10-second review: Students explore the lyrics of R.E.M. and the poems of Emily Dickinson.
Title: “ ‘It Beckons, and It Baffles’--: Resurrecting Emily Dickinson (and Poetry) in the Student-Centered Classroom.” P.L. Thomas. English Journal (March 1998), 60-63. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: Students conclude their unit by using Dickinson’s poems as models to write their own poems.
Comment: A pretty good way to end any unit on poetry. RayS.
The purpose of this blog, English Education Archives, is to review articles of contemporary interest from past issues of English education journals.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Monday, September 29, 2008
Topic: Grammar and Writing
10-second review: The issue of grammar and its relationship to writing is still alive. We need to recognize that research has not been able to prove that a knowledge of grammar improves writing.
Title: “Sacred Cows Make the Best Hamburger.” C Van Zalingen. English Journal (March 1998), 12-13. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Quotes: Question to a presenter on writing workshops at a convention: “When do your students learn the difference between a gerund and a participle?”
“…the formal study of grammar, whether transformational or traditional, improved neither writing quality, nor control over surface corrections.” Patrick Hartwell, College English (February 1985), 106.
“Unfortunately, the premise that students need to know all the parts of speech before they can write well continues to pervade the teaching of writing in spite of the mountain of research which clearly contradicts it.”
“They [adherents of grammar] suspect that writing workshop teachers turn their students loose with wild abandon and allow them to write to their ‘hearts’ content without regard to usage, punctuation or spelling because they ‘don’t matter.’ ”
“Furthermore, when we ourselves write, we do not stop mid-sentence and think to ourselves, ‘I’ve just used the prepositional phrase as an adjective,’ so why do we think drumming the difference between a prepositional phrase used as an adjective and one used as an adverb will enhance our students’ writing?”
Summary: After summarizing the different points of view on the teaching of grammar, the author concludes that grammar is best taught functionally, by helping students learn to correct problems in usage, punctuation and sentence structure within the students’ own writing.
Comment: I think English teachers who are supposed to teach students to think fall into the trap of the “either/or” fallacy. Remember the big brouhaha over process vs. product in writing? You need both. The same is true of formal grammar vs. functional grammar—you need both.
There are times when key concepts like “sentences,” “clauses” and “phrases” can best be taught at one time rather than having to teach it over and over again as each individual student needs it. And, of course, students need to learn to proofread sentence structure, usage, punctuation and spelling in order to polish their writing.
And it’s not grammar vs. writing. You certainly need to teach grammar within the context of writing. However, I do remember that when I was in high school, my English teachers believed that grammar had to be learned first BEFORE they taught writing. As a result, I was never taught to write, went to college and my first composition was returned with the comment, “Where’s your summary paragraph?” I had never heard of a summary paragraph. When my college English teachers mentioned “term papers,” I asked, “What’s a term paper?” I know that is ancient history, but that’s the way it was when I was in high school.
By the way, common sense should tell you that studying grammar will probably not improve writing. Compositions involve quality of content, organization, paragraphs, unity and coherence. Grammar focuses only on the sentence. Judgments of writing focus on the total composition, content, organization, paragraphs primarily—and correctness at the sentence level.
I made up my mind a long time ago on the issue of formal grammar and writing.
1. I do not teach grammar BEFORE teaching writing. I teach grammar and writing at the same time so they can be applied to each other.
2. I always ask and answer the question, “Why?” when I teach grammar. How will the students use what they have learned about grammar in their writing, especially as applied to usage, sentence structure and punctuation. The purpose of grammar, so far as I am concerned, is to polish writing.
3. I teach grammar formally to the class when all the students need to learn the concept as applied to their writing. I teach students to proofread and to use a reference text in order to find answers to their questions about sentence structure, usage and punctuation. RayS.
The purpose of this blog, English Education Archives, is to review articles of contemporary interest from past issues of English education journals.
Title: “Sacred Cows Make the Best Hamburger.” C Van Zalingen. English Journal (March 1998), 12-13. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Quotes: Question to a presenter on writing workshops at a convention: “When do your students learn the difference between a gerund and a participle?”
“…the formal study of grammar, whether transformational or traditional, improved neither writing quality, nor control over surface corrections.” Patrick Hartwell, College English (February 1985), 106.
“Unfortunately, the premise that students need to know all the parts of speech before they can write well continues to pervade the teaching of writing in spite of the mountain of research which clearly contradicts it.”
