I would guess that elementary teachers don't respond because nouns,
verbs, and so forth are confusing for an elementary student. They
already know most of the rules for the language whether they can
verbalize them or not. And so when we declare dolls, pencils, and so
forth nouns, they suddenly declare that these words are nouns. But
darnit, words are not nouns. Words are symbolic references to thought.
'Pencil' is not a noun. 'Pencil' is a symbolic representation of
something. But the word is not the thing.
My 5-year-old knew, when I said, "What's a pencil?" that the correct
answer was noun. Because it is in context. He might be able to make
the leap if I gave him a a list of words (if he knew his letters yet)
that 'pencil' was a noun. But it is a leap without context and quite
possibly a damaging leap because it limits his focus. Nothing
infuriates me more than a group of students who see a word like 'pencil'
in a sentence such as "I will pencil it in" and then they tell me it is
a noun. Seniors in high school will do this. My 5-year-old who
couldn't tell you the difference between an 's' and an 'f' understands
parts of speech better than my seniors who come in out of a traditional
grammar regiment.
And so, why would an elementary teacher not participate? Well, probably
because she (look at my stereotype...) knows that when she teaches her
traditional grammar that her students simply aren't getting anything out
of it even if they do memorize lists of words. What if she would say
something to that effect to a list such as this? I've been watching
this list long enough to know what the responses would be.
Eduard C. Hanganu wrote:
> Herb,
>
> One of the problems I see in the ATEG forum is that there is very
> little participation from the ranks of public school teachers, and
> especially from the primary grades. Most of the discussions seem to
> occur at a college level. In order for the ATEG group to develop a
> practical grammar which would indeed benefit students there must be
> input from educators who teach at such basic levels. We need to know
> how they approach the teaching of grammar for their students, and
> what the needs and expectations are at different levels in public
> school.
>
> Eduard
>
>
>
> On Sun, 20 Aug 2006, Herbert F.W. Stahlke wrote...
>
>
>> Eduard,
>> =20
>> I was writing in the context of the Scope and Sequence program,
>>
> where =
>
>> the goal is to provide developmentally appropriate grammar
>>
> instruction =
>
>> that build as students are ready to master new concepts, principles,
>>
> =
>
>> analyses, etc. Whether you want to call this one or several
>>
> grammars =
>
>> doesn't make a whole lot of difference. As a university-level
>>
> teacher, =
>
>> not K-12, I see my role as a step or two removed. I can provide
>>
> content =
>
>> and can assist with the development of content, but I wouldn't
>>
> pretend =
>
>> to any expertise in K12 curriculum and pedagogy. That I'll
>>
> gratefully =
>
>> leave to those on the list who are specialized in these areas.
>> =20
>> Herb
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar on behalf of
>>
> Eduard =
>
>> C. Hanganu
>> Sent: Sun 8/20/2006 7:35 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Defining Traditional Grammar
>>
>>
>>
>> Herb:
>>
>> I agree with you. There is much more to be said about grammar than I
>> did, but I was referring to basic guiding principles, and not to the
>> details. Still I am getting a little confused: do you want to write a
>> grammar encyclopaedia, or a practical grammar? And if you want to
>> write a practical grammar ( which is my assumption) for which grade
>>
> (s)
>
>> are you going to write that grammar? It appears to me that we will
>> necessarily have to write grammarS, not just a grammar, each adjusted
>> to some school level. One thing is to teach grammar to the elementary
>> school students, another to teach grammar to college students. Each
>> such level would require a grammar specifically written for its own
>> purposes.
>>
>> Eduard
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 18 Aug 2006, Herbert F.W. Stahlke wrote...
>>
>>
>>> Eduard,
>>>
>>> Quite a lot, in fact, as I suggested in my posting to Phil. Part of
>>>
>> my
>>
>>> problem in this discourse is that I come from a background in which
>>> traditional grammar includes Jespersen, Poutsma, Kruizinga, and
>>>
>> others
>>
>>> of the great 19th and 20th c. scholars of English grammar.=20
>>>
>> Traditional
>>
>>> school grammar, like what is found in the Warriner's series, for
>>> example, a series that was used widely in American high schools for
>>> quite a long time, is in part of reduction of this combined with a
>>> variety of stylistic prescriptions and proscriptions. I don't have
>>>
>> the
>>
>>> negative reaction Fries had, because I go back to Jespersen on a lot
>>>
>> of
>>
>>> matters. However, I agree with Fries as to the sometimes mindless
>>>
>> way
>>
>>> in which traditional grammar has been reduced to a few inflexible
>>>
>> terms,
>>
>>> concepts, and maxims.
>>>
>>> Herb
>>>
>> 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/
>>
>> 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/
>>
>
> 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/
>
>
--
James Sebastian Bear
Montpelier Public School
www.montpelier.k12.nd.us/classroom.html
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/
|
