets as needed for individual,
pair, and group work.
Instructional Design
As the title of the series indicates, the primary focus is on grammar, vocabulary, and writing.
Their treatment within a unit unfolds as follows.
Vocabulary
The first page of each unit introduces key vocabulary in a meaningful visual context related to
the unit theme. Never simply decorative; each piece of art introduces a new word or concept in a
clear way. This theme-related vocabulary is then used throughout the rest of the unit (and
consistently recycled in later units and levels as well). SPIN! takes care to target vocabulary
appropriate to the developmental age of the children. Very young learners focus on concrete
vocabulary items that relate to objects they can see and touch from the real world around them.
They deal with words on a basic level and tend to learn words as related collections (swim, fish,
water, catch). Children using the later levels of SPIN! are better able to handle abstract words
and concepts that are more removed from their own world, and tend to learn words as lexical sets
1
SPIN! GRAMMAR, VOCABULARY, AND WRITING: PEDAGOGICAL RATIONALE
in categories (communication technology: computer, fax, cell phone, TV). As the students mature
cognitively, they encounter new ways of learning and using vocabulary. For example, in levels C
through F, students gradually learn about vocabulary development tools such as compound
words, synonyms and antonyms, prefixes and suffixes, collocations, and different vocabulary
organizers.
Grammar
To learn successfully, students need systematic exposure over time to grammatical structures in a
variety of meaningful contexts. SPIN! provides conceptually appropriate attention to grammar.
For the younger children, due to their level of cognitive development, grammar is not presented
as a set of explicit rules and forms to be analyzed. Instead, the children are lead to “notice” and
attend to features of grammar in the language they are used to seeing in familiar songs, chants,
sentences, mini-dialogues, and other forms of social interaction. Grammar is therefore embedded
in meaningful contexts and presented as “chunks” of language. As the children grow and develop
their powers of analysis, they begin to focus on grammar boxes containing clear models of the
target language as well as specific features such as plural endings or comparative and superlative
forms of adjectives. Grammatical information is explained in simple, age-appropriate ways and
in measured quantities as learners gradually become more cognitively mature. Students work
with carefully sequenced structures in both oral and written form. Exercises move from focus on
form to freer, more open-ended activities such as games requiring oral production, to classmate
interviews, to written work on topics of personal interest.
Writing
In the lower levels directed at the youngest learners, SPIN! systematically introduces practice
with the printed word, and gradually builds upon it until students are capable of writing
sentences and finally three- or four-sentence paragraphs in level C. From this point on, older
students work with concepts such as the parts of a paragraph (title, topic sentence, detail
sentences, and concluding sentence), paragraph function, unity, sentence variety (simple,
compound, and complex sentences), and so on. Attention is also paid to genres such as informal
and formal letters, and basic paragraphs of description, process, exemplification, and persuasion.
Learners are also made aware of the stages of the writing process, with attention to prewriting
activities such as brainstorming, using word maps, T-lines, and so on. Students are consistently
provided with clear models for each type of writing they are asked to do; each model is related to
the theme of the unit and provides an opportunity for additional use of target vocabulary and
grammar.
Other elements that come into play in each unit include opportunities for listening, speaking, and
pronunciation work (stress, rhythm, and intonation) as learners play games, repeat chants, and
work with picture cards.
Program Philosophy
The authors of SPIN! believe that successful language learning is more likely to occur when
teachers combine communicative language teaching (CLT) methodologies (Lynch 1996,
Richards and Rodgers 1986, Littlewood 1981, Morrow 1981) with judicious use of other
approaches that provide opportunities for the new focus on form that recent research shows is
key (Doughty and Williams 1998, Van Patten 1996, Batstone 1995, Swain, 1995). In other
words, a balanced attention to accuracy as well as fluency facilitates the negotiation of meaning
2
SPIN! GRAMMAR, VOCABULARY, AND WRITING: PEDAGOGICAL RATIONALE
in spoken and written discourse. This is the case not only for adults, but for children also. Today,
many children’s courses offer ample exposure to and practice with spoken discourse. However,
some focus on expressing meaning and fluency to the extent that grammatical accuracy and
precision are neglected. Studies show that without attention to form, it will not be learned
accurately (Harley et al. 1995, Lightbown and Spada 1994, Harley and Swain 1984). Children
certainly need to immerse themselves in as well as participate in meaningful discourse, but they
also need opportunities to move their language learning forward through noticing and attending
to certain grammatical features of the songs, chants, sentences, and dialogues they work with.
This is precisely the situation the supplementary series SPIN! hopes to correct, keeping in mind
that children of different ages at different developmental stages require a variety of formfocusing activities appropriate to their cognitive abilities.
