Brock, et al,

As you may know by now, I am very interested in the use of grammar
instruction in connection with reading/literature. I often find that it
helps students when we use grammar to explain complicated texts or authorial
intent. One recent instance that came up in my 11th grade English classes
this year was in our reading of _Brave New World_. On reviewing the book
before I began teaching it, I found it fascinating that Huxley wrote the
opening paragraph of the novel without a single verb! In spite of this
seemingly odd omission, the descriptions in the text are as clear as
crystal. When we began to discuss the opening of the book, I posed the
question, "What is unusual about this paragraph?" Few students noticed the
lack of verbs, but most seemed to "feel" a certain detatched negativeness of
mood. It seems to me that this is exactly the effect that Huxley was aiming
for, so I discussed the issue with the students: "How did he create this
mood." Eventually, some students noticed the lack of verbs and pointed it
out to the rest of the classes. The ensuing discussion was wonderful, and
most of the students were hooked. This was the beginning of the most
successful literature teaching experience I have ever had! I actually had
some students reading several chapters ahead of the class (one student
finished the book three weeks ahead of schedule!).

I would love to know if there is ANY research on the link between grammar
instruction and reading or the use of grammar as a tool in teaching
literature (I have mentioned this before). I'd also love to see this come up
during ATEG conferences (maybe NEXT year?).

Paul E. Doniger

----- Original Message -----
From: Haussamen, Brock <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: In and out of Context


