Grammar exercises in Dutch, Finnish, and global textbooks for teaching
German as a foreign language
1 Introduction
In current foreign language (FL) teaching and learning, there is no one single methodology as
to how to teach foreign languages and their grammar (cf. Funk 2012; Thornbury 2011), and
several methodologies are to be found simultaneously in FL teaching materials. Accordingly,
we can state that the methodologies used in the FL classroom (audiolingualism, grammar-
translation method, communicative approach including task-based/supported language
learning) are no longer used solely in their original form, but in a combined and eclectic way.
This means that they still have an influence on the content of FL textbooks (for an overview
see McDonough and Shaw 2012: Ch. 2) and on grammar exercises. For instance, the influence
of audiolingualism is still to be seen in language teaching materials as use of de-contextualised
drills, gapped sentences, and substitution tables in grammar learning (cf. Littlejohn 2012;
Neuner 1994).
Textbooks play a central role in FL teaching and learning both from the perspective of teachers
and learners. They have a strong impact on learning activities as well as on the linguistic and
cultural content transmitted in the classroom. Moreover, they are used as a major source when
FL teachers design their teaching and select activities which they consider to be suitable for
their learners (Harwood 2010; McGrath 2006; Richards 2014). Textbooks guide teachers and
learners on how grammar is presented and practised in language lessons and also outside the
classroom (cf. Garton and Graves 2014a; Littlejohn 2012; McGrath 2006; Richards 2014),
when learners do their homework. By examining FL textbooks, assumptions can be made as to
how grammar is learned in the classroom context since there is evidence that teaching materials
have an influence on their users (see e.g. Andon and Wingate 2013; McGrath 2002; Tomlinson
and Masuhara 2010).
However, if the impact of teaching materials is as strong on teaching practices, as stated above,
and if grammar holds a traditionally strong position in FL teaching, then the question arises as
to what the teaching materials are exactly. This calls for an in-depth analysis of grammar in FL
textbooks. The lack of research on FL textbooks is surprising considering how central a role
they play (Garton and Graves 2014b; Guerrettaz and Johnston 2013; Harwood 2013; Littlejohn
2011; Tomlinson and Masuhara 2010; Tomlinson 2012). Both micro-evaluations of the use of
FL textbooks, for instance, learner experiences of textbooks (cf. Ellis 2011), empirical studies
(cf. Ellis 1997), and comprehensive international analyses of FL textbooks (e.g. Tomlinson et
al. 2001) are not common in the field of FL educational research (cf. Garton and Graves 2014b;
Tomlinson 2012; Tomlinson and Masuhara 2010). In order to gain a broader picture of the ways
in which grammar is taught and learned, an international comparison of FL textbooks is needed.
In recent years, teaching materials of English have especially attracted attention (Garton and
Graves 2014a; Gray 2010; 2013b; Harwood 2010, 2013). However, materials for teaching
languages other than English have been explored less (see e.g. Gray 2013a). Possible reasons
for the lack ofresearch on such FL textbooks are difficulties in finding either objective or
comparable research criteria suitable for local conditions (e.g. Roberts 1996; Tomlinson and
Masuhara 2010), or criteria that would be generalisable or useful to teachers worldwide
(Harwood 2010: 12). These are the reasons why we decided to examine textbooks for another
language, namely German. Although our focus is on German as a foreign language (henceforth
GFL), the relevance of this study is not restricted to this language alone since the methodology
used here is applicable to language teaching materials for other languages. Moreover, our
results can be used as a reference point in other such future studies. The exercise types can give
an insight into the methodology of FL textbooks and how exercises and activities are modified
by textbook authors to reflect local needs in a specific country (cf. López-Barrios and de Debat
2014; Richards 2014).
Our aim is to examine the kind of grammar exercise types,  the proportion of each type and the
kind of grammar learning promoted in Dutch, Finnish, and global textbooks for German as a
foreign language for young adolescent learners (13–15 years). All the teaching materials
available in 2015 in both countries for this learner group are included in our study. The terms
textbook or course book are used here to encompass all printed materials used in German FL
classrooms in Finland and in the Netherlands. The textbooks provide the basis for classroom
activities and also for self-study before and after lessons (cf. Harwood 2010; Richards 2014;
Tomlinson 2011; see Section 3.1). In our textbook analysis, the grammar exercises are
classified, and the number of exercises per exercise type is counted (see Section 3). This
analysis enables us to reflect on pedagogical criteria for effective grammar exercises and
compare these criteria with the approach to learning that is manifested by the exercises in the
textbooks (see Sections 2 and 4). Aspects to consider are what kind of learning is elicited by
grammar exercises in the textbooks and whether the ideas are in line with current general
pedagogical principles such as discovery, learner-centredness and reflection on language(s).
2 The role of grammar and grammar exercises in FL textbooks
Grammar plays a well-established role in the FL classroom, in textbooks and other teaching
materials, and in language tests (see e.g. Nation and Macalister 2010: Ch. 5; Tomlinson 2012).
This is apparent in several ways. For instance, in many language courses, grammar is used as
the major unit of progression (Nation and Macalister 2010: Ch. 5). Moreover, in the table of
contents of FL textbooks, the domination of grammar is clearly to be seen in almost every unit
(see e.g. Tomlinson et al. 2001), and texts and activities of FL textbooks are usually built around
grammatical structures (see e.g. Andon and Wingate 2013; Nation and Macalister 2010: Ch. 5).
In addition, students often expect grammar to be the focus of FL language lessons (cf.
Canagarajah 1993). The study of Peacock (1997) revealed that learners rate grammar exercises
even more highly than their teachers do. Although grammar exercises in textbooks play a very
important role in FL classrooms, they have rarely been studied (see e.g. Funk 2014; Littlejohn
2011; Neuner 1994).
Earlier studies into FL teaching materials for German show that the number of grammar and
grammar exercises in textbooks is extensive. In her analysis of grammatical content in five
Dutch GFL textbooks, Tammenga-Helmantel (2012) concluded that they contain a relatively
high percentage of grammar exercises (up to 25%). However, grammar is hardly ever integrated
in productive skills training. Both inductive and deductive grammar exercises are found.
Maijala (2010) analysed the presentation of grammar and grammar exercises in Finnish and
global GFL textbooks for adult education. She found that the majority of grammar exercises
are reproductive (blank-filling exercises) and/or stimulate recognition (underlining,
subcategorization, marking) with only relatively few productive, reflective/analytical or
contrastive exercises. A widely used exercise type is to manipulate sentences following a given
example, for instance, to build sentences/dialogues according to a certain pattern. Funk (2014)
analysed exercise types in a selection of current textbooks for teaching German as a foreign
language which are used globally. Mostly mechanical grammar practice, consisting mainly of
gap-filling exercises, was found in the textbooks in his study. He concluded that these grammar
exercise types are de-contextualised and without any connection to communicative goals.
Analytical and reflective grammar exercises are not common in GFL textbooks (e.g. Maijala
2010).
Doughty and Williams (1998) analysed the grammar teaching practices of teachers of English
as L2 and outlined three models for integrating form and meaning in second language teaching.
Their first model is sequenced, i.e. explicit formal instruction is given first and is then followed
by mechanical focus-on-form activities. In practice, this involves presentation of grammar
which is then mostly followed by controlled activities such as listening and repeating, matching
and filling in blanks with a conscious focus on grammar rules. As a result, learners concentrate
on form and not on meaning (Ellis 2011; Newby 2014; Tomlinson 2011; Tomlinson 2012). The
second model of Doughty and Williams (1998) reflects the conventional PPP approach, i.e.
presentation, practice, and production, that is, explicit formal instruction of grammar is given
first. After that follows controlled practice of the grammar items and extensive communicative
practice allowing more time for learners to digest the declarative information than in the first
model. In the third model, form and meaning are integrated and taught simultaneously with or
without explicit grammar instruction.