“They [adherents of grammar] suspect that writing workshop teachers turn their students loose with wild abandon and allow them to write to their ‘hearts’ content without regard to usage, punctuation or spelling because they ‘don’t matter.’ ”
“Furthermore, when we ourselves write, we do not stop mid-sentence and think to ourselves, ‘I’ve just used the prepositional phrase as an adjective,’ so why do we think drumming the difference between a prepositional phrase used as an adjective and one used as an adverb will enhance our students’ writing?”
Summary: After summarizing the different points of view on the teaching of grammar, the author concludes that grammar is best taught functionally, by helping students learn to correct problems in usage, punctuation and sentence structure within the students’ own writing.
Comment: I think English teachers who are supposed to teach students to think fall into the trap of the “either/or” fallacy. Remember the big brouhaha over process vs. product in writing? You need both. The same is true of formal grammar vs. functional grammar—you need both.
There are times when key concepts like “sentences,” “clauses” and “phrases” can best be taught at one time rather than having to teach it over and over again as each individual student needs it. And, of course, students need to learn to proofread sentence structure, usage, punctuation and spelling in order to polish their writing.
And it’s not grammar vs. writing. You certainly need to teach grammar within the context of writing. However, I do remember that when I was in high school, my English teachers believed that grammar had to be learned first BEFORE they taught writing. As a result, I was never taught to write, went to college and my first composition was returned with the comment, “Where’s your summary paragraph?” I had never heard of a summary paragraph. When my college English teachers mentioned “term papers,” I asked, “What’s a term paper?” I know that is ancient history, but that’s the way it was when I was in high school.
By the way, common sense should tell you that studying grammar will probably not improve writing. Compositions involve quality of content, organization, paragraphs, unity and coherence. Grammar focuses only on the sentence. Judgments of writing focus on the total composition, content, organization, paragraphs primarily—and correctness at the sentence level.
I made up my mind a long time ago on the issue of formal grammar and writing.
1. I do not teach grammar BEFORE teaching writing. I teach grammar and writing at the same time so they can be applied to each other.
2. I always ask and answer the question, “Why?” when I teach grammar. How will the students use what they have learned about grammar in their writing, especially as applied to usage, sentence structure and punctuation. The purpose of grammar, so far as I am concerned, is to polish writing.
3. I teach grammar formally to the class when all the students need to learn the concept as applied to their writing. I teach students to proofread and to use a reference text in order to find answers to their questions about sentence structure, usage and punctuation. RayS.
The purpose of this blog, English Education Archives, is to review articles of contemporary interest from past issues of English education journals.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Topic: Censorship
10-second review: A side-effect of censorship incidents is self-censorship.
Title: “Seeing with the Third Eye.” Lloyd Alexander. English Journal (May 1974), 38. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Quote: “Censorship, once begun, is hard to contain. It can soon spread to include any idea or attitude the censors find objectionable. At worst, it can lead to something even more pernicious: self-censorship.”
Comment: Don’t forget the “basics” of preparation for censorship incidents:
1. Policy on book selection.
2. Rationales for literary works, controversial or non-controversial, since no one cannot predict what will be censored.
3. Questionnaire to be completed by the person objecting to a book.
4. Committee consisting of administrators, teachers, parents and older students to determine disposition of the book or recommendation to the school board.
Information on all of this can be found at the Web site of the National Council of Teachers of English, ncte.org. RayS.
The purpose of this blog, English Education Archives, is to review articles of contemporary interest from past issues of English education journals.
Title: “Seeing with the Third Eye.” Lloyd Alexander. English Journal (May 1974), 38. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Quote: “Censorship, once begun, is hard to contain. It can soon spread to include any idea or attitude the censors find objectionable. At worst, it can lead to something even more pernicious: self-censorship.”
Comment: Don’t forget the “basics” of preparation for censorship incidents:
1. Policy on book selection.
2. Rationales for literary works, controversial or non-controversial, since no one cannot predict what will be censored.
3. Questionnaire to be completed by the person objecting to a book.
4. Committee consisting of administrators, teachers, parents and older students to determine disposition of the book or recommendation to the school board.
Information on all of this can be found at the Web site of the National Council of Teachers of English, ncte.org. RayS.
The purpose of this blog, English Education Archives, is to review articles of contemporary interest from past issues of English education journals.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Topic: Parents' View of English
Ten-second review: Parents’ criticism of English as it is taught today (1974).
Title: “The Fear of English Teachers.” Ken Donelson. English Journal (May 1974), 14-15. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English.