The authors of SPIN! recognize that attention to students’ learning styles is beneficial in the
language classroom. Children tend to take in knowledge through their senses, and sensory
modalities include the visual, auditory, tactile, and kinesthetic (Reid 1987). Gardner’s Theory of
Multiple Intelligences (1993) identifies several abilities that overlap Reid’s categories to a
degree: bodily-kinesthetic, musical, spatial, linguistic, logical-mathematical, interpersonal, and
intrapersonal. SPIN! supports visual learners through a variety of colorful illustrations, graphic
organizers, and picture cards. Auditory learners are provided with opportunities to hear and
repeat key learning targets as well as chants. Tactile and kinesthetic learners reinforce their
learning through board games, adapted Total Physical Response (TPR) routines (Asher 1972),
and manipulation of picture cards in group card games.
References Supporting the Pedagogy Behind SPIN!
Integrated-Skills, Theme-Based Instruction
Anderson, J.R.; Eisenberg, N.; Holland, J.; Wiener, H.S.; & Rivera-Kron, C. 1983. Integrated Skills
Reinforcement: Reading, Writing, Speaking, and Listening Across the Curriculum. Longman.
Brinton, D.M.; & Master, P. (Eds.), 1997. New Ways in Content-Based Instruction. TESOL.
Driscoll, P.; & Frost, D. (Eds.) 1999. The Teaching of Modern Foreign Languages in the Primary
School. Routledge.
Dunn, O. 1984. Teaching English to Children. Macmillan.
Edelhoff, C. 1981. “Theme-oriented English teaching: Text-varieties, media, skills and project work.”
In C.N. Candlin (Ed.), The Communicative teaching of English: Principles and an exercise typology.
Longman.
Garvie, E. 1991. “An integrative approach with young learners.” In C. Brumfit et al. (Eds.), Teaching
English to Children: From Practice to Principle. Nelson.
Genesee, F. (Ed.), 1994. Educating Second Language Children. Cambridge.
Locke, J. 1993. The Child’s Path to Spoken Language. Harvard.
Moon, J. 2000. Children Learning English. Macmillan Heinemann.
Morrow, K. 1981. “Principles of communicative methodology”, in K. Johnson & K. Morrow (Eds.),
Communication in the Classroom. Longman.
3
SPIN! GRAMMAR, VOCABULARY, AND WRITING: PEDAGOGICAL RATIONALE
Richards, J.; & Rodgers, T. 1986. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge.
Scott, W.; & Ytreberg, L. 1990. Teaching English to Children. Longman.
Wray, A. 1999. “Formulaic language in learners and native speakers.” Language Teaching, 32, 213231.
Learner-Centered Approach
Brewster, J., Ellis, G.; & Girard, D. 1992. The Primary Teacher’s Guide. Penguin.
Cook, G. 1997. “Language play, language learning.” ELT Journal, 51, 224-231.
Grieve, R.; & Hughes, M. 1990. Understanding Children. Blackwell.
Halliwell, S. 1992. Teaching English in the Primary Classroom. Longman.
Kennedy, C.; & Jarvis, J. (Eds.). 1991. Ideas and Issues in Primary ELT. Nelson.
Littlewood, W. 1981. Communicative Language Teaching: An Introduction. Cambridge.
Lynch, T. 1996. Communication in the Language Classroom. Oxford.
Learning Styles and Strategies
Asher, J. 1972. “Children’s first language as a model for second language learning.” Modern
Language Journal 56, 3, 133-139.
Chamot, A.U.; & O'Malley, J.M. 1994. The CALLA Handbook: Implementing the Cognitive
Academic Language Learning Approach. Addison-Wesley.
Chamot, A.U.; Barnhardt, S.; El-Dinary, P.B.; & Robbins, J. 1999. The Learning Strategies
Handbook. Longman.
Diaz Maggioli, G.H. 1995. Managing Learning Styles in the Classroom. TESOL.
Ellis, G. 1991. “Learning to learn.” In C. Brumfit, Moon, J. & Tongue, R. (Eds.), Teaching English to
Children. Collins, 191-200.
Gardner, H. 1993. Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice. Basic Books.
Meadows, S. 1993. The Child as Thinker. Routledge.
Oxford, R.L. 1990. Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Newbury House
Reid, J. 1987. “The learning style preferences of ESL students.” TESOL Quarterly 21
Wood, D. 1998. How Children Think and Learn. Blackwell.
Grammar
Batstone, R. 1995. Grammar. Oxford.
Bley-Vroman, R. 1988. “The fundamental character of foreign language learning.” In W. Rutherford
& M. Sharwood-Smith (Eds.), Grammar and Second Language Teaching: A Book of Readings. Heinle
& Heinle.