The question then arises as to what ideal grammar exercises in FL textbooks should be like, and
whether these are to be found in textbooks. Ideal grammar exercise types should take into
account the characteristics of the learner group, for instance, age, learning style, motivation,
and prior knowledge (cf. Sercu 2013). Usually in a learner-centred approach, the level of
difficulty should be located within the learner’s zone of proximal development, which means
that the exercises should not underestimate or overestimate what the learner can do. In addition,
they should be based on content that the learner perceives as relevant. Since FL textbooks are
usually designed for broad public use, teachers have to select the activities that best suit the
specific needs of their learners and try to take account of different learning styles (cf. Richards
2014). For the teacher, it becomes a kind of puzzle to choose a suitable combination of the
exercises to include for each group of learners. The teacher often has to rewrite textbook
activities in order to make them suitable for the target group (Harwood 2010; McGrath 2002;
Masuhara 2011; Richards 2014). For instance, FL textbooks usually do not contain any (or at
least not many) activities for kinaesthetic learners, who learn more effectively through physical
activities (cf. Tomlinson et al. 2001).
As indicated above, FL learners (and teachers) often expect a controlled approach to grammar.
The teaching and learning of grammar in classroom settings is generally regarded as accuracy-
oriented. This implies that learners are required to construct utterances which are grammatically
acceptable. These expectations do not completely meet the goals of modern FL teaching and
learning determined by the research terms of discovery, learner-centredness and reflection on
language, or language awareness. Teaching grammar using a discovery approach usually
involves activities in which learners are asked to work out the rules from examples, i.e. the
inductive approach (Tomlinson 2011). The discovery approach usually requires the teacher to
act as a mediator in order to make grammar learning reflective and to promote language
awareness. Accordingly, FL textbooks should “encourage in learners habits of observation and
[to] help them to use such observation in the comprehension and formulation of rules for the
use of forms” (Carter, Hughes and McCarthy 2011: 91).
In FL teaching, the aim should be that learners progress from strongly teacher-supported,
controlled exercise types towards more open-ended practice with automatic and free use of the
foreign language. In other words, this progress involves moving gradually from mostly
reproductive to productive practice (cf. Neuner et al. 1981; Sercu 2013). The purpose and
justification of conventional form-focused practice including repetition is the expectation that,
at some stage of learning, declarative knowledge becomes procedural (cf. DeKeyser 1998).
Therefore, open-ended practice can be described as “the final stage of the skill-learning
process”, which means developing a skill that is already thoroughly learned (Dörnyei 2009:
289–290). Consequently, it is presumed that FL textbooks for beginners should include mostly
receptive and reproductive exercises, and productive open-ended exercises are less common
(e.g. Aski 2005). Despite the fact that controlled activities do not seem to have long-term effects
on language learning (e.g. Boers et al. 2016; Ellis 2008: Ch. 16), they are widely used in FL
textbooks and even expected by teachers and learners. This could, in the worst case scenario,
mean that classroom time is wasted in doing controlled exercises, endless drills, filling in blanks
and manipulating sentences isolated from context (Tomlinson 2011). It seems that the greatest
benefit from form-focused instruction is obtained when it is embedded in communicative
activities (Ellis 2008: Ch. 16; Funk 2014; Newby 2014), that is, when grammar teaching and
learning occur in a meaningful context (e.g. Aski 2005; Boers et al. 2016; Borg and Burns
2008).
Accordingly, we conclude that the ‘ideal‘ grammar exercise should be learner-centred and help
students:
- to focus on meaning and/or form (see e.g. Ellis 2011);
- to reflect on the differences and similarities between the source language, target language and
other learned languages (López-Barrios and de Debat 2014; Ros i Solé 2013), and in this way
raise awareness of  foreign languages and cultures (Graves and Garton 2014);
- to discover grammatical rules autonomously;
- to produce the target language also in open-ended practice and to use the target language
communicatively with peers (Andon and Wingate 2013; McDonough and Shaw 2012, Ch. 2).
In this article, we analyse Dutch, Finnish, and global GFL textbooks in order to find out what
kind of grammar learning they promote, and then, on the basis of our analysis, we test whether
they fulfil the criteria outlined above.
3 Research project: Analysis of grammar exercises
3.1 General remarks
In analysing course books, it is important that one is familiar with the teaching context of the
country in question to understand the broader context in which course books are produced (see
e.g. Harwood 2010: 18; Harwood 2013; McDonough and Shaw 2012: Ch. 1). As teacher
educators and teachers of German as a foreign language, we, the researchers of the study, have
teaching experience in secondary education in Finland and the Netherlands. For this reason we
focus on textbooks for adolescent learners in these two countries (beginners’ level, CEFR-level
A1–A2).
In both countries, the curriculum for FL teaching and learning is strongly influenced by the
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR; Council of Europe 2001).
In the Netherlands, only general core curriculum goals for secondary education for reading,
listening, writing, and speaking at the CEFR levels, and literature are provided by the state
(CVE 2012). Grammar is not mentioned in these exit objectives. Centralized testing takes place
only for reading comprehension. It is the responsibility of the teachers or schools to determine
how to reach these goals, and with which course materials. In Finland, the core curriculum of
basic education gives the framework for the structure of studies and objectives, core content
and general assessment criteria for each school subject (Finnish National Board of Education
2004). On the basis of the core curriculum, each individual school in Finland determines its
own curriculum. Since the beginning of the 1990s, there has been no central control of the
school textbooks used. This has led to a situation similar to the Netherlands in that the
publishing houses have a significant influence on the content of school course books and other
teaching materials. In both countries, textbook writers have a free hand with only very general
instructions concerning the domains of language teaching plus a minimum of content prescribed
per domain (CVE 2012: 24; Finnish National Board of Education 2004). In the Finnish
curriculum, the core content for grammar is defined in the following way to be: “sentence
formation and main grammatical principles characteristic of the language in question, from the
standpoint of communication.” (Finnish National Board of Education 2004: 147). The Finnish
and Dutch curricula are in line with the language curricula around the world that generally
emphasise communication (Garton and Graves 2014b; McDonough 2012: Ch. 1). Since global
GFL textbooks lack guidelines on exit objectives and other local requirements, it is expected
that the general guidelines given in the CEFR play an important role in forming their linguistic
and cultural content.
In the Netherlands, FL teaching begins with English in primary education. German is learned
at secondary school (starting approximately at the age of 13) as a third foreign language and is
an obligatory subject for at least two years. All students have English as a final exam subject.
In their pre-final year in secondary education, Dutch students can decide whether they want an
additional language in their final exam. German is then the most popular foreign language
subject (DIA 2016). Other modern foreign languages that can be chosen in certain schools are
French, Chinese, Spanish, Turkish and Arabic. For all FL teaching, CEFR-based goals are
formulated (CVE 2012); these are slightly higher for English than for German. As far as
grammar teaching is concerned, teaching generally occurs in Dutch. We are not aware of any
substantial differences between teaching grammar for English or for German. At least, this is
not apparent in the teaching materials; Dutch publishing houses develop FL textbooks for
German, English, French and Spanish using a uniform format for all languages.
As in the Netherlands, in Finland FL teaching begins in primary education mostly with English.
Since Swedish is the second official language of the country, this is a compulsory subject for
all students (with Finnish for students  who have Swedish as their mother tongue-) and is started
mostly after English. Learning German is voluntary in Finnish schools. Students who want to
learn German (usually as a third or fourth foreign language) can begin in primary school (at
around the age of 10), in secondary school (at the age of 14) or later in senior secondary school
(at the age of 16). Other foreign languages that are mostly chosen in Finnish schools are French,
Spanish and Russian. The learning of other foreign languages than English has lost popularity
in recent years (see e.g. Kangasvieri 2017). In 1994, 27.3 % of the students at the age of 14–15
learned German ,in contrast to 2009 when only 6.7 % of this age group did (Kangasvieri et al.
2011: 11). Finnish foreign language textbooks usually have a pragmatic orientation towards the
everyday use of language, which is also emphasized in the national core curriculum (Finnish
National Board of Education 2004). Authentic texts are rarely used and the language in FL
textbooks is constructed for the purposes of learning grammar and vocabulary.
