Systemic-Theoretical Instruction Vs. Discovery Learning: The Case of Iranian EFL Learners’ Acquisition of Grammar

Although there is a myriad of theoretical and pedagogical research studies into L2 grammar, the instruction in this area remains traditional and there have been calls for more usage-based approaches that can fill the gap between theory and practice. Accordingly, this quasi-experimental compared the effects of two pedagogical frameworks, namely Systemic-Theoretical Instruction (STI), derived from Vygotsky’s ideas and proposed by Gal’perin and discovery learning (DL), derived from Piaget’s ideas mainly proposed by Bruner, on learning English tense-aspect system. To this end, 71 Iranian low-intermediate EFL learners, aged 12 to 19, were instructed in three groups through STI, DL (experimental) and traditional method (comparison). They took a pretest, a posttest and a delayed posttest consisting of grammar tests checking their receptive and productive grammar knowledge. Results of one‐way repeated‐measures analyses of ANOVA revealed that all groups improved significantly in both the entire test and its subcomponents in the immediate posttest, suggesting that the three kinds of form-focused intervention were efficient in creating immediate progress. However, significant differences were identified among the groups in the delayed posttest accounting for the inadequacy of traditional method of instruction in the long run, and for the superiority of STI over DL. These findings can have significant implications for materials developers and teacher education programs in considering the tenets of more innovative approaches such as STI through systematic representations of target language features by taking advantage of materialized tools and verbalization in teaching.