>      I too found Nancy Patterson's discussion of constructivism helpful.
A
> question it led me to think about (again) is, what contexts, _other than
> student writing_, can we create for middle and secondary students in which
> the basic language of grammar is useful for discussing language?  Nancy
> outlines a post-secondary linguistics course for teachers that encourages
> the discovery of grammar through comparisons of literature, other texts,
and
> spoken discourse.  The course sounds inviting and do-able.  But I think we
> need to flesh out more than we have what such a course would be preparing
> teachers to do in their classroom.
>        I exempt writing from this fleshing out because, for teachers
> interested in finding out, the ways to bring grammar into the context of
> helping students with both the effective style of their writing and also
the
> mastery of conventions has been written about.  It seems to me that
> meaningful contexts in which students who are trying to figure out a poem
or
> a story can bring grammar to bear to clarify a line or sentence--such
> contexts are less widely known.
>       The other general context in which I think grammar as an articulate,
> basic understanding of language could be very valuable is in the
comparison
> of languages and dialects among the students in a classroom.  Couldn't a
> teacher compare the English possessive with the way the possessive is
> indicated in Spanish and in variants of English? (Such comparison would
help
> overcome the tendency to think that languages other than Standard English
> don't have grammar.)  But again, such a setting for including grammar
> doesn't seem to come to mind when one thinks about grammar in the
classroom.
>         Beyond the relevance of grammar in the context of teaching
writing,
> the addition of these two areas--grammar in the context of reading and in
> the context of language/dialect comparison--makes sense to me, but I teach
> at a community college and know only a little about the K-12 curriculum
and
> what is workable within it.  So I would interested in discussion of how
> teachers might develop these two types of settings for grammar.
>
> Brock Haussamen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nancy Patterson
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: 6/24/01 2:29 PM
> Subject: Re: In and out of Context
>
> I think we need to make some clarifications here.  We are not really
> talking
> about teaching methods.  We are talking about philosophies of learning,
> And
> though our philosophies generally drive our classroom practice,
> sometimes we
> need to speak those philosophies in order to know what we believe about
> teaching and learning.
>
> I am a constructivist.  Social constructivism is hardly new, but its
> impact
> on classroom learning is just beginning, I think.  We could look at John
> Dewey and say that he was one of the precursors to constructivism.
> Dewey,
> of course, believed that students learned best by doing.  And certainly
> experientialism is part of a constructivist approach.  But I think
> constructivism goes beyond merely experiential learning theory.  To me,
> constructivism is based on a foundation of respect for students and
> individuals and as "knowers."  Traditional approaches to education tend
> to
> view students as deficient, as empty vessels or blank slates.  A
> constructivist believes that students enter our classrooms with a great
> deal
> of knowledge, both of facts and concepts.  It may be that knowledg is
> not"accurate" but we cannot say that knowledge does not exist in
> students.
> Students also enter our classrooms with preconceived notions regarding
> how
> the world in general works.  In the case of language arts classes, they
> specifically bring a knowledge of how language works.  They may not be
> able
> to articulate that knowledge, but the knowledge exists nonetheless.  A
> constructivist would see his or her task as one of connection and
> perhaps
> rearrangement.  In other words, my job is to help students see what they
> already know about language, to connect it to new knowledge, and, if
> necessary, rearrange prior knowledge if it is faulty.  Actually, I can't
> do
> that rearranging.  The student has to.  I can only monitor how quickly
> that
> rearranging is happening.
>
> In order for that new knowledge to take hold, I and the students must
> provide or construct and environment that is rich in language, rich in
> conversations about language, rich in examples of varied uses of
> language.
> I also have to provide many different avenues within that environment
> because I know that no two students learn in quite the same way.  One of
> those avenues involves direct instruction.  But I have to be careful
> here
> because most students do not learn through direct classroom instruction.
> They learn when the situation arises where they have to know something
> in
> order to accomplish a meaningful task.  We could say a final exam is a
> meaningful task, but we have all been students and we have all learned
> enough to do well on an exam, then promptly forgotten what we needed to
> know.
>
> It may be that the majority of the people on this list learned through
> direct instruction.  In fact, the academy seems to privilege students
> who
> learn that way.  Students who learn in a different way don't get very
> far.
> They struggle.  They assume they aren't the academic type.  And they
> enter
> other spaces in adult life.  They pursue other avenues.   This is true
> of
> all content areas, by the way.  I always wonder how many brilliant
> students
> we have side tracked because we privileged only one kind of knowledge
> and
> only one avenue to knowledge.
>
> Anyway, constructivists believe they are not the only experts in the
> classroom.  Their approach in the classroom is more that of facilitator
> rather than authority.  Giving up that authority status in the classroom
> is
> sometimes very difficult for certain types of teachers who either
> believe
> they are in the classroom because they are authorities, or because they
> need
> the affirmation that the authority role gives them.  That type of
> individual
> will probably never see the wisdom of the constructivist philosophy
> about
> teaching and learning.  But a constructivist teacher believes that
> knowledge
> is not a series of facts, but an always changing landscape that grows
> and
> intersects in ever increases patterns of complexity.  For me, this means
> that a more post-structuralist view of literature and language is
> appropriate.  The author is not the only authority in the transaction
> with
> text.  The reader brings meaning to the text.  The student brings
> meaning to
> the classroom, to the lesson.  Authority is shared.  It shifts depending
> on
> the situation.
>
> I bring to the classroom (or I try to bring to the classroom--I often
> fail
> dismally), a belief that students deserve as much respect as I do, that
> they
> are bearers of knowledges that I do not have. and that the classroom is
> a
> space in which we can share our knowledges.  I approach the classroom
> with
> the belief that knowledge happens whole to part, not part to whole.
> That we
> look at the big concepts first, and then investigate how the varied
> parts
> fit into the whole.
>
> Now, to get more specific about the topic of this list.  I teach middle
> school english.  I set up an environment so that my students and I can
> have
> as many conversations as possible about language and how it works.  But
> eventually, for some students who are interested in knowing more about
> the
> details of language, it is highly appropriate for them to look at the
> parts.
> So, I am not at all opposed to linguistics classes, for example.  Most
> of
> you teach at the post secondary level.  For many many students that is a
> highly appropriate time to begin or continue investigating the structure
> of
> the language, and to go into great and  miniscule detail.  My objection
> would only be if this approach were forced on all students, and if this
> were
> considered the avenue through which students became better users of
> language.   Bur for those students who want to know, either because of
> their
> career choice or because of a genuine interest in linguistics, their
> lessons
> are probably going to be best learned in an authentic context of some
> sort.
> Here's where constructivist philosophy about learning begins to drive
> instructional practive.  As a constructivist teaching a post secondary
> linguistics class for teachers I might situation the course within the
> following questions.
>
> What rhetorical choices does James Joyce use?  How does his written
> language
> differ from that of, say, Stephen King?  How does that show through in
> the
> grammatical structures each chooses to use?  What is the difference in
> clause structure?  How does discursive form impact decisions regarding
> modifier placement?  What decisions did Shakespear have to make when he
> was
> working in iambic pentameter as opposed to prose?  What are the
> differences
> between a rap and a Langston Hughes blues poem?  What decisions do rap
> artists make regarding grammar and usage?  What are the similarities and
> differences between those pieces of writing and a Hughes blues poem?
> How
> are our conversations in the classroom different from our conversations
> with
> a group of friends?  In what way do vocatives work in sychronous on-line
> conversatons as opposed to casual face to face discourse?
>
> These are all grammar questions that consider context.  Why couldn't a
> university level grammar course use as its context one recorded
> conversation
> that students make.  Why couldn't they spend part of the course
> analyzing
> that piece of discourse grammatically, looking for patterns?  And why
> couldn't another part of the course compare two pieces of literature
> from
> two different periods, not for literary elements but for grammatical
> ones.
> In the process of comparing those conversations or those pieces of
> literature, students would learn a tremendous amount about grammar.  The
> context becomes the vehicle through which the learning happens.
>
> Nancy
>
> Nancy G. Patterson, PhD
> Portland Middle School, English Dept. Chair
> Portland, MI  48875
>
> "To educate as the practice of freedom is a way of teaching that anyone
> can
> learn."
>
> --bell hooks
>
>  [log in to unmask]
> http://www.msu.edu/user/patter90/opening.htm
> http://www.npatterson.net/mid.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/
>
> 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/