Approaches for Mastering Coordinative Appositions Exceptions in Simple Present Tense

Farisani Thomas Nephawe, Matodzi Nancy Lambani


Coordinative appositions bring coordination between words, phrases, and clauses in communication. They are one grammatical feature requiring second language learners’ competence in its usage. However, the use of the coordinative appositions exceptions in English language is concerning. They usually deviate from the exceptions involved in the use of the coordinating conjunction ‘and’ in the simple present tense. In South African schools, English First Additional Language learners are affected by this learning adversity. The research paper aimed at investigating a suitable approach for mastering the coordinative appositions exceptions in the simple present tense. A quantitative research approach was used by the researchers because the findings could be reduced to numbers and percentages using statistical procedures. Using a questionnaire, data were collected from the respondents. Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 22 and IBM SPSS version 25 both were utilised to analyse data after the findings from each software were collated for validity purposes. A random sampling technique was used to sample 8 respondents from an overall enrolment of 65 Grade eight learners at Andries Mugaguli Secondary School in Limpopo Province, South Africa. Although pre-test findings showed poor performance in using ‘Hangman’ approach, after utilising the ‘coordinating conjunction board game, learners’ performance improved remarkably. The research recommends regular practise in the exceptions involved in the use of the coordinating conjunction ‘and’ in the simple present tense.


compound subjects; concord; coordinating conjunctions; exceptions.

Full Text:



Abuhamda, E., Bsharat, T. R. A. & Ismail, I. A. (2021). Understanding quantitative and qualitative research methods: A theoretical perspective of young researchers. International Journal of Research, 8(2):71-87.

Anderton, C. L. & King, E. M. (2016). Promoting multicultural literacies through game-based embodiment: A case study of counsellor education students and the role-playing game oblivion. On the Horizon, 24(1): 44-45.

Aryal. S. (2019). Questionnaire method of data collection. Microbe Notes. Available online at:[Accessed on 8 September 2021].

Bahari, S. F. (2010). Qualitative versus quantitative research strategies: contrasting epistemological and ontological assumptions. Sains Humanika, 52(1):[Accessed on 12 October 2021].

Balwit, D. (2017). Tricky English grammar: Gerund subjects. Intermediate English. Available online at: [Accessed on 8 March 2021].

Barak, A. (1990). Counsellor training in empathy by a game procedure. Counsellor Education and Supervision, 29, p. 170-178.

Basias, N. & Pollalis, Y. (2018). Quantitatve and qualitative research in business & technology: Justifying a suitable research methodology. Review of integrative Business and Economics research, 7, pp.91-105.

Blanton, E. G. (2017). Real-time data as an instructional tool: examining engagement and comprehension (PhD Thesis). Lynchburg, VA 24515, USA: Liberty University.

Chele, M. I. (2015). An analysis of subject agreement errors in English: The case of third-year students at the National University of Lesotho. Roma: National University of Lesotho.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Curriculum Assessment Policy Statement. (2011). English FAL Grades R-12. Pretoria: Department of Basic Education.

Estliden, K. P. (2017). “Why is it important to learn English?”: A study of attitudes and motivation towards English and English language learning in Swedish upper secondary school. Available online at: [Accessed on 6 August 2021].

Forbes, L. K. (2021). The process of play in learning in higher education: A phenomenological study. Journal of Teaching and Learning, 15(1):57-73. [Accessed on 8 October 2021].

James, A. & Nerantzi, C. (2019). The power of play in higher education: Creativity in tertiary learning. Palgrave Macmillan. Journal of Teaching and Learning 15(1):1.

Isaacs, B. (2018). Understanding the Montessori approach (2nd ed.). London and New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.

Khan, S. I. (2020). Parts of speech. Available online at: [Accessed on 6 August 2021].

Kirszner, L. G. & Mandell, S.R. (2015). Writing first with readings: paragraphs and essays. (6th ed.). Boston, New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s.

Kusumawardhani, P. (2017). The analysis of conjunctions in writing an English narrative composition: A syntax perspective. Wanastra: Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra, 9(1):1-7.

Leithwood, K., Harris, A. & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1):5-22. [Accessed on 11 October 2021].

Lester, M. & Beason, L. (2013). The McGraw-Hill handbook of English grammar and usage. (rev. 2nd ed.). New York: Mark Lester and Larry Beason.

Mohajan, H. K. (2017). Two criteria for good measurements in research: Validity and reliability. UTC Annals of Spiru Haret University, 17(3):58-82.

Muhsin, M. A. (2016). Analysing the students’ errors in using simple present: A case study at Junior high school in Makassar, Pacific Science Review B: Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(3):81-87.

Nicholas, J. (2006). Introduction to descriptive statistics. Sydney: University of Sydney.

Nishanthi, R. (2018). The importance of learning English in today's world. International Journal of Trend in International Open Access Journal, 3(1): 2456-6470.

Piaget, J. (2013). The construction of reality in the child (Vol. 82). Routledge.

Pisheh, N. M. & Bagheri, M. S. (2012). The impact of educational games on vocabulary and grammar learning of elementary Iranian EFL learners. Iranian EFL Journal,8(6):50-66.

Stapa, S. H. (2010). Analysis of errors in subject-verb agreement among Malaysian ESL. Available online at: ejournals. [Accessed on 11 February 2021].

Swank, J. M. (2012). Using games to creatively enhance the counsellor education curriculum.

Tarpley, L. G. (2021). FluentU: 27 common English conjunctions and how to use them. Georgia, United States: Enux Education Limited.

TeachThis. (2021). Coordinating conjunctions board game. Available online at: › resources › coordinating-conjunctions-board-game [Accessed: 10 August 2021].

Thoughtful Learning K-12 Newsletter. (2021). Teaching conjunctions. Available online at: [Accessed:10 August 2021].

Unubi, A. S. (2019). Conjunctions in English: meaning, types, and uses. International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research, 4 (3): 202-213.

Warfield, D. (2010). Is/it research: a research methodologies review. Journal of theoretical & applied information technology, 13. pp 28-35.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Published by:

Institute of Managing and Publishing of Scientific Journals STKIP Singkawang

Sekolah Tinggi Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan (STKIP) Singkawang

Address : STKIP Singkawang, Jalan STKIP - Kelurahan Naram Singkawang, Kalimantan Barat, INDONESIA, 79251
No. Telp.   : +62562 420 0344
No. Fax.    : +62562 420 0584

JETL (Journal of  Education, Teaching, and Learning)

e-ISSN : 2477-8478

p-ISSN : 2477-5924

Editor in Chief Contact: [email protected] / Wa: +6282142072788

Publisher Contact: [email protected] / Wa: +6282142072788

Management Tools


JETL Indexed by:



  Creative Commons License

JETL (Journal of Education, Teaching, and Learning) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.