Author
Cherry Mae O. Espara*
Northeastern College, Santiago City, Isabela, Philippines
Alma P. Gonzales, PhD
Northeastern College, Santiago City, Isabela, Philippines
E-mail: almagonzales@northeasterncollege.edu.ph
Abstract
Grammar proficiency is essential for junior high school students to communicate clearly and develop effective English language skills. However, limited local evidence is available on the specific grammar difficulties of students at Saint Joseph’s College of Baggao, Cagayan. This study assessed the grammar skills of 50 junior high school students at the institution. It employed a descriptive research design and used a researcher-developed grammar proficiency test covering parts of speech, subject-verb agreement, verb tenses, pronoun usage, prepositions, and sentence construction. The results showed an overall mean score of 61.5%. Students performed best in parts of speech, with 74%, while prepositions received the lowest score of 52%. Sentence construction and verb tenses also emerged as areas requiring further attention. These findings provided a basis for developing a contextualized grammar instructional program. English teachers are encouraged to use targeted grammar activities and regular assessments to address students’ identified learning needs.
Keywords: Grammar proficiency, junior high school, English instruction, grammatical competencies, instructional program.
*Corresponding author
DOI: http://doi.org/10.69651/PIJHSS05041635
Recommended citation:
Espara, C. M. O., & Gonzales, A. P. (2026). Grammar proficiency among junior high school students: Identifying learning gaps for targeted English instruction. Pantao (International Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences) 5 (4), 924-931. http://doi.org/10.69651/PIJHSS05041635
Read the full text
References
Capin, C. E., & Mamonong, V. H. (2025). Awareness of Philippine English and influence of Filipinism as predictors of the grammatical competence of senior high school students. International Journal of Education Research for Higher Learning, 32(2). https://doi.org/10.17158/tg8vav27
DeKeyser, R., & Prieto Botana, G. (2015). The effectiveness of processing instruction in L2 grammar acquisition: A narrative review. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 290–305. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu071
Department of Education. (2016). K to 12 basic education curriculum: English curriculum guide. https://lrmds.deped.gov.ph/detail/23/5449
Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 83–107. https://doi.org/10.2307/40264512
Ellis, R. (2008). Investigating grammatical difficulty in second language learning: Implications for second language acquisition research and language testing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 4–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2008.00184.x
Magbanua, J. J. (2024). Enhancing English grammar skills of Grade 9 students through the use of an English grammar application. ELT Worldwide: Journal of English Language Teaching, 11(2), 394. https://doi.org/10.26858/eltww.v11i2.66180
Sabaduquia, L. R., & Pal-Ing, J. C. (2026). Students’ age and grammar competence. International Journal of Educational Innovations and Research, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.63671/ijeir.v2i3.159
Sacal, P. G. Y., & Potane, J. D. (2023). Students’ mastery of English grammar towards effective writing and speaking competence. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 4(8), 2894–2904. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.04.08.27
Samaranos, A. J. R., & Biol, I. M., Jr. (2024). Communicative competence in English among junior high school students. JPAIR Multidisciplinary Research, 57(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.7719/jpair.v57i1.893
Shintani, N., Li, S., & Ellis, R. (2013). Comprehension-based versus production-based grammar instruction: A meta-analysis of comparative studies. Language Learning, 63(2), 296–329. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12001
Toth, P. D. (2022). Introduction: Investigating explicit L2 grammar instruction through multiple theoretical and methodological lenses. Language Learning, 72(S1), 5–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12490