Summary: After stating the obvious, that telling strangers you’re an English teacher will evoke some variation of “I better watch my English,” the author quotes parents on other aspects of English:
1. “English teachers should correct my kid’s language more than they do. I want him to be educated better than me.”
2. “English teachers spend too much time on those lie/lay, who/whom things.”
3. “I learned three rules from English teachers: never end a sentence with a preposition; never begin a sentence with a conjunction; and never split an infinitive.”
Comment: I remember a parent who wrote a criticism that her preparation in English was superior to the present-day teaching of English. She read it to the school board and her message was received with applause. She emphasized that we should be diagramming and drilling on grammar. In a fit of hubris, she let me, the language arts supervisor, read her written criticism. Her writing was riddled with grammatical mistakes in sentence structure, usage, punctuation and—can you believe it?—spelling. I spilled red ink all over it. Neither the school board nor the administration would touch it.
1. “…than I (not ‘me’) (am educated).”
2. One junior high teacher, a female, said, “That’s it. I’m never going to teach ‘lie and lay’ to teen-age boys again.” [I suggest that English teachers teach kids how to “write around” tricky usage like “lie/lay” and “who/whom.”]
3. Churchill: “That is something up with which I will not put.”
And that is how I feel about beginning sentences with conjunctions.
I have been taught to not split an infinitive. It often sounds better not to split an infinitive.
Not too seriously.
Moral: English teachers must educate students—and parents!. RayS.
The purpose of this blog, English Education Archives, is to review articles of contemporary interest from past issues of English education journals.
Title: “The Fear of English Teachers.” Ken Donelson. English Journal (May 1974), 14-15. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English.
Summary: After stating the obvious, that telling strangers you’re an English teacher will evoke some variation of “I better watch my English,” the author quotes parents on other aspects of English:
1. “English teachers should correct my kid’s language more than they do. I want him to be educated better than me.”
2. “English teachers spend too much time on those lie/lay, who/whom things.”
3. “I learned three rules from English teachers: never end a sentence with a preposition; never begin a sentence with a conjunction; and never split an infinitive.”
Comment: I remember a parent who wrote a criticism that her preparation in English was superior to the present-day teaching of English. She read it to the school board and her message was received with applause. She emphasized that we should be diagramming and drilling on grammar. In a fit of hubris, she let me, the language arts supervisor, read her written criticism. Her writing was riddled with grammatical mistakes in sentence structure, usage, punctuation and—can you believe it?—spelling. I spilled red ink all over it. Neither the school board nor the administration would touch it.
1. “…than I (not ‘me’) (am educated).”
2. One junior high teacher, a female, said, “That’s it. I’m never going to teach ‘lie and lay’ to teen-age boys again.” [I suggest that English teachers teach kids how to “write around” tricky usage like “lie/lay” and “who/whom.”]
3. Churchill: “That is something up with which I will not put.”
And that is how I feel about beginning sentences with conjunctions.
I have been taught to not split an infinitive. It often sounds better not to split an infinitive.
Not too seriously.
Moral: English teachers must educate students—and parents!. RayS.
The purpose of this blog, English Education Archives, is to review articles of contemporary interest from past issues of English education journals.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Topic: The 21st Century Viewed from 1974
10-second review: Even if print is dead, we must recognize that all methods of communication will likely have the same problems.
Title: “Presidential Address.” Walker Gibson. English Journal (May 1974), 8-10. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Comment: I thought it would be interesting in the twenty-first century to see how the president of the NCTE in 1974 foresaw what was likely to happen in English in the twenty-first century. RayS.
Quote: “The twenty-first century, of course, is indeed blank on the chart, but we can say that in that century the processes of communication are not going to get any simpler We can safely bet that one criterion for survival or success will be a capacity to change symbol systems, to invent new ones and adapt old ones for unpredictable situations. The print medium may be dead, for all I know—so be it. But what we tell our students today, about any medium of communication, is sure to be of use if it can be applied to any other medium of communication. As I’ve tried to suggest for example, a person trained in making literary discriminations can, if he is willing to try, use this skill to make discriminations about the language of bureaucracy in Washington.” p. 10.
Comment: Back to the twenty-first century, 2008. Well, print is not dead. It lives on in the Internet. But newspapers are failing and drying up with less and less newsprint and more and larger pictures. People still buy books, but the quality of those books is questionable—I guess it always was.
But he’s right. Communication is communication regardless of the medium. If you can deal with problems in print communication you can deal with problems in communication in all other mediums—pictures, slides, tape recorders, radio, Web sites, e-mail, e-books, cell phones, blogs, text messaging, film and whatever else I have forgotten.
