Libyan universities have been through several responses to reform English since the 1970s. The researcher has been concerned about how to improve the English language grammar in Libya. The problem is not just learning English grammar, but the problem is in teaching as well. Non-native English speakers attempted to reform English in Libya, and few of them were Libyans. To improve English schooling within the country, the Libyan Ministry of Education evolved new English curricula in 2000. Primarily based totally on CLT standards for use in Libyan number one and excessive colleges near the preceding curricula, which aimed primarily to train English grammar classes in Libya.
After Libyan independence in 1951, up to the mid-1980s, the English language loved extensive fame in Libya and became, typically speaking, the principal overseas language learned. As a result of political disagreements among Libya and the United Kingdom and the US withinside the 1980s, the Libyan authorities decided to prohibit coaching English as a foreign language. This ban of English intended an entire technology to grow up and not use publicity to English. Almost a decade ago, the authorities realized the mistake of this selection and determined to re-comprise the English language into the academic curriculum of number one and secondary schools, in addition to universities. Since the 1990s, the United States of America has additionally begun the flourish, and the call for getting to know English has increased (2014). Najeeb suggested that the so-called "Grammar Translation Method" become used for coaching English in Libya earlier than English became banned as an Educational subject (2012). The recent studies explore the teaching methods the university teachers follow in teaching English Grammar in Libyan universities. The question is how teachers teach English grammar and what methods they use to help students learn.
The principal purpose is to examine how English and English Grammar is taught in Libyan universities like Tripoli and Zawia. And to accumulate all the factors that have contributed to the decline in standards of students studying grammar. In association, the recent study strives to provide a rationale for repairing the current way of English grammar teaching and the problems of studying it at Libyan universities in the circumstances of new political change in Libya. However, the motivation behind examining the hassles of learning English grammar at the University of Tripoli and the University of Zawia originates from the researcher's beliefs that a long-term plan for teaching English grammar classes should be undertaken to improve the learning skills of teachers and students.
Learning the English language (EGFL) is not an easy task. Different perspectives of teaching and learning grammar due to contextual and theoretical influences led researchers and theorists to develop several approaches. They explained that teachers should consider the difference between Focus on Forms and Focus on Meaning approaches. As reported by Etherington and Burgess, Focus on Form is a synthetic and structural strategy to language, where the focus is on forms preferably than meaning. Focus on Form draws students' consideration to grammatical forms in a communicative context. The other approach is Focus on Meaning which gives attention only to meaning with communicative classroom activities.
Pachler outlined four steps to enhance English grammar classes:
He disputes that teaching grammar can be explicit or implicit, and its success depends upon the knowledge of the teacher and their practice to cope with the teaching process.
Ellis stated that teaching grammar explicitly is improbable to result in the students obtaining the implicit knowledge needed for fluent and accurate language.
Most teachers that teach English to use photocopied sections of textbooks and books. Lecturers F1, F4, and M5 used authoritative texts that involved concise articles written in a commutative way but did not include grammatical explanations and exercises. Teachers encouraged their students to buy separate grammar books. These books contain additional rules and methods for learning grammar, but these books are costly. A single book may cost 50LD, which is difficult for students to buy. Lecturers F2 and F3 used CDs that involved texts with some grammar exercises to strengthen student listening skills. All these exercises are related to technical terminology, and neither included explicit or implicit grammar. The main goal of using these supplementary materials is to encourage students to use language in their social lives and learn more about the culture. In other words, authentic material is used to close the language gap. So it can be said that using grammar textbooks with authentic material is the primary goal of students using the English language in their communicative and practical life. It's the teacher's role to combine both materials and which material comes first.
Interestingly, students of F1 and M5 said that the rooms were decked with data projectors, but they are not used regularly because most of the teachers cannot implement them. All other students stated that their teachers used written documents with audio disks to teach English grammar classes and sometimes used whiteboards to show some data and then apply it. Students M14 said that the teachers only gave grammar worksheets and answered questions without any informative activities. Students F6, F3, M5, and F10, M11, and F12 said they were taught from grammar books in an informative way, but they are not available anymore.
These recommendations were based on the suggestions made by the members of the study.
Language labs enable students to monitor grammatical examples, which they can function through recording themselves and listening to their performance.