When I saw that the majority of our readings for this week were about teaching grammar, I’ll admit that I was a bit excited. Teaching grammar has always been one of those pet peeves of mine. I cannot stress enough how important I think that it is to write in agreement with the standard English conventions and rules. As we are teaching students to enter into the culture of power and succeed in this society, they have to be able to write according to the agreed upon rules of grammar and rhetoric. While these rules are arbitrary and not nearly as important as the creation of meaning and content, one simple punctuation error can cause a great idea to be dismissed. Our students will not be taken seriously in this culture of power if they cannot conform to these standards. Yet, few students really do understand or implement these rules in their writing.
The more time that I spend in the schools, the more dismayed I am about the mistakes that students are making in their writing. Many seniors in high school are still not able to use punctuation rules correctly or to tell the difference between its and it’s. In the Edina school district and many other districts, grammar has been set on the back burner. Few teachers ever actually set aside time to teach grammar explicitly to their students, as it is not demanded in the curriculum. Teachers do not want to bog down students or make writing feel like a chore. The focus is on gaining fluency and getting the words down on paper. And while this is important, I am a strong advocate of getting students to know how to construct sentences properly. It is essential if they are going to climb up the social ladder.
I liked how the Dornan reading discussed the subjectivity and arbitrariness of Grammar 3 conventions. The chapter we read gave a brief history about how correct grammar has changed over the years. Years ago double negatives were seen as correct, but as the years progressed, certain groups of people wanted to distinguish themselves and thus they made a change. These conventions are not set in stone and they are certainly not innate. I think that as we teach students grammar rules, we have to teach them where they came from. We have to teach them why it is important to learn them and what it means to follow them. I think that students should understand that they do not have to change their own dialect to fit with the standard form of English in their everyday life. In the classroom and in society, different vernaculars and dialects should be allowed. However, when it comes time to write an essay, students have to buckle down and do it the way that the power culture states is correct. This is simply a way of life and until students get access into this culture, they have to follow the rules. Once they are there, they can take the steps to change it.
After doing the readings for the week, I am still uncertain about how I want to approach grammar. I do think that it is important for students to use their grammar skills in their writing. However, I am not completely convinced that a grammar worksheet is not just as or more effective than having students analyze a paragraph from one of the texts that they are reading. I think that it is important to isolate grammar rules so that students really get a chance to play with them so they can master the skill. Repetition is really the key here. I do agree with the chapters in the sense that I think I would have my students use what they learned and perhaps free write using the grammar technique of the day. I’m simply not sure. I am still searching for a better way to teach students grammar in context that is efficient, productive, and useful. I want students to be engaged and I want to make what I teach practical instead of busy work. Yet, sometimes I still see the value in this “busy work.”
One final note that I would like to make is on the Harper reading about revision instruction for creative writing. Normally, I am not that gung-ho on revision tools, but I loved this article. I think that this article presented a great and realistic way to approach revision of creative writing. Creative writing is really the worse to rewrite, because often students are so attached to their work that they can’t seem to separate themselves from it. I have never been an advocate of peer revision, because I have always felt that students either don’t care or are scared to actually give constructive feedback to their fellow students. Yet, I think that Harper’s ideas in this reading make the revision process much more explicit. Having these explicit tools to look for makes it a much more efficient and useful process. I loved the final tool of making a scene where he had the students highlighting the writer’s use of action, dialogue, snapshots, and internal reflection. This breaks down the revision process into something that students can really understand. It takes the feelings out of it and gives students something concrete to work with.
Link of the WeekFor this week, I chose a website from Full Sail University that basically summarizes the main points of our reading into eight bullet points. I like it because it is explicit about how teachers should go about correcting students works. It gives steps for how to approach salient grammar issues and the revision process. Many of the ideas are very easy to implement and seem like they might be very effective in the classroom!
Eight Tips for Teaching Grammar Without a Worksheet
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete