|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Carpal Tunnel
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296 |
Dear Plutarch,
For the first time in SAT history, students will have a written essay as part of their SAT scores beginning in 2005. Students will have twenty-five minutes to respond to an essay topic, organize their thoughts, write the essay and proofread it. For anyone who has been working with high school writers with less than average verbal skills, this is truly a difficult task, especially since the task will have bearing upon college admissions. However, the essay on the SAT test will now be in place and I like to think that whatever I am doing well in the classroom might help my students become better thinkers, writers, and even higher scorers on this new test. The scope of the writing opportunities my students get to try is wide and varied. Some topics work better than others; free writings are always best--those writings in which students do not have to worry at all about usage and mechanics; essays are hardest, but are very rewarding for me to evaluate by spring because most students have learned to organize their thoughts so that another human being can follow the line of thinking. I happen to love writing, and I do hope I convey in spades my enthusiam for the written word, and most especially the written words of my students.
Your response was interesting to what I initiated as a simple inquiry into one of literally thousands of questions a teacher could pose about writing. Your response was not particularly original. The reason I say not particularly original is because what you wrote has been observed by countless teachers I have personally known and also in thousands upon thousands of articles about writing, poetry, rhythm, the oral tradition in the classroom, and so on. However, you moved from my questioning of a very insignificant model for testing prepositions to expression of your own philosophy about common sense applied in the teaching of writing. Terrific. I agree with you. I also use the practices you described in my own classroom, and I use other practices you didn't mention.
After reading your initial response, I thought, "Plutarch certainly jumps to many conclusions." After reading your response from this morning, I thought, "Plutarch jumps to many more." It is surprising to me to see just how many conclusions you've reached about my own teaching by my simply asking about the preposition model that I found lacking--and certainly wouldn't use as a standard with my own students--and my having mentioned that we do teach students how to punctuate prepositional phrases that begin sentences. You also commented on the list of prepositions that I had simply copied out of the grammar book. I cannot imagine a grammar book lying around that didn't include a list of prepositions, a list of subordinating conjunctions, a list of personal pronouns, and so on. I think lists of examples, whether open or closed sets, are commonly used in all grammar texts. You commented on teaching punctuation of prepositional phrases. For better or worse (and I believe for better), we do work with punctuation as a means the writer has of letting the reader know how his message should sound. Punctuation is to the writer as rests are to the composer, plain and simple, most likely too simple, but perhaps you understand the analogy. I teach ninth grade, and still the tenth grade teachers comment that some students do not use punctuation well for even simple concepts such as items in a series. But writing is a process; it evolves; students improve; teachers improve. I listen carefully to what the teachers around here say, I try their methods, and I view their complaints to my own students so my own will know that some writing traits, such as a poor mastery of punctuation, can give a reader the wrong impression of their own merit. So, I hope you see that you and I do agree, but I will use a phrase that you apparently bristle at (introductory prepositional phrases) simply because that phrase helps some of my students, the more left-brained in the crew. You have to realize that people learn best in different ways. What works for you, Plutarch, could be a method that is anathema to another student. The challenge of a determined teacher is to incorporate many different ways and approaches into the classroom so that the final outcome is a group of students who will write well, write with emotional honesty, and write with confidence. You may have been my Plutarch over there in the desk by the door who detested learning parts of speech, but you may have been the one who, when reading aloud, capitivated the entire class. However, in the other corner is Jordan who, though a horrible oral reader, needs to know the naming of parts, needs to know down to the last detail why this word is called an adjective here but a verb over there. And I do have a Jordan and he must understand word functions, punctuation rules precisely and with some comfort level reached about the--ah, me--exceptions. And you two are just two types among so many who dwell inside the English classroom.