In  Finland and in  the  Netherlands,  there  is  a  strong tradition of  producing textbooks for  the
national school market. In our study, the analysed FL textbooks are books designed for a
specific country by local writers, or global books that are localized to meet the needs of the
local learners in question. The writers are mostly experienced non-native and native language
teachers, not university academics (cf. Richards 2014). In Finland and in the Netherlands, FL
course books for German usually consist of a textbook, a student workbook and occasionally a
CD for the student, and sometimes extra digital materials such as teachers’ guides and
assessment files. In the English language teaching (ELT) research literature, students’
workbooks are often seen as a supplementary aid that accompany textbooks (see e.g. Harwood
2013; Richards 2014), and there are cultural differences in how teaching materials are structured
and how they are supplemented (see e.g. Harwood 2013). Workbooks focus on more controlled
activities and are seen as an optional extra (see e.g. Verdelhan and Sercu 2013). Global GFL
teaching materials are generally structured in this way. The Finnish and Dutch course materials
for German, on the other hand, usually consist of two separate books (textbook and student’s
workbook). The textbook contains the texts and a grammar and vocabulary overview, and the
exercises are provided in the workbook. In Finland and in the Netherlands, the student’s
workbook (in German Übungsbuch, Übungen, Arbeitsbuch, in Dutch werkboek, in Finnish
työkirja, harjoituskirja) is an essential part of learning in the FL classroom and even outside
the classroom. In the Finnish books, dialogues are not based on authentic conversations, but are
composed mostly by the textbook writers to simulate authentic conversations in real-life
contexts (Andon and Wingate 2013; Richards 2014). In the Dutch books, more authentic texts
are available. The content of the textbooks is practised in the exercises found in the student’s
workbook.
The object of this study is to examine all locally used course books (textbooks and student’s
books) for German as a foreign language available in 2015 for young adolescent learners in the
Netherlands and in Finland. As for the global GFL textbooks produced in Germany and used
all over the world, we could analyse only a selection. Global textbooks are rarely used in Finnish
schools or adapted by Finnish publishers. This might be due to the requirements concerning the
intercultural component in the Finnish core curriculum, making a contrastive approach logical.
In the Netherlands, some teachers use global textbooks, which facilitates a monolingual
approach to FL teaching. In this case, the usage of Dutch in textbooks is considered a distracting
factor in the language learning process. Therefore, we concentrate on the global textbooks that
are regularly used in the Netherlands. The Goethe Institut Amsterdam was consulted for our
selection.
We focus on the textbooks for beginners (CEFR level A1–A2), approximately 13–15 years of
age,  who  have  been  learning  German  for  a  period  of  two  years.  From  the  Netherlands  we
analysed the following books: Na klar (NK), Neue Kontakte (NeKo), Salzgitter Heute (SH),
TrabiTour (TT), and Mach’s gut (MG). The Finnish corpus included the books Studio Deutsch
(SD), Super (SU), Echt (E), and Kompass Deutsch Neu (KDN). The globally used textbooks for
German Planet (P), Geni@l (G) and Team Deutsch (TD) [Dutch edition] were part of our
investigation. From now on, we use the abbreviations in brackets to designate the analysed
textbooks. The components, contents and structure of the course books are described in
Appendix 1. Because grammar rules and exercises are found in the workbooks, we limit our
analysis to these.
3.2 Research questions and method
Our analysis is content-based, focusing on grammar exercises in Dutch, Finnish, and global
GFL textbooks. By examining grammar exercises we aim to find a methodology for how
grammar is conveyed in these FL textbooks. The specific research questions are the following:
1. What types of grammar exercises are found? What is the proportion of each exercise type?
2. What kind of pedagogical approach to grammar teaching and learning is promoted by the
grammar exercises. Furthermore, do they fulfil the ‘ideal‘ criteria, as outlined in section 2?
To answer the first research question, we provide a framework for the classification of grammar
exercises in FL textbooks (see below for the typology used). Our aim is to create local criteria
which would be best suited for analysing regionally used books because evaluation lists are
difficult to transfer to local contexts (cf. Roberts 1996). In addition, our purpose is to create a
typology for the classification of grammar exercises in FL textbooks. Furthermore, we attempt
to put this classification into practice. We also present typical examples for the exercise types
provided in textbooks for teaching GFL. One particular problem in any analysis of textbooks is
to determine the concepts as they can be understood differently by different reviewers (cf.
Tomlinson et al. 2001) and be subjective in nature (Richards 2014; Sheldon 1988). In the local
materials, grammar explanations and instructions for the exercises are often given in the
students’ L1. For this reason, it was agreed that the Finnish analyst would evaluate the Finnish
books and the Dutch, the Dutch ones. The analysis was first conducted for the Finnish materials
and was followed by a methodological calibration session in order to analyse the Dutch and
global materials in the same way. This agreement was necessary because of the mother tongue
of the evaluators. Finnish and Dutch are very different languages. Dutch is typologically close
to German while Finnish is distant, being not even an Indo-European language.
In our study, the definition of ‘exercise’ and particularly ‘grammar exercise’ caused problems,
since it is difficult to separate lexical and grammatical items. We agreed that a grammar exercise
is an activity that requires learners to use a specific grammatical item or structure and which is
explicitly expressed in the instructions for the exercise, that is, the exercise is explicitly
designated as grammar. After studying the data, the typology for the grammar exercises
emerged. On the basis of this method, we classified and counted the exercises. For each exercise
type, the number of exercises per type is given. The quantitative analysis indicates where the
emphasis lies. Only grammar exercises have been classified, and each exercise has been
classified uniquely, that is, it has been allotted to only one exercise type. The typology we
created for the grammar exercises is as follows; examples of  each type are provided when the
results of the study are presented below.
A Choose-the-correct-answer exercises (choosing)
In these activities, learners are, for example, asked to choose from a selected set of possible
answers, or to search for a particular grammatical construction in a text, or to select the
correct grammatical form.
B Fill-in-the-blank exercises (filling in blanks)
With fill-in-the-blank exercises, we refer to gapped sentences to be completed; for example,
learners are asked to write the correct forms of certain verbs into the paradigm, or to add articles
to sentences.
C Written exercises (sentence building)
In these activities, learners are asked to construct sentences, mostly using words/phrases
supplied by the material, in writing ready-made blocks or according to a certain (sentence)
pattern. Transformation activities, such as  writing sentences based on a model, rewriting a text,
building sentences/questions based on given words, are also included in this category.
D Communicative oral grammar exercises (dialogue building)
In these communicative exercises, learners are asked to construct a dialogue or sentences orally
with a partner or in a group. They are guided to use a certain grammatical structure. Common
instructions given in this exercise type are, for example, ‘Discuss on the basis of the dialogue
given’ or ‘Replace the highlighted words in the role-play’.
E Combining exercises (combining)
In combining or matching exercises, learners are required to combine sentences or parts of
sentences. Instructions often given for this exercise type are, for example, ‘Combine pronouns
with the correct verb forms’ or ‘Combine the beginnings and ends of the sentences’.
F Grammar games
In grammar games, learners are asked to play with language. In most cases, grammar games
are controlled and learners are provided with a “model” as to how they should use the language.
A common instruction is, for example, ‘Play Bingo’ using a certain grammatical structure.
G Translation exercises (translating)
Learners are asked to translate sentences into the mother tongue or into the target language. A
common instruction for translation exercises is, for example, ‘Explain in your own words’ or
just ‘Translate’. Clearly, this exercise type is found in local books only since the use of the
mother tongue is necessary.
H Reflective/analytical exercises (analysing)
In these exercises, learners are encouraged to discuss the grammar rules and notice how the
new language is introduced by using metalanguage in their L1. The workbooks can guide
reflection with instructions such as ‘What do you notice?’
I Revision exercises (revising)
In revision exercises, learners are asked to repeat grammar rules, mostly using the
“minigrammar” provided at the end of the workbook.
Our evaluation regarding research question 2 is inevitably more subjective in nature (cf.
Tomlinson et al. 2001). For instance, the questions ‘Do the grammar exercises assist learners
in the process of learner-centred meaning construction?’ and ‘Do the exercises encourage
learners to independently discover and explore linguistic phenomena and to reflect on
language?’ are difficult to answer at the level of the individual exercise. Our aim is, above all,
to answer these questions globally and to provide an overall picture of the pedagogical approach
to grammar learning which emerges from the composition of grammar exercises in the Dutch,
Finnish, and global GFL textbooks in the study.
3.3 Research findings
Before presenting our results and analysis of the exercise types, certain general remarks on the
grammatical content in the Dutch, Finnish, and global course books for German as a foreign
language are given. In order to gain a clearer picture of the grammar exercises, illustrative
examples are given (the examples are translated into English by the authors, M.M. and M.T-
H.)
