I deleted Hindy's post, and intended to ignore it. Went on to class preps for
Monday (we start), but the post kept bugging me, so I'm back to respond.
     I understand the frustration. Indeed, I often share it, but then, since he
(she?) says "all," I guess I'm one of those "self-serving, smug" "know-it-all
"'expert'[? s]". For those of you who share Hindy's frustration, please realize
the purpose of this list -- it is to share ideas, and disagreements about the
teaching of grammar. Before the advent of ATEG, I was sure that the entire world
would not only immediately see, but also adopt my brilliant ideas. Of course, that
was at a time when no one could get anything published about the teaching of
grammar, so I was unable to see that there are other people out there who also
have brilliant ideas -- significantly different from mine, and that they believe
that the world will follow them. Whereas I had hoped that ATEG would attract
teachers who were looking for ways to teach grammar, I should have realized that
it would first and foremost attract people who have ideas about how to teach
grammar, and that they would want to use ATEG to express their ideas. I have come
to accept that.
       I do, however, want to address the "smug" and "self-serving."  I probably
come across that way at times. In my last post, for example, I wrote about those
who "play" at teaching teachers. It wasn't the kindest thing to say, but it
expresses my frustration (in one word), in the same way that Hindy's post
expresses his (or hers). There are times when I would really like to be nasty, but
I've learned the purposes and dimensions of this group, and I apologize if my
saying what I think hurts anyone's feelings. That doesn't mean that I will stop.
If the purpose of this list is to debate what, how, and why grammar should be
taught, then we should all be free to state what we think is wrong, and well as
what is right, with what other people contribute.
     As for the "self-serving," I cannot speak for others, but I do want to point
out that my stuff is all available, for free, on the web. I've lately mentioned a
book, but the book is being attempted at the invitation of a publisher (and one
that does not pay well from what I have heard). I agreed to try the book for the
simple reason that NCTE, should it publish the book, will get the ideas of KISS
grammar to a lot of teachers beyond this list, thereby enabling other teachers try
the KISS ideas and perhaps help me improve the KISS approach. I do not need to
publish for tenure. In effect, I already have it. Is it self-serving to argue for
an idea (or a set of ideas)?
     I do not think Hindy's expectations of this list are reasonable. There are
too many people involved, with too many significantly different philosophical and
theoretical differences, for us to conduct a practical discussion of what Hindy
wants -- "Instead of hypothesizing about different theories, here's a new one for
you all...teach  kids to read, write, and function in an ever-confusing world!!"
That is, I think, what everyone on this list wants to do, but it is a matter of
how, what, etc. Recently, we had a thread about a separate list for different
grade levels. I still think that that is a serious mistake, but perhaps it
wouldn't be a bad idea to have separate lists (or guest books) for discussions
related to different theories? For example, those people who are interested in
teaching Reed-Kellogg diagramming might find more practical discussion in such a
list (or guest book). Likewise for those who are interested in tree-diagrams? This
might be one way to provide more of the "practical" discussion that Hindy seems to
want. I would suggest, by the way, that guest books would be the better option.
That way, the thread of related messages stays there for anyone to read and add
to.
Just a thought,
Ed V.

Hindy Lewis wrote:

> What does it take to leave this site? I have tried to unsubscribe for
> months now, but to no avail. Although some of the topics are most
> interesting, I am irritated by the self-serving, smug style of some of your
> participants. They remind me of myself some 30 years ago as a know-it-all
> "expert" (redundant, perhaps, but you get the picture!) when I first
> attended university. I'm too old to wade through incomprehensible gibberish
> designed to confuse, and which shows off a minimum awareness of the basics
> needs of our students. Instead of hypothesizing about different theories,
> here's a new one for you all...teach  kids to read, write, and function in
> an ever-confusing world!!
>
> Please stop flooding my e-mail with your discussions. I'd much rather read
> the latest Bill Clinton joke (shock! horror! a conservative Republican!!)
>
> Thank you.
>
> P.S. any grammatical/syntax errors are all mine!

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/