I returned form a very positive, very invigorating, inspiring ATEG
conference to face a back load of student papers, so I have been
catching up on that while working my way toward a short report on Scope
and Sequence. Rather than reply to the skeptics directly, I'll just
give a quick perspective of my own.
   The assembled group now seems to be drawing alliances from a number of
different areas, including foreign language teaching and the
Connecticut Writing Project. There seemed a unanimous consensus in
favor of A scope and sequence project, including all the different
aspects of that: how it would be assessed, how teachers would be
trained, and so on. We had fine assistance from Tim Hadley (background
to NCTE opposition), Deb Rossen-Knill (background understanding of
assessment), and Amanda Godley (questions related to all aspects of
teacher training.) We looked at drafts on rationale and a position on
standard English (as presented to all members via the list before the
conference) and a very early draft of Scope and Sequence(from Cornelia
Paraskevas, who has been trying to follow the suggestions of our
working group), all of which was well beyond the scope of the time
allotted to us. But we did spend considerable group time settling on
the wording of an opening statement, which is here presented:

     Students should have explicit knowledge of the nature and structure
of language.  In addition to its value for understanding what it
means to be human, this knowledge is a powerful tool that helps
students to develop critical thinking, to explore cultural diversity,
and to strengthen reading and writing.
     Accordingly, as educators, we propose a systematic framework for the
teaching of grammar.

   I don't think we can present a scope and sequence that will please
everyone in all its aspects. That hardly seems a reason not to try. Nor
should we apologize for being a group that has long included robust
disagreement.  I think the jury will be out on its efficacy and
effectiveness until it is put into place and closely monitored, and we
should be very open to that happening. We should always let the world
know that there are a rich array of alternative perspectives, many of
which have gone into our own core understanding. We can offer a series
of definitions that includes alternative definitions. If we decide not
to use "gerund", for example, we can at least explain how the term is
used within the traditional grammar that it's a part of.

   One of many pleasures at the conference was seeing the presentation
from two teachers, Alan Zepp and Thom McHugh, from Cook County
Maryland, where a project has been underway for a few years now to
reintroduce grammar systematically into the curriculum. Alan showed us
work that was being done with somewhat needy freshmen. Thom showed us
work done among advanced placement seniors. And it was clear that
everyone is benefiting from this sequenced understanding, the beginning
teachers who know they are setting things up as well as the later
teachers who have something substantial to work with and build on.

   The plan is to have volunteers for all aspects of the project,
including work on definitions, which Herb has volunteered to
coordinate. I envision the project as an important part of the ATEG
website, even as a work in progress. We have an NCTE panel set for
November, at which time we will report on the ongoing project in its
current form.

   I still think the world is now hungry for reasonable advice about the
reintegration of grammar into the public school curriculum. As a
professional organization whose mission is promoting and supporting the
teaching of English grammar, Scope and Sequence seems a natural step.

   I couldn't have been more pleased at the results of the conference. We
got wonderful participation from very talented people, and the
conference as a whole embraced the project as an ATEG project.

   We should encourage tough questions and be prepared for thoughtful
criticism. I think we can come up with a program that's so much better
than the hodge podge currently out there.

Craig

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/