100 Years of Research in English

Question: What have we learned about teaching secondary English in the 100 years that the NCTE has been in existence?

Answer/Quote: “First, we have learned that the teaching of traditional school grammar á la Warriner and that ilk does next to nothing to advance a better writing and even correctness in writing.

“Second, we have learned that writing is a process, though we may disagree about some important parts of the process.

“Third, we know that real discussion…is essential to learning how to interpret literature….

 “Fourth, we know from a very wide variety of studies in English and out of it, that students who are authentically engaged with the tasks of their learning are likely to learn much more than those who are not….” P. 189.

Comment: Traditional school grammar is useless in improving writing or correctness. Writing is a process. Discussion is significant in interpreting literature. Authentic engagement produces better learning. Each of these findings calls for significant discussion. Try them out  on your colleagues. RayS.

Title: “Commenting on ‘Research in Secondary English, 1912-2011: Historical Continuities and Discontinuities in the NCTE Imprint.’ ” George Hillocks Jr. Research in the Teaching of English (November 2011), 187-192.