Grammar and the Teaching of Writing
Grammar and the Teaching of Writing
A great deal of class time in both elementary and middle schools is devoted to grammar instruction. Research suggests, however, that formal grammar instruction does not improve the quality of student writing. So why is grammar taught so much? Should teachers stop teaching it? Teach it using different methods? Are there other reasons for teaching grammar besides improving student writing?
These are some of the questions this group will explore. A good place to begin, and the article I would suggest reading for your first meeting during week 6, is chapter two from the following work:
Weaver, Constance. "Teaching Grammar: Reasons for, Evidence Against." In Teaching Grammar in Context.
Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 1996. 7-28 [On Reserve].
The above article contains a useful list of nine "references [articles] for and against the teaching of formal grammar" (p. 8). After reading this overview by Weaver, the group might want to look closely at one or two of these articles. A study that is not on this list but is summarized by Weaver is one by Elley et al. This research study is often cited to prove that grammar instruction is useless in improving writing quality. For one meeting, the group might like to look closely at this study:
Elley, W. etal. "The Role of Grammar in the Secondary School English Curriculum." Research in the Teaching of
English 10 (1976): 5-21) [Reserve].
The English Journal, a journal of the secondary section of the National Council of Teachers of English, devoted their November, 1996, issue to "The Great Debate" about teaching grammar and usage (Vol. 85, No. 7). You might check it out.
Two famous teacher trainers, Susan J. Tchudi and Stephen N. Tchudi, have some interesting things to say about the great grammar debate and also make some good teaching suggestions in Chapter 11 ("Grammar, Dialects, and Correctness") of The English Language Arts Handbook (Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 19999) 201-217. [Reserve].
Another good work, one which could be read and talked about in later sessions, is the following:
Noguchi, Rei R. Grammar and the Teaching of Writing. Urbana, IL: NCTE, 1991 [Reserve].
The group could discuss chapters one and two, although all of this short book is useful.
One problem is that most researchers have focused on high school students, not younger students. (But see the studies by Calkins [1980] and DiStepfano and Killion [1984] mentioned by Weaver on pp. 176-178.) To correct this imbalance, group members could interview or survey local elementary school teachers and get their views on the teaching of grammar. In the final presentation, group members could also share with the class samples of lessons in grammar--excerpts from language arts textbooks--that are used in local schools.
Five possible areas of responsibility:
1. Summary and evaluation of research that allegedly proves formal grammar study does not improve writing.
2. A report on Weaver's and/or Tchudi and Tchudi's recommendations.
3. An examination and report on how several widely used language arts textbooks present information on grammar.
4. A demonstration of a mini-lesson in grammar of the type recommended by Atwell in In the Middle, Calkins in The Art of Teaching Writing, and Weaver in the book mentioned above. In the Appendix to Weaver's book there are many sample mini-lessons.
5. Report of interviews with local teachers, or of a survey done of local teachers, regarding their views and practices relating to grammar and writing.