3.3.1 Dutch GFL textbooks
The Dutch course books provide grammatical structures mostly in two or more blocks per
chapter. The first block usually consists of repeating familiar grammar structures and the
subsequent blocks present new grammar items. These are in most cases marked with symbols
of their own. Both inductive and deductive approaches to introducing new grammar are found
in the Dutch books. The productive writing and speaking exercises do not explicitly focus on
grammatical  rules,  but  seem  to  be  related  to  the  vocabulary  and  useful  phrases  (in  German
Redemittel) introduced in the unit. Integration of grammar into productive exercises is rarely
encountered. Table 1 presents an overview of the grammar exercises in the Dutch workbooks.
Table 1. Number of exercises per exercise type in the Dutch GFL books.
Exercise type Neue
Kontakte
Mach’s
gut
TrabiTour Salzgitter
Heute
Na Klar
A Choosing 1 (0.9%) 16 (9.5%) 12 (8.9%) 23
(17.2%)
10 (6.4%)
B Filling in
blanks
66 (56.4%) 67
(39.6%)
84
(62.2%)
79
(59.0%)
87
(55.4%)
C Sentence
building
3 (2.6%) 50
(29.6%)
4 (3.0%) 13 (9.7%) 5 (3.2%)
D Dialogue
building
2 (1.7%) 18
(10.7%)
1 (0.7%) 3 (2.2%) 0 (0.0%)
E Combining 0 (0.0%) 6 (3.6%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (1.5%) 1 (0.6%)
F Grammar
games
0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)
G Translating 9 (7.7%) 4 (2.4%) 12 (8.9%) 2 (1.5%) 6 (3.8%)
H Analysing 35 (29.9%) 8 (4.7%) 12 (8.9%) 10 (7.5%) 46
(29.3%)
I Revising 1 (0.9%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (1.5%) 2 (1.3%)
As Table 1 shows, all of the exercise types are found in the materials, with the exception of
grammar games (F). Examples 1–3 illustrate the most common exercise types in the Dutch
books: filling-in-blanks exercises (B), analysing (H), and choosing (A). Filling-in-blanks
exercises (B) are the most frequently used exercise type in all the Dutch teaching materials.
Example 1 presents a typical exercise type (B) from the Dutch corpus.
(1)
Vertaal en vul het Duitse woord in de juiste vorm in. [Translate and fill in the German word in
the correct form.]
1. hebben Wir ____ ganz viele Hobbys.
2. zijn Mein Vater ____ ein Anfänger. [---] (NeKo 1–2: 99)
With newly introduced grammar, a variety of exercises is used to practise the new structure,
and in almost all cases blanks-filling exercises are found. On the other hand, when repeating
previously introduced grammar, blank-filling exercises are often used exclusively. Choosing
(A) is the next widely used exercise type, see (2). It is frequently used in verb conjugation and
adjective declension, for instance, the correct case form of an article.
(2)
Streep de foute vorm van het werkvoord door. [Strike out the incorrect form of the verb.]
1 Hör/Hört mal zu, Peter und Lisa!
2 Lauft/Läuft so schnell ihr könnt, Kinder! [---] (SH2: 82)”
Type (H), analysing, is used mainly in those books which present new grammar inductively
(NeKo, NK). When grammar is introduced inductively, learners are asked to induce and
formulate the grammar rule or to analyse it. These exercises are very predictable, sometimes
even dull, not challenging enough and do not encourage learners to reflect on grammar (cf.
Newby 2014), as the example in (3) shows.
(3)
a Lees het gesprek en markeer de vormen van fahren. [Read the dialogue and mark the forms
of the verb fahren.] [---]
b Vul het schema zo veel mogelijk in. Gebruik daarvoor de zinnen van a. Markeer de vormen
die anders gaan dan wohnen. [Fill in the table if it is possible using the sentences in a. Mark the
cases which are different from wohnen] (NeKo 3: 37)
Combining exercises (E) and revising exercises (I) are rarely found in Dutch workbooks,
although the former are found in Mach’s gut. Translation exercises (G), both into Dutch and
into German, are found in all the Dutch books. However, their usage ranges from 2 in Salzgitter
heute to 12 in TrabiTour. TrabiTour uses translation exercises as a way of scaffolding, leading
towards semi-guided reproduction and blank filling. There are significant differences between
the materials in the frequency of the exercise types in the Dutch books. Generally, new grammar
is practised with blank-filling exercises combined with two or three other exercise types; each
textbook opts for its own combination of exercise types. Mach’s gut is an exception among the
Dutch books because it provides a great variety of exercise types.
Regarding research question 2, it can be observed that grammar is still introduced in a rather
traditional way. The textbooks adopt a focus-on-form approach and usually concentrate on
presentation and practice. Grammar is rarely integrated into productive exercises (cf. Newby
2014). There are some productive exercises but they seem to be meaning-oriented, that is, they
mostly deal with the thematic vocabulary presented in the unit in question and do not focus on
grammatical forms. In other words, the newly introduced grammar is not ‘put into practice’ in
these productive exercises. Naturally, this is not a problem from a language learning perspective
where basic skills are acquired. However, when grammar is not integrated, there is a risk that
in productive tasks learners cannot transfer that knowledge into procedural knowledge. On the
other hand, grammar is introduced inductively, especially in Neue Kontakte and Na Klar;
however, as indicated above, this is not challenging for learners to master (cf. Funk 2014;
Newby 2014; Tomlinson 2012). By using translation exercises, the Dutch teaching materials
can contrast L1 and L2, but this is not utilised, for instance, in reflective exercises.
3.3.2 Finnish GFL textbooks
The general concept of Finnish GFL textbooks is that they comprise texts, mostly dialogues,
which have been designed to illustrate certain grammatical structures and vocabulary. Grammar
rules are presented, mostly inductively guided by the book, in one or more blocks per chapter
after vocabulary exercises, and are usually marked with special symbols. The exercises in a unit
mostly focus on the grammatical structure presented in the unit and usually only one
grammatical item is practised per exercise.
Table 2. Number of exercises per exercise type in the Finnish GFL books.
Exercise
type
Studio
Deutsch
Super Echt! Kompass
Deutsch Neu
A
Choosing
7 (3.8 %) 14 (6.3 %) 10 (4.8 %) 7 (3.0 %)
B Filling in
blanks
55
(30.6 %)
100 (44.6 %) 75 (36.2 %) 73 (30.8 %)
C Sentence
building
75
(41.7 %)
49 (21.9 %) 35 (16.9 %) 66 (27.8 %)
D Dialogue
building
25
(13.9 %)
40 (17.9 %) 54 (26.1 %) 51 (21.5 %)
E
Combining
3 (1.7 %) 4 (1.8 %) 5 (2.4 %) 8 (3.4 %)
F Grammar
games
4 (2.2 %) 0 (0.0%) 8 (3.7 %) 10 (4.2 %)
G
Translating
9 (5.0 %) 16 (7.1 %) 20 (9.7 %) 17 (7.2 %)
H
Analysing
1 (0.6 %) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 4 (1.7 %)
I Revising 1 (0.6 %) 1 (0.4 %) 0 (0.0%) 1 (0.4 %)
As Table 2 shows,  there are no significant differences among the Finnish workbooks in the
number of exercise types. In the Finnish books just as in the Dutch ones, the most frequently
used exercise type is filling in blanks (B). In the second and the third most common exercise
types (C, D), learners are asked to construct sentences and dialogues using a particular
grammatical structure by writing or speaking after a given model. The books Echt! and
Kompass Deutsch Neu provide more oral exercises and grammar games than the other books.
Just as in the Dutch materials, translation exercises are occasionally used in Finnish books.
There are very few exercises in which learners are asked to analyse.
In general, the emphasis in the mechanical blank-filling exercises clearly lies on finding the
correct forms in the texts, which should be familiar to learners before they fill in the gaps.
Common instructions are “Write the verbs in the correct column.” (S 8: 66) or “Write the forms
of the verbs haben or sein in the text.” (SD 2: 88). The most common exercise type in category
C in the Finnish books is building sentences, see (4). Learners are expected to construct written
sentences by using the content, words and structures supplied by the course books. Examples
4–5 illustrate that the contribution of learners is guided and the focus is on one grammatical
item at a time (cf. Ellis 2011).