There is a great deal I could write about the virtues of teaching parts of speech, and there is a great deal more I could write about the multitude of ways in which parts of speech are taught. But I won't. I'll just say that, yes, I do teach parts of speech, I love teaching the parts of speech, I bring a lot of imagination to the teaching of parts of speech, and I even quote passages from A Word a Day in these lessons from time to time. It is a very good idea to teach parts of speech, but understanding a dictionary and the scope of the entries does require that one basically understands what a part of speech is. Faldage called me on calling concerning, considering and but prepositions, when he believed they were not; I referred him to MW where those three words are clearly identified as prepositions in certain functions. If Faldage had called me on something in which I had been in error, I would have written here that he was correct. I certainly have done so in the past when in error. But the point I make here is that teachers at the very least should make sure their students understand how words function in the glory of sentences we offer to them so that, at the very least, their students can use their dictionaries with understanding. And that is at the very least, Plutarch.
Let me address writing:
It has been my experience that students learn to look forward to writing when the fear of being marked down for errors is removed and, more importantly, that they know their thoughts will be responded to by a careful and caring teacher. My own students write to me at the beginning of each class, and they tell me what's on their minds: problems, celebrations, observations, narrations--any topic they choose. And I take these usually two-page invitations into their lives and respond honestly to the places that are strongest in terms of expressive strengths. I don't offer advice, and I don't try to overrule their own emotions with my own experience. Instead, if a student writes about an event and recalls an impressive list of details, I will comment on that strength; if a student shows insight into a situation, I comment on that; if a student asks interesting questions of himself, I comment on that. In other words, I am a deeply listening ear--and I care, so I take care to respond. If you've ever wanted someone to listen to you and notice you--really notice you--then I'm your man when it comes to reading your free writings.
Essays are altogether different for the English teacher and student. Essays are the place where rigorous proofreading must occur, not only for usage and mechanics errors, but also for content, organization, and written expression. Yes, the student is still expressing his opinion, but the rigor of essay writing challenges the student to make reasonable arguments and to organize those arguments so that most readers will understand his points. I try to build up my students' confidence through their free writings, and then help them understand how to improve their editing and organizing in the writing of the formal essays. I see the free writings as a safety valve for the rigors required in essay writing. And I see the study of grammar as a tool that helps the student editor.
You name it; we try to do it in English 9: spell, conjugate, parse, speak, read, rap, write, edit, sing, chant, create, negate, hypothesize, order, dream, celebrate.
And we fail at times. And I admit failure at times, such as in the preposition model I offered to the A Word A Day bulletin board readers as an example of a teaching model that struck me as being flawed. But, Plutarch, I will continue to examine any model anyone mentions that resonates with productive possibility if it leads my students toward learning to thrive in writing about their lives, whether formally or informally.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
wonderfully expressed, Ww.
I have one rather unrelated question: do you give lessons in remedial paragraph structure? (just wondering.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
what a great essay, WW!
there are some here who have seen my formal writing (it takes me hours!) and some here who have heard me speak casually, and in my 'professional voice' --my formal speaking, like my formal writing, is very different.
its much easier for me to slip into formal speaking.. but spelling and grammar are subjects i still stuggle with on a daily basis, in both formal and casual writing.
what i did learn, i learned best from teachers who double scored--1 grade for ideas, organization and presentation, a second grade for spelling, punctuation and grammer--i often scored A+ over F!(as i still often do here!) but, because they recognized my thoughts, i made much more of an effort to work on the details that mattered to them- (spelling punctuation and grammar!) and was able at the end of 2 terms to consistantly get A over C or A over B.
i love spell check (in general, Ænegma is not the most helpful spell checkers!) and i find, that the constant, non critical corrections offered by MSWord help alot! (that is intentional i like alot so much better than a lot!)
there are now new words in my written vocabulary. works, that i avoided for years, that i have now learned to spell!(i now can make decisions! i used to exersize an option (or opt, or opted) i used to choose (or made a choice) but i couldn't spell decide or decision for years, so i never used the word!