Although the NCTE is encouraging multi-media communication, I am not sure how many English teachers are encouraging their students to communicate through non-print media or a combination of non-print and print media. But Gibson was right. Multi-media communication is where we’re headed and we have to do a deal of thinking about how to bring this about. RayS.
The purpose of this blog, English Education Archives, is to present articles of contemporary interest in English education from professional English journals of the past (pre-2008 and 2009).
Title: “Presidential Address.” Walker Gibson. English Journal (May 1974), 8-10. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Comment: I thought it would be interesting in the twenty-first century to see how the president of the NCTE in 1974 foresaw what was likely to happen in English in the twenty-first century. RayS.
Quote: “The twenty-first century, of course, is indeed blank on the chart, but we can say that in that century the processes of communication are not going to get any simpler We can safely bet that one criterion for survival or success will be a capacity to change symbol systems, to invent new ones and adapt old ones for unpredictable situations. The print medium may be dead, for all I know—so be it. But what we tell our students today, about any medium of communication, is sure to be of use if it can be applied to any other medium of communication. As I’ve tried to suggest for example, a person trained in making literary discriminations can, if he is willing to try, use this skill to make discriminations about the language of bureaucracy in Washington.” p. 10.
Comment: Back to the twenty-first century, 2008. Well, print is not dead. It lives on in the Internet. But newspapers are failing and drying up with less and less newsprint and more and larger pictures. People still buy books, but the quality of those books is questionable—I guess it always was.
But he’s right. Communication is communication regardless of the medium. If you can deal with problems in print communication you can deal with problems in communication in all other mediums—pictures, slides, tape recorders, radio, Web sites, e-mail, e-books, cell phones, blogs, text messaging, film and whatever else I have forgotten.
Although the NCTE is encouraging multi-media communication, I am not sure how many English teachers are encouraging their students to communicate through non-print media or a combination of non-print and print media. But Gibson was right. Multi-media communication is where we’re headed and we have to do a deal of thinking about how to bring this about. RayS.
The purpose of this blog, English Education Archives, is to present articles of contemporary interest in English education from professional English journals of the past (pre-2008 and 2009).
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Topic: Reading Aloud to Secondary Students
10-second review: Remembers when a teacher read aloud to the author and decides to read to her classes.
Title: “To Capture Those Captives: Read to Your Students.” Beth C. Paullin. English Journal (November 1974), 88-89. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: Why read aloud to secondary students? You’ll read great literature and you will transport your classes into another world. The class will come together. You will have fun.
Comment: And you will present a model of how to read aloud and silently. Students will feel the emotion conveyed by the words on the page. The words will come alive. Students will increase their vocabulary. Words they would pass over when reading silently, they will hear and understand when read to them aloud. You will be introducing them to works they might not have wanted to read. You will tempt the students to want to read their own books. Read selections. Read whole stories. It’s a shared experience with your students that they are likely to remember forever.
A word to the wise: prepare and practice before reading aloud.
I still remember the expressions on the faces of the students when I read “Most Dangerous Game” and Faulkner’s “Two Soldiers.” The students read along. They couldn’t wait to learn if Rainsford would escape and, after I read “Two Soldiers,” some of my students looked up from the copy they were following with tears in their eyes. When the vocabulary was too difficult for the students, I read Poe’s “The Pit and the Pendulum.” Boredom turned to rapt attention and thought. Dickens, when he read aloud on the lecture circuit, noted the reactions of his audience and said, “Now, that’s power.” RayS.
The purpose of this blog, English Education Archives, is to review articles of contemporary interest from past English education journals.
Title: “To Capture Those Captives: Read to Your Students.” Beth C. Paullin. English Journal (November 1974), 88-89. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: Why read aloud to secondary students? You’ll read great literature and you will transport your classes into another world. The class will come together. You will have fun.
Comment: And you will present a model of how to read aloud and silently. Students will feel the emotion conveyed by the words on the page. The words will come alive. Students will increase their vocabulary. Words they would pass over when reading silently, they will hear and understand when read to them aloud. You will be introducing them to works they might not have wanted to read. You will tempt the students to want to read their own books. Read selections. Read whole stories. It’s a shared experience with your students that they are likely to remember forever.
A word to the wise: prepare and practice before reading aloud.