(4)
Muodosta lauseita. [Construct sentences.]
Example: Stefan – Julias Adresse – auf/schreiben. [---] (S 8: 97)
(5)
Schreibe. Mitä itse teit viime viikolla? Kirjoita vihkoosi ainakin viisi lausetta. Käytä laatikon
verbejä perfektissä. [Write down what you did last week. Write at least five sentences in the
perfect tense. Use the verbs in the box.] (SD 2: 68)
Controlled oral exercises, which function like the writing exercises described above, are often
used in Finnish workbooks. Oral exercises in the Finnish corpus are most frequently found in
Echt! and Kompass Deutsch Neu. After instructions, learners are given a model for forming
sentences orally by using the words and grammar supplied by the materials. Learners are often
asked to focus on the use of a certain grammatical item, for instance, “Talk to your partner and
make sentences together; remember to use the accusative.” (S 9: 40). Example 6 illustrates one
of the most frequently used oral exercise type in the Finnish corpus.
(6)
Keskustele mallin mukaan. Vaihda alleviivattuja sanoja. [Discuss on the basis of the dialogue
given. Replace the underlined words.]
A: Wo ist das Buch?
B: Es ist da!
A: Wo ist der CD-Spieler?
B: Er ist nirgends (Levittele käsiäsi)! [Show that you are puzzled!]
[German words supplied in a box] (S 8: 145)
Similarly, in grammar games, the skill of speaking is practised in a controlled way to gain a
certain communicative outcome (cf. Ellis 2011). Playing with grammar often means dice games
in  which  the  grammatical  item  presented  in  the  unit  is  practised,  e.g.  “Play  Bingo  [with
possessive pronouns]” (SD 2: 23). In the choosing exercises (A), a particular grammatical item
that has beenpresented in the unit is practised, e.g. “Choose the correct possessive pronoun.” (S
8, 68) The aim is to use a predetermined grammatical feature and practise it more or less
communicatively (cf. Ellis 2011).
Finnish learners of German often have difficulties in placing the finite verb in second position
in the main clause and respectively in putting the finite verb at the end of a subordinate clause.
Grammar exercises that stress placing the finite verb in second position in the main clause are
very common, such as in (7).
(7)
”Sprich mit dem Partner. Ralf ja Mona keskustelevat koulunkäynnistään. Käy parisi kanssa
keskustelu niin, että aloitat lauseet tummennetuilla sanoilla.” [Ralf and Mona talk about
school. Discuss with your partner and make sentences beginning with the words written in
bold.]
Examples: Ich habe heute einen Mathe-Test. Ich habe morgen zwei Stunden Latein, ugh. [--
-]” (SD 1: 83)
In general, the approach in Finnish books does not display great variety. Still, more variation in
exercise types can be found in the Finnish than in the Dutch course books. The pedagogical
approach to grammar learning that emerges from the Finnish books is focus on forms with
guided and controlled practice, consisting mostly of blank-filling and choosing exercises. In the
Finnish books, reproductive grammar exercises, in which learners are required to use the
grammar rule in question, mostly follow directly after the guided discovery of the rule in
question. This is clearly the PPP approach with the emphasis on presentation and practice. The
results indicate that activities in the Finnish textbooks promote the use of language in daily life
situations, that is, grammar exercises include the scaffolded and guided production of language
in order to communicate (cf. Newby 2014; Tomlinson 2011). This is in line with the Finnish
core curriculum. The communicative approach can also be seen, for instance, in the sentence-
building dialogue and game-like exercises in which learners are usually expected to work with
peers.
3.3.3 Global GFL textbooks
Whereas in the Dutch and Finnish teaching materials the grammar rules and exercises are
provided in the workbooks, in the global GFL teaching materials both textbooks and workbooks
involve practising grammar. In the global course books, grammar is generally found throughout
the chapter, in short blocks. A grammar overview is mostly given at the end of the chapter or
at the end of the textbook. Both inductive and deductive introduction of new grammar is found.
In general, grammar is integrated into productive exercises although the relation to previously
introduced and practised grammar is not always stated explicitly.
Table 3. Number of exercises per exercise type in the global GFL books.
Exercise type Team
Deutsch
Planet Geni@l
A Choosing 12 (9.3%) 25 (26.6%) 16 (22.5%)
B Filling in blanks 66 (51.2%) 38 (40.4%) 32 (45.1%)
C Sentence building  24 (18.6%) 23 (24.5%) 11 (15.5%)
D Dialogue building 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (1.4%)
E Combining 6 (4.7%) 1 (1.1%) 0 (0.0%)
F Grammar games 2 (1.6%) 1 (1.1%) 0 (0.0%)
G Translating 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)
H Analysing 18 (14.0%) 6 (6.4%) 11 (15.5%)
I Revising 1 (0.8%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)
Similar to the Dutch and Finnish course books, the blank-filling exercise (B) is the type most
frequently found in the global books. These exercises often have a non-traditional layout in that
they consist of tables to be filled in, have extra graphic options or are combined with a game-
like element, as (8) shows.
(8)
[Puzzle a) Find and highlight the ten verbs. b) Write five sentences using the verbs from the
puzzle.] (G1: 49, from © genial, Deutsch als Fremdsprache für Jugendliche, Arbeitsbuch A1
ISBN 978-3-12-606261-9, with the kind approval of Ernst Klett Sprachen GmbH, Stuttgart,
2017, first edition published 2002 by Langenscheidt KG, Munich, Germany.
Sentence building exercises (C) and analysing exercises (H) are also popular, as presented in
(9).
(9)
Ergänze die wenn-Sätze. [Construct sentences with wenn.)
a) Du ärgerst dich immer, (wenn – Schwester – anzieht – deine – deine – Sachen) [---] (P2:
73)
Dialogues with grammar, translation and repetition through self-study exercises are
sporadically found. Unlike the Dutch and Finnish textbooks, no fixed patterns can be observed
in the order in which the global GFL books use the types of grammar exercises. Moreover,
grammar is not practised as a set of exercises (as we see in the Dutch and Finnish materials),
but grammar exercises focus on a single pattern, are spread out over a chapter and fit in with
the preceding vocabulary exercises and the topic of the chapter. In other words, they constitute
a thematic unit and are not considered as a structure to be practised intensively, i.e. with more
than one exercise.
Regarding research question 2, it can be concluded that the analysed global textbooks adopt the
focus-on-form approach by integrating grammar into productive skills exercises so that
grammar is not a goal in itself. Blank-filling exercises are made meaningful, attractive and
probably more motivating through the layout and by including game-like elements. For
instance, the exercise (10) below combines the selection of the correct form of the question
word welch ‘which’ with a calculation puzzle.
(10)
[Fill in the blanks.] (P2:19, from © Planet 2, ISBN 978-3-19-011679-9, with the kind approval
of Hueber Verlag, Munich, Germany)
In the global GFL textbooks, grammar is sometimes introduced deductively, sometimes
inductively, the latter giving learners the opportunity to discover the grammar rules themselves.
Reflection on language in grammar exercises is seldom found; similarly,  there are no grammar
exercises with a contrastive and reflective approach that could encourage learners to make
comparisons with their mother tongue.
4 Discussion
From the results of our study, it can be concluded that, in general, grammar exercises seem to
mainly rely on deductive processing since they consist mostly of completion and matching. In
the Dutch, Finnish, and global GFL textbooks, blank-filling exercises are still the most common
exercise type. Table 4 summarizes the exercise types most frequently found in the corpus.
Table 4. Most common exercise types used in Dutch, Finnish, and global GFL textbooks
Dutch textbooks Finnish textbooks Global textbooks
1. blank-filling (39.6–
59.0 %)
2. analysing (4.7–29.9 %)
3. choosing (0.9–17.2 %)
4. sentence building (2.6–
29.6)
5. translating (1.5–8.9 %)
1. blank-filling (30.8–
44.6 %)
2. sentence building (16.9–
41.7 %)
3. dialogue building (13.9–
26.1 %)
4. translating (5.0–9.7 %)
5. choosing (3.0–6.3 %)
1. blank-filling (40.4–
51.2 %)
2. sentence building (15.5–
24.5 %)
3. choosing (9.3–26.6 %)
4. analysing (6.4–15.5 %)
5. combining (0.0–4.7 %)
The percentage of fill-in-the-blanks exercises in the corpus, ranging from 30.8 to 59.0 %, is
quite noticeable. On the whole, the distribution of grammar exercise types reveals a traditional
core of exercises (blank-filling exercises), supplemented by communicative (sentence/dialogue
building, type F) and awareness raising (analysing, type D) exercises. Boers et al. (2016)
obtained similar results. In their study, almost 85 % of phrase-focused exercises in recent ELT
textbooks were matching and gap-filling.