Dyslexia, combined with caring but overwhelmed teachers --i attend a small parachial school during the baby boom--some of my elementary classes were packed with 75 students! way too many students for any one teacher to effective teach. the average class size was 65 students (starting in 4th grade)
Still, enough of the basic rules of grammar seeped into my brain. Songs/rhythms and rhymes worked well for me, and so did clear explainations of the rules and exceptions.
i follow many of thread here about grammar, and the discussion between the prescriptives vs. the descriptives closly (but i rarely partcipate) i am still learning grammar.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
and I do hope I convey in spades my enthusiasm for the written word, and most especially the written words of my studentsYou certainly do, Wordwind. Your students are obviously very lucky to have you. Thank you for taking the time and trouble to straighten me out. I am heartened to hear that what little I had to say which passes as valid criticism has been said many times before by many others more qualified than myself to say it, and more likely to do something constructive about it. Thanks again.  P.S. I won't apologize for my presumptuous criticisms only because my presumption has resulted in such a marvellous insight into what good teachers can and are doing in the classroom, and this passage, in particular, convinces me that you are amongst the very best of them. You name it; we try to do it in English 9: spell, conjugate, parse, speak, read, rap, write, edit, sing, chant, create, negate, hypothesize, order, dream, celebrate.WOW! Can't say I ever had a teacher who was as passionately committed, creative and capable* as you are. You are a credit to your profession, Wordwind. And a credit to AWADtalk ... says Plutarch slinking away abashed. [Not that I am inviting anyone else to abash me. ] * In addition, you are a very cool cucumber -- which also comes in handy in the classroom, I'll bet.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,692
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,692 |
That was a joy to read WW. Thank you for sharing your passion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
In addition, you are a very cool cucumber"Can't you just picture the British soldiers in 1845 Afghanistan taking time out for tea at three o'clock while being attacked by hordes of unpleasant fellows with long swords and rifles? Talk about cool, 'Pass the scones please, old chap?'" http://www.gourmetretailer.com/gourmetretailer/magazine/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=2036816You would be as formidable a figure in the courtroom as you are in the classroom, Wordwind.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
Still, enough of the basic rules of grammar seeped into my brain. Songs/rhythms and rhymes worked well for me, and so did clear explainations of the rules and exceptions.
i follow many of thread here about grammar, and the discussion between the prescriptives vs. the descriptives closly (but i rarely partcipate) i am still learning grammar.Reading your story makes me wonder if there is some value to all this discussion about grammar after all. I never got a single thing out of a grammar lesson [as far as I know*] but maybe this stuff does "seep" into you, as you say, Of Troy. Now that I think of it, I think I acquired all the grammar I have accumulated to this very day before I entered Grade 1 ... listening to my parents talk and having them correct my own talk. But I never heard anything about prepositions, or nouns, or pronouns, or verbs or adjectives and adverbs, and certainly none of that more exotic stuff, from either of my parents, so I do wonder why teachers need to use these words to teach grammar. Of course, some of these words [noun, verb, adjective, adverb, in particular] are a useful addition to anyone's vocabulary, but why are these words used so preemptively to teach grammar? I still don't get it. Don't kids learn by imitating the language of others, and being shown how to say it right when they say it wrong, rather than by learning rules? It seems to me, as an outsider, that these "rules" simply get in the way of learning.I accept that many children don't hear the best grammar at home, but doesn't that mean that these children should hear more proper english at school and less talk about "the rules"? * Actually, I do remember one thing I learned for the first time in a classroom. Never dangle a participle. And I must have learned that lesson pretty well, because I never do. Also, I know what a "participle" is**. It's not a very useful word, but I remember it anyway, without any particular resentment. Aside: Perhaps I should feel resentful because I hear that the "dangling participle rule" has been relaxed or withdrawn completely. Perhaps it has, perhaps not, but either way, it doesn't matter. I'll be a "prescriptivist" on this one, not as a matter of principle but instead as a matter of habit. *** Actually, I didn't know what a "dangling participle" was until I read the page linked below a minute ago. I thought a "dangling participle" was leaving a word like "of" at the end of a sentence. [Eg. "the disease he died of."] Seems I had it wrong. In any case, it seems to be less of a sin to "dangle a participle" today than it was in my schooldays, as this extract from "Dangling a Participle" suggests: "The agreement among speakers of English that the subject of a participle (which is the same as saying `what it modifies') should come close behind it makes perfect sense in keeping our statements free of ambiguities like (1) to (3). But here as everywhere else, being rigid and across-the-board about it gets us into the realm of pedantry. Look at these:
Speaking of John, he could work with us too.