I still remember the expressions on the faces of the students when I read “Most Dangerous Game” and Faulkner’s “Two Soldiers.” The students read along. They couldn’t wait to learn if Rainsford would escape and, after I read “Two Soldiers,” some of my students looked up from the copy they were following with tears in their eyes. When the vocabulary was too difficult for the students, I read Poe’s “The Pit and the Pendulum.” Boredom turned to rapt attention and thought. Dickens, when he read aloud on the lecture circuit, noted the reactions of his audience and said, “Now, that’s power.” RayS.
The purpose of this blog, English Education Archives, is to review articles of contemporary interest from past English education journals.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Topic: Questions in Response to Literature
10-second review: Teachers should make up their own questions rather than begin with questions in the anthology.
Title: “When Teachers Talk and Students (Sometimes) Listen.” P. Sanders. English Journal (November 1974), 80-81. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: The author suggests that teachers develop a planned set of questions to ask students after reading a piece of literature instead of using the canned, scattershot questions from the anthology or other commercial sources that seem to have no plan or sequence.
Comment: I use an alternative to teachers' or textbooks' questions on literature. Have the students generate and answer their own questions.
Novel
1. Students read for five minutes near the beginning of the novel. What have they learned? What questions do they have? Record the questions using key words.
2. Students read for five minutes in the middle of the novel. What have they learned? What questions do they have?
3. Students read for five minutes three-fourths through the novel. What have they learned? What questions do they have?
4. Students read for five minutes near the end. What have they learned? What questions do they have?
5. Teacher and students organize the list of questions into questions of fact (can be answered in the text), questions of interpretation (Why? and How?) and questions of criticism.
6. The students read to answer the questions. They then discuss the answers to the questions.
7. Go back to see which questions in the anthology or other sources were not covered and discuss them. How many questions in the anthology did the students anticipate?
Short Story
1. Students read one sentence on each page or in each column. What have they learned? What questions do they have?
2. Students read one paragraph on each page or in each column. What have they learned? What questions do they have?
3. Students read the first sentence of each paragraph throughout the story. What have they learned? What questions do they have?
4. Teacher and students organize the list of questions according to whether they are questions of fact (can be answered in the text), interpretation (Why? and How?) and criticism.
5. Students read to answer the questions.
6. Discuss.
7. Go back to see which questions in the anthology or other sources they have not asked and discuss them.
Whenever I used this technique with my students, they became so involved in the novel or short story, that, frankly, they would not shut up. They were their questions and they wanted to know the answers. RayS.
The purpose of this blog is to present articles of contemporary interest from professional educational journals for teachers of English at all levels, elementary, middle school, junior high school, high school and college.
Title: “When Teachers Talk and Students (Sometimes) Listen.” P. Sanders. English Journal (November 1974), 80-81. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: The author suggests that teachers develop a planned set of questions to ask students after reading a piece of literature instead of using the canned, scattershot questions from the anthology or other commercial sources that seem to have no plan or sequence.
Comment: I use an alternative to teachers' or textbooks' questions on literature. Have the students generate and answer their own questions.
Novel
1. Students read for five minutes near the beginning of the novel. What have they learned? What questions do they have? Record the questions using key words.
2. Students read for five minutes in the middle of the novel. What have they learned? What questions do they have?
3. Students read for five minutes three-fourths through the novel. What have they learned? What questions do they have?
4. Students read for five minutes near the end. What have they learned? What questions do they have?
5. Teacher and students organize the list of questions into questions of fact (can be answered in the text), questions of interpretation (Why? and How?) and questions of criticism.
6. The students read to answer the questions. They then discuss the answers to the questions.
7. Go back to see which questions in the anthology or other sources were not covered and discuss them. How many questions in the anthology did the students anticipate?
Short Story
1. Students read one sentence on each page or in each column. What have they learned? What questions do they have?
2. Students read one paragraph on each page or in each column. What have they learned? What questions do they have?
3. Students read the first sentence of each paragraph throughout the story. What have they learned? What questions do they have?
4. Teacher and students organize the list of questions according to whether they are questions of fact (can be answered in the text), interpretation (Why? and How?) and criticism.
5. Students read to answer the questions.
6. Discuss.
7. Go back to see which questions in the anthology or other sources they have not asked and discuss them.
Whenever I used this technique with my students, they became so involved in the novel or short story, that, frankly, they would not shut up. They were their questions and they wanted to know the answers. RayS.
The purpose of this blog is to present articles of contemporary interest from professional educational journals for teachers of English at all levels, elementary, middle school, junior high school, high school and college.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)