Grammar learning in the Dutch and Finnish GFL textbooks is sequenced mostly according to
the following pattern. Firstly, explicit instruction or strongly guided discovery of grammar
items takes place, i.e., grammar items are derived from examples and texts included in the
books. This means that learners are asked to fill in blanks and/or tables following the grammar
rule, or to answer questions related to it. Secondly, the grammar items are practised
mechanically by filling in blanks or choosing. Thirdly, communicatively oriented practice of
the forms may be used by building sentences or dialogues (cf. Doughty and Williams 1998;
Littlejohn 2011; Newby 2014). The emphasis clearly lies on presentation and practice. This
suggests that FL textbooks, in general, should provide more frequent opportunities to produce
language and to communicate with peers using that language (cf. Tomlinson et al. 2001). In the
analysed textbooks, the “focus on forms” approach is usually found, with explicit grammar
instruction focusing on one grammatical item at a time followed bycontrolled practice of the
item. Semi-guided or free productive practice is rare. Productive exercises in Finnish GFL
books are strongly guided, more than in the global and Dutch materials. This might be related
to the typological distance between the Finnish and German languages (see below). Although
productive exercises are found in Dutch GFL books too, speaking and writing exercises are
generally based on newly introduced vocabulary, not grammar. On the basis of our data, it
seems that, in general, in FL textbooks, the traditional form-focused PPP approach of grammar
teaching and learning still prevails and is widely used (similar results were obtained in the study
of Andon and Wingate 2013). Based on our experience as German teachers, we can say that
Finnish L1 students need much more guided practice and explanation of grammar, since
sentence structure is very different in Finnish compared with Germanic languages. There is less
variation in grammar exercise types in Dutch and global GFL books, which is probably due to
these languages being strongly related.
Our study shows that translation exercises, in which the learner’s L1 is used in addition to the
target language to support learning, are found in locally used Dutch and Finnish textbooks. This
type of exercise can help to raise language awareness, to contrastively analyse the languages
and can be beneficial especially in reflecting and analysing similarities and/or differences
between the L1 and the target language. These exercises seem to function both with an L1
similar to the target language German (Dutch) and with an L1 very different from the target
language (Finnish). For learners with Finnish as L1, learning foreign languages such as German
is challenging since their mother tongue is not an Indo-European language but belongs to the
Finno-Ugrian language family. In practice, this means that, as Finnish is very different from
other European languages,  many items of German grammar that are transparent, for instance,
to Dutch learners of German, are more difficult for Finns to comprehend. Some examples of
this difficulty are articles, gender, three different pronouns for third person singular (in German
er/sie/es), prepositions, and separable verbs, which do not exist in Finnish. However, Finnish
students learning German, mostly as their third (L3) or fourth (L4) foreign language, can use
their prior knowledge of English and Swedish, which in Finnish basic education are the foreign
languages most commonly taught. Exercises with an analytical and reflective approach could
be used to explicate the differences and similarities between the L1 and the foreign language
(here: German). However, this type of exercise is seldom found.
On the basis of our analysis into GFL teaching materials, it seems that gapped sentences are the
most commonly used exercise type. Referring to the composition of exercise types, the
following questions arise: Why do gapped sentences and other controlled practice with an
excessive focus on language form (cf. Aski 2005; Funk 2014; Tomlinson et al. 2001) still
dominate in FL textbooks? Funk (2014) gives the following reasons for their use. They are easy
to create, even by inexperienced authors, and they can be made with computer programs. These
mechanical exercises are also easy for both learners and teachers to do and to check in the
classroom. In addition, learners can receive feedback immediately and are given the impression
that they can actually be effective in the target language. In their review article, Boers and
Lindstromberg (2012) found that in several studies there is little evidence for the effectiveness
of the most commonly used exercises in grammar learning, that is, gapped sentences and
matching exercises. Ellis (2002, 170) also expresses doubts whether learners are able to put
their knowledge acquired through controlled exercises into communicative practice.
On the other hand, effective open-ended productive exercises need a great deal of scaffolding
of the language in advance and are time consuming for the teacher to develop and to assess after
the learners have completed the exercises. Moreover, open-ended practice involves
instructional scaffolding and linguistic input from the teacher. It can also be that productive
grammar exercises are rarely found in FL textbooks because learners can find them difficult
without further vocabulary or help from the teacher. In this area, further investigation is needed.
One method of how gap-filling exercises could be made more beneficial for learners is that they
are provided with examples of the target phrases before doing the exercise. This was suggested
by Boers et al. (2016), who find that adult English textbook users are not adequately provided
with contextualized examples or any other help from the textbook. In other words, our findings
confirm earlier studies. In particular, the large number of gapped sentences can be explained by
language teaching practices: blank-filling exercises are convenient both for teachers and
learners.
Gapped sentences seem to be overrepresented and perhaps need to be supported by other
activities in order make them more learner-centred and to leadi to discovery learning. For
instance, when game-like elements are combined with gapped exercises, these might be more
appropriate for younger adolescent learners. The exercises should encourage learners to play
more often with language and/or use it creatively and communicatively with their peers.
According to our study, learners are mostly required to use their linguistic knowledge (provided
by the textbooks), and integration with other skills is not required. This approach favours the
isolation of grammar teaching from other skills and could be described as an activity block
approach, such as, ‘first we do grammar, then we learn writing, speaking etc.’ However, the
analysed global GFL textbooks tend to integrate grammar into meaningful productive exercises
more than the Dutch and Finnish textbooks. The integration of grammar is then the
responsibility of the teacher.
The common approach to grammar teaching in FL textbooks emerging from our results is a
mixture of a traditional and a learner-centred approach. The activities provide mostly guided
practice of grammar, without giving opportunities to use the target language creatively and/or
analytically. In general, the inductive grammar instruction in the textbooks analysed is rather
predictable and not sufficiently challenging for learners (cf. Newby 2014). Grammar exercises
based on this kind of instruction do not assist learners in the process of learner-centred meaning
construction, for example, by encouraging them to independently discover and explore
linguistic phenomena and to reflect on language(s) (cf. Andon and Wingate 2013). When the
inductive or discovery approach is used in textbooks, it usually requires learners to find pre-
determined answers. In most of the grammar exercises in our corpus, learners are asked to
manipulate sentencesthat are often de-contextualised. After the presentation of grammar rules,
these rules are practised mostly with the help of gapped sentences, pattern drills, and sentences
to be transformed. These exercise types clearly reflect a form-based, mechanical view of
grammar without a specific context. Teaching materials tend to strongly influence FL teaching
in that textbooks “aim to ‘micro-manage’ the classroom event by providing detailed guidance
on how teachers and learners are to work together” and only seldom “provide ideas that teachers
and learners are actively encouraged to critically select or develop” (Littlejohn 2011: 184).
Since we cannot know how teachers use the textbook in practice, we can only make assumptions
about their pedagogical orientation. However, our analysis gives indications of the pedagogical
orientation that the analysed textbooks follow.
5 Conclusion
There is an observable discrepancy between the research literature on grammar teaching and
learning  and  its  actual  practice  in  FL  textbooks.  Ideally,  grammar  should  be  placed  in
meaningful contexts, and should, above all, be integrated with other skills such as listening,
speaking, reading and writing (cf. Aski 2005; Boers et al. 2016; Borg and Burns 2008). Whilst
ideal grammar learning is linked to concepts such as discovery, learner-centred exploration, and
reflection on language(s), the reality in FL textbooks often still involves strongly guided
grammar activities, which most likely enhance the mechanical learning of grammar.