Considering all the facts, this should be easy to resolve.
Knowing that, those plans had better be abandoned."http://home.bluemarble.net/~langmin/miniatures/dangling.htm
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
re Don't kids learn by imitating the language of others, and being shown how to say it right when they say it wrong, rather than by learning rules?
I realize now that I have avoided dangling participles throughout my life, but it's not because I understood the rule against "dangling participles". Obviously, I didn't because I just learned the rule a few minutes ago. [In fact, I just learned what a "participle" is a few minutes ago ... and even now I'm not sure I know what it is.]
I have avoided dangling participles all my life because it just didn't sound right to dangle them.
Isn't this proof that people learn from listening to proper english being spoken, or by reading it, not from rules?
From my own experience, I am convinced this is true. Why wouldn't it be true for all children?
Maybe we could make more headway in grammar school without all the intimidating names for parts of speech and the like and all the intimidating, not to mention confusing, rules?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
in any field, language, knitting, or auto mechanics, there are special terms, and 'languge' to explain the workings.
I know the 4 bacis parts of a cycle (in a gas combustion engine) Intake, compression, exploition, exhaust--(are these the correct term? maybe--or maybe just close enough.)
but if my career was based on improving engine performence, i would need to know these terms, and others, and understand them. i would use the specialize language of engineers. this language would actually help me convey ideas that others could understand.
Maybe we could make more headway in grammar school without all the intimidating names for parts of speech and the like and all the intimidating, not to mention confusing, rules?
Yes, most of use learn to speak reasonably good english by doing nothing more than listening to others speak.
but there are irregular verbs to be learned, and general rules..(word order rules) spelling rules, and so on. and not every child is blessed and born into a household with adult that speak proper english. and the children that grows up hearing errors, and having its basic errors uncorrected are at a disadvantage.
have you spend time around a 3 or 4 year old? they will tell you 'she goed'. they know the verb go. and they have figured out the rule adding ED to a verb makes it the past tense. But they don't yet know the rules for irregular verbs. so 'they goed' is their 'natural english'
i was so startled when as a teen, i was asked to 'congigate' the verb to be. i really had to think about it. i always used the verb correctly, but i hadn't realized (duh!) that
i am
you/ are
he/she/it is
we are
they are
i have been
you have been
i was, she was, he was
we are being
they were
etc..
were all the ROOT same verb. i never put it together.
learning these rules and details helps us(well me!) understand our language better.
it might be the dyslexics of the world need the rules more than others. certainly i spell better when words follow the rules (i before e, except after c..or when sounded as A as in neighboor and weight.) but i it took me years to remember how to spell friend- (no c, no A sound in the middle.. was it friend or freind? ) eventually i learned to remember not to fry the end of my friends but to always fri ends.
i have a 1000 or so of those silly nmemotics in my head. so i can mostly spell the 4000 or so commonest words i use.
perhaps, because language (written language)made sense to you right off the bat, you underappreciate the structure.
maybe understanding structure isn't important to you (or comes naturally to you!) and your experience, while it might be widely shared, is not the only way people experience language.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,385 |
Thanks for taking the time to explain and to share your insights, Of Troy. Your Dyslexia may make you a diamond in the rough at times, but you are a diamond all the same.
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,322
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
466
guests, and
4
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