4
SPIN! GRAMMAR, VOCABULARY, AND WRITING: PEDAGOGICAL RATIONALE
Celce-Murcia, M. 1981. “Grammar pedagogy in second and foreign language teaching.” TESOL
Quarterly, 25.
Celce-Murcia, M.; & Larsen-Freeman, D. 1999. The Grammar Book. Heinle & Heinle.
DeKeyser, R. 1998. “Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing
second language grammar.” In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second
Language Acquisition. Cambridge.
Doughty, C.; & Williams, J. (Eds.). 1998. Focus on Form in the Second Language Classroom.
Cambridge.
Harley, B.; Howard, J.; & Hart, D. 1995. “Second language processing at different ages: Do younger
learners pay more attention to prosodic cues than sentence structure?” Language Learning 45, I: 43-71.
Harley, B.; & Swain, M. 1984. “The interlanguage of immersion students and its implications for
second language teaching.” In A. Davies, C. Criper, and A. Howatt. (Eds.). Interlanguage. Edinburgh.
Lightbown, P.; & Spada, N. 1994. “An innovative program for primary ESL in Quebec.” TESOL
Quarterly 28, 3, 563-579.
Rutherford, W.; & Sharwood-Smith, M. (Eds.). 1988. Grammar and Second Language Teaching: A
Book of Readings. Heinle & Heinle.
Swain, M 1995. “Three functions of output in second language learning.” In G. Cook and B.
Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principles and Practice in Applied Linguistics. Oxford.
Van Patten, B. 1996. Input Processing and Grammar Instruction in Second Language Acquisition.
Ablex.
Writing
Calkins, L. 1994. The Art of Teaching Writing. Heinemann.
Cameron, L. 2001. Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge.
Connor, U.; & Farmer, M. 1990. “The teaching of topical structure analysis as a revision strategy for
ESL writers.” In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing. Cambridge.
Dyson, A. 1982. “The emergence of visible language: Interrelationships between drawing and early
writing.” Visible Language, 16, 360-381.
Graves, D. 1983. Writing: Children and Teachers at Work. Heinemann.
Hughey, J.B.; Wormuth, D.; Hartfiel, V.F.; & Jacobs, H. 1983. Teaching ESL: Composition:
Principles and Techniques. Newbury House.
Johnson, D.M.; & Roen, D.H. (Eds.). 1989. Richness in Writing: Empowering Language Minority
Students. Longman.
Kaplan, R. 1987. “Cultural thought patterns revisited.” In U. Connor & R. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing
Across Languages: Analysis of L2 Text. Addison-Wesley.
Kroll, B. (Ed.). 1991. Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom. Cambridge.
5
SPIN! GRAMMAR, VOCABULARY, AND WRITING: PEDAGOGICAL RATIONALE
Lee, J.F.; & Van Patten, B. 1995. Making Communicative Language Teaching Happen. McGrawHill.
Perera, K. 1984. Children’s Writing and Reading. Basil Blackwell.
Raimes, A. 1983. Techniques in Teaching Writing. Oxford.
White, R.V. 1980. Teaching Written English. George Allen and Unwin.
White, R.; & Arndt, V. 1991. Process Writing. Longman.
Vocabulary
Allen, V.F. 1983. Techniques in Teaching Vocabulary. Oxford.
Carter, R.A.; & McCarthy, M.J. 1988. Vocabulary & Language Teaching. Longman.
Celce-Murcia, M. 1991. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Heinle & Heinle.
Hatch, E.; & Brown, C. 1995. Vocabulary, Semantics, and Language Education. Cambridge.
Nation, P. 2001. Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge.
Nattinger, J.; & DeCarrico, J. 1992. Lexical Phrases and Language Teaching. Oxford.
Nunan, D. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology. Phoenix ELT.
Rudzka, B.; Channell, J.; Putseys, Y.; & Ostyn, P. 1981. The Words You Need. Macmillan.
Schmitt, N.; & McCarthy, M. (Eds.). 1997. Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition, and Pedagogy.
Cambridge.
Taylor, L. 1990. Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. Prentice Hall.
Verhallen, M.; & Schoonen, R. 1993. “Word definitions of monolingual and bilingual children.”
Applied Linguistics, 14, 4: 344-365.
Verhallen, M.; & Schoonen, R. 1998. “Lexical knowledge in L1 and L2 of third and fifth-graders.”
Applied Linguistics, 19, 4: 452-470.
Wode, H. 1999. “Incidental vocabulary acquisition in the foreign language classroom.” Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 21, 243-258.
Language Standards, Policy
Council of Europe. 2003. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages.
TESOL. 1997. ESL Standards for Pre-K-12 Students.
6