In this study, we present a method for classifying grammar exercises in FL textbooks. On the
basis of our results, there is evidence to suggest that the form-focused approach with guided
discovery or rule presentation is the most commonly used approach in the analysed GFL
textbooks. Regarding the pedagogical criteria for ideal grammar learning, there is a need for
more tailor-made and learner-centred grammar exercises in FL textbooks which would involve
learners in using the target language and make language learning meaningful for them. To
confirm whether this universally holds true, international comparisons of FL textbooks and
other teaching materials are needed with future research to include other foreign languages than
German. Further research is also needed in order to design and test new exercise types which
enhance language awareness and learner-centredness. A further point for discussion is how
language textbooks could be developed so that they could be easily modified for the needs of
specific target groups. New digital materials seem promising since they might enable a more
flexible and meaningful approach to teaching and learning grammar. Easily adaptable materials
are needed to meet learners’ specific needs because ultimately it is the learner’s personal
experience that matters.
The discrepancy between the conceptions found in the research literature and the actual content
of teaching materials raises the question whether FL textbooks really are based on research (cf.
Littlejohn 2011; Sheldon 1988). The huge number of controlled exercises in the form of gapped
sentences raises doubts about this.. It is easy to agree with the conclusions of other researchers
(cf. Harwood 2010; Harwood 2013; Masuhara 2011) that there is still a need for better co-
operation between textbook writers, researchers, and publishers. Textbooks play an important
role as a kind of teacher education by encouraging teachers to use a wider range of activities.
Once again teachers are in a key position to place grammar learning in meaningful contexts, to
integrate it with other skills and, above all, to direct it towards language awareness and learner-
centredness. It is desirable that FL textbooks would support teachers in doing this.
References
Andon, N. and U. Wingate. 2013. Motivation, Authenticity and Challenge in German
Textbooks for Key Stage 3. In Critical perspectives on language teaching materials, ed. J.
Gray, 182–203. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Aski, J. M. 2005. Alternatives to Mechanical Drills for the Early Stages of Language Practice
in Foreign Language Textbooks. Foreign Language Annals 38: 333–343.
Boers, F. and S. Lindstromberg. 2012. Experimental and intervention studies on formulaic
sequences in a second language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 32: 83–110.
Boers, F., T. C. T. Dang and B. Strong. 2016. Comparing the effectiveness of phrase-focused
exercises: A partial replication of Boers, Demecheleer, Coxhead, and Webb (2014). Language
Teaching Research 20: 1–19. DOI: 10.1177/1362168816651464.
Borg, S. and A. Burns. 2008. Integrating Grammar in Adult TESOL Classrooms. Applied
Linguistics 29, no. 3: 456–482.
Canagarajah, A. S. 1993. American textbooks and Tamil students: Discerning ideological
tensions in the ESL classroom. Language, Culture and Curriculum 6, no. 2: 143–156.
Carter, R., R. Hughes and M. McCarthy. 2011. Telling tails: grammar, the spoken language and
materials development. In Materials Development in Language Teaching, ed. B. Tomlinson,
78–100. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coffey, S. 2013. Communicating Constructions of Frenchness through Language Coursebooks:
A Comparison. Critical perspectives on language teaching materials, ed. J. Gray, 137–160.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Council of Europe. 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:
Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
CVE. 2012. Handreiking schoolexamen moderne vreemde talen havo/vwo.
http://www.slo.nl/downloads/archief/handreiking_20mvt_20elementair.pdf/ [20.11.2015].
DeKeyser, R. 1998. Beyond focus-on-form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing
second language grammar. In Focus-on-form in classroom second language acquisition, ed.
C. Doughty and J. Williams, 42–63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
DIA. 2016. Schoolvak Duits. https://duitslandinstituut.nl/naslagwerk/1207/inleiding#
[11.11.2016].
Dörnyei, Z. 2009. The Psychology of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Doughty, C. and J. Williams. 1998. Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In Focus on Form
in Classroom Second Language Acquisition, ed. C. Doughty and J. Williams, 197–285.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R. 1997. The empirical evaluation of language teaching materials. ELT journal 51, no.
1: 36–42.
Ellis, R. 2002. Grammar teaching-practice or consciousness-raising. In Methodology in
language teaching: An anthology of current practice, ed. J.C. Richards and W. A. Renandya,
167–174. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,.
Formatted: Swedish (Sweden)
Formatted: Swedish (Finland)
Formatted: Swedish (Finland)
Field Code Changed
Ellis, R. 2008. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Ellis, R. 2011. Macro- and micro-evaluations of task-based teaching. In Materials
Development in Language Teaching, ed. B. Tomlinson, 212–235. 2nd ed. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Finnish National Board of Education. 2004. National core curriculum for basic education.
http://www.oph.fi/download/47671_core_curricula_basic_education_1.pdf [12.12.2015].
Funk, H. 2012. Four Models of Language Learning and Acquisition and Their Methodological
Implications for Textbook Design. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 9, no:
Suppl 1: 298–311.
Funk, H. 2014. Übungsformen im fremdsprachlichen Grammatikunterricht [Grammar
exercises in foreign language teaching]. In Grammatikunterricht zwischen Linguistik und
Didaktik. DaF/DaZ lernen und lehren im Spannungsfeld von Sprachwissenschaft, empirischer
Unterrichtsforschung und Vermittlungskonzepten, ed. S. Dengscherz, M. Businger and J.
Taraskina, 183–197. Tübingen: Narr.
Garton, S. and K. Graves. 2014a. Identifying a research agenda for language teaching
materials. The Modern Language Journal 98, no. 2: 654–657.
Garton, S. and K. Graves. 2014b. Materials in ELT: Current Issues. In International
Perspectives on Materials in ELT, ed. S. Garton and K. Graves, 1–15. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan UK.
Graves, K.  and S. Garton. 2014. Materials and ELT: Looking Ahead. In International
Perspectives on Materials in ELT, ed. S. Garton and K. Graves, 270–279. Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Gray, J. 2010. The Construction of English: Culture, Consumerism and Promotion in the ELT
global coursebook. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gray, J. 2013a. Introduction. In Critical perspectives on language teaching materials, ed. J.
Gray, 1–16. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Gray, J. 2013b. Critical perspectives on language teaching materials. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Guerrettaz, A. M. and B. Johnston. 2013. Materials in the classroom ecology. The Modern
Language Journal 97, no. 3: 779–796.
Harwood, N. 2010. Issues in materials development and design. In English Language Teaching
Materials: Theory and Practice, ed. N. Harwood, 3–30. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Field Code Changed
Harwood, N. 2013. Content, consumption, and production: Three levels of textbook research.
In English Language Teaching Textbooks: Content, Consumption, Production, ed. N. Harwood,
1–41. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Kangasvieri, T., E. Miettinen, P. Kukkohovi and M. Härmälä, Marita. 2011. Kielten tarjonta ja
kielivalintojen perusteet perusopetuksessa. Finnish National Board of Education. [The language
supply and the grounds for language choices in basic education].
Kangasvieri, T. 2017. L2 motivation in focus: the case of Finnish comprehensive schools
students. The Language Learning Journal, 1–16. DOI: 10.1080/09571736.2016.1258719.
Littlejohn, A.. 2011. The analysis of language teaching materials: inside the Trojan Horse. In
Materials Development in Language Teaching, ed. B. Tomlinson, 179–211. 2nd ed.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Littlejohn, A. 2012. Language Teaching Materials and the (Very) Big Picture. Electronic
Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 9, no. 1: 283–297.
López-Barrios, M. and E. V. de Debat. 2014. Global vs. Local: Does It Matter? In
International Perspectives on Materials in ELT, ed. S. Garton and K. Graves, 37–52.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Maijala, M. 2010. Grammatische Unterrichtsinhalte in Lehrwerken Deutsch als Fremdsprache
[Grammatical content in textbooks for teaching German as a foreign language]. Zielsprache
Deutsch 37, no: 3, 17–44.
Masuhara, H. 2011. What do teachers really want from coursebooks? In Materials
Development in Language Teaching, ed. B. Tomlinson, 236–266. 2nd ed. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Masuhara, H. and B. Tomlinson. 2008. Materials for General English. In English language
learning materials: A critical review, ed. B. Tomlinson, 17–37. London, New York:
Continuum.
McDonough, J. and C. Shaw. 2012. Materials and Methods in ELT. Oxford: Blackwell.
McGrath, I. 2002. Materials evaluation and design for language teaching. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
McGrath, I. 2006. Teachers' and learners' images for coursebooks. ELT journal 60, no. 2: 171–
180.
Nation, I.S.P and J. Macalister. 2010. Language Curriculum Design. New York, London:
Routledge.
Neuner, G. 1994. Aufgaben und Übungsgeschehen im Deutschunterricht [Tasks and exercises
in teaching German]. Fremdsprache Deutsch 10: 6–13.
Formatted: Finnish
Field Code Changed
Neuner, G., M. Krüger and U. Grewer. 1981. Übungstypologie zum kommunikativen
Deutschunterricht. [Typology of exercises in communicative German teaching]. Berlin.
Newby, D. 2014. Do grammar exercises help? Assessing the effectiveness of grammar
pedagogy. In ELT: Harmony and Diversity, ed. C. Haase and N. Orlova,  3–16. Newcastle
upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Peacock, M. 1997. The effect of authentic materials on the motivation of EFL learners. ELT
journal 51, no. 2: 144–156.
Richards, J. C. 2014. The ELT Textbook. In International Perspectives on Materials in ELT,
ed. S. Garton and K. Graves, 19–36. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Roberts, J. T. 1996. Demystifying materials evaluation. System 24, no. 3: 375–389.
Ros i Solé, C.. 2013. Spanish Imagined: Political and Subjective Approaches to Language
Textbooks. In Critical perspectives on language teaching materials, ed. J. Gray, 161–181.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Sercu, L. 2013. Exercise types and grading. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Language Teaching
and Learning, ed. M. Byram and A. Hu, 242–245. 2nd ed. London, New York: Routledge.
Sheldon, L. E. 1988. Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT Journal 42, no. 4:. 237–
246.
Tammenga-Helmantel, M. 2012. Zur Positionsbestimmung von Grammatik in DaF-
Lehrwerken am Beispiel der Schulbücher in der niederländischen Unterstufe [On the position
of grammar in teaching materials for German as a foreign language in Dutch lower secondary
education]. Deutsch als Fremdsprache 49, no. 2: 67–77.
Thornbury, S. 2011. Language teaching methodology. In The Routledge Handbook of Applied
Linguistics, ed. J. Simpson, 185–199. London, New York: Routledge.
Tomlinson, B. 2011. Glossary of basic terms for materials development in language teaching.
In Materials Development in Language Teaching, ed.  B.  Tomlinson,  ix-xviii.  2nd  ed.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tomlinson, B. 2012. Materials development for language learning and teaching. Language
Teaching 45, no. 2: 143–179.
Tomlinson, B. and H. Masuhara. 2010. Published research on materials development for
language learning. In Research for materials development in language learning,  ed.  B.
Tomlinson and H. Masuhara, 1–18. London: Continuum.
Tomlinson, B., B. Dat, H. Masuhara and R. Rubdy. 2001. EFL courses for adults. ELT Journal
55, no. 1: 80–100.
Verdelhan, M. and L. Sercu. 2013. Textbooks. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Language
Teaching and Learning, ed. M. Byram and A. Hu, 720–724. 2nd ed. London, New York:
Routledge.
Appendix 1. Description of the GFL course books.
Title of the
book
(abbreviations
in brackets)
Year of
publication
Components
(supplementary components
in brackets)
Size Subdivision Type
of the
book
Country of
use
Echt! 1 (E 1) 2008 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, files with
answer key and assessment
material)
textbook (156
pages);
workbook
(261 pages)
14 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Finland
Echt! 2 (E 2) 2012 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, files with
answer key and assessment
material)
textbook (222
pages);
workbook
(243 pages)
14 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Finland
Kompass
Deutsch Neu 7
(KDN 7)
2012 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, files with
answer key and assessment
material)
textbook (221
pages);
workbook
(228 pages)
16 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Finland
Kompass
Deutsch Neu 8
(KDN 8)
2012 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, files with
answer key and assessment
material)
textbook (249
pages);
workbook
(254 pages)
14 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Finland
Super 8 (S 8) 2012 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
textbook in
one volume
for S 8 and S
12 units
(grammar
rules and
local Finland
teachers’ guide, files with
answer key and assessment
material)
9 (175 pages);
workbook
(243 pages)
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
Super 9 (S 9) 2012 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, files with
answer key and assessment
material)
workbook
(243 pages)
12 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Finland
Studio Deutsch
1 (SD 1)
2011 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, files with
answer key  and assessment
material)
textbook (111
pages);
workbook
(226 pages)
16 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Finland
Studio Deutsch
2 (SD 2)
2011 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, files  with
answer key and assessment
material)
textbook (140
pages);
workbook
(224 pages)
16 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Finland
Mach ’s gut 1
(MG 1)
2003 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CD for
teacher and student,
teacher’s guide, answer
key)
textbook (115
pages);
workbook
(216 pages)
12 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Netherlands
Mach ’s gut 2
(MG 2)
2004 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CD for
teacher and student,
teacher’s guide, answer
key)
textbook (152
pages);
workbook
(240 pages)
12 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Netherlands
Na Klar! 1–2
(NK 1–2)
2006 textbook and two
workbooks (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, book  with
answer key  and assessment
textbook (164
pages);
workbook A
(91 pages);
workbook B
9 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
local Netherlands
material, supplementary
materials on website)
(117) the
workbook)
Na Klar! 3 (NK
3)
2007 textbook and two
workbooks (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, book with
answer key and assessment
material, supplementary
materials on website)
textbook (170
pages);
workbook A
(91 pages);
workbook B
(117)
9 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Netherlands
Neue Kontakte.
1–2 (NeKo 1–
2)
2008 textbook and two
workbooks (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, book  with
answer key and assessment
material, supplementary
materials on website)
textbook (144
pages);
workbook A
(135 pages);
workbook B
(144)
6 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Netherlands
Neue Kontakte.
3 (NeKo 3)
2009 textbook and two
workbooks (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, book with
answer key and assessment
material, supplementary
materials on website)
textbook (144
pages);
workbook A
(144 pages);
workbook B
(138)
6 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Netherlands
Salzgitter heute
1 (SH 1)
2010 textbook and two
workbooks (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, book with
answer key and assessment
material)
textbook (146
pages);
workbook A
(86 pages);
workbook B
(97)
8 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Netherlands
Salzgitter heute
2 (SH 2)
2011 textbook and two
workbooks (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, book with
answer key and assessment
material)
textbook (156
pages);
workbook A
(92 pages);
workbook B
(110)
8 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Netherlands
TrabiTour 1
(TT 1)
2013 textbook and three
workbooks (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, book with
answer key and assessment
material, supplementary
materials on website)
textbook (119
pages);
workbook A
(113 pages);
workbook B
(123 pages);
workbook C
9 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Netherlands
(119 pages)
TrabiTour 2
(TT 2)
2014 textbook and three
workbooks (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide, book with
answer key and assessment
material, supplementary
materials on website)
textbook (137
pages);
workbook D
(136 pages);
workbook E
(130 pages);
workbook F
(134 pages)
9 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the
workbook)
local Netherlands
Team Deutsch
1 (TD 1)
2010 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide)
textbook (176
pages);
workbook
(128 pages)
10 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the textbook)
localis
ed
Netherlands
Team Deutsch
2 (TD 2)
2011 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide)
textbook (175
pages);
workbook
(127pages)
10 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the textbook)
localis
ed
Netherlands
Planet (P 1) 2004 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide)
textbook (128
pages);
workbook
(128 pages)
16 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the textbook)
global Netherlands
Planet 2 (P 2) 2005 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide)
textbook (128
pages);
workbook
(128 pages)
16 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the textbook)
global Netherlands
Genial (G 1) 2002 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide)
textbook (120
pages);
workbook (96
pages)
15 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
the textbook)
global Netherlands
Genial 2 (G 2) 2003 textbook and workbook in
two volumes (CDs for the
student and teacher,
teachers’ guide)
textbook (120
pages);
workbook
(104 pages)
15 units
(grammar
rules and
exercises
included in
global Netherlands
the textbook)
Acknowledgements: We would like to thank anonymous reviewers for
their valuable suggestions and corrections and our dear colleagues Marja-Liisa Lehto and Jane
Honka for careful reading of the manuscript and useful advice.