John, (Peter),
   You speak for me enormously well.  It seems to me the two projects
might even be mutually supporting. For those who say "I need a short
term solution", we can say that this is not at all an either/or choice.
>For someone who objects to short term thinking, we can say we have
made recommendations for a long-term solution.
   I have been workiing on a short-term solution for some time, even
promising a few times that I was getting close, and I feel that way
again; I'm rewriting the curriculum in my own program for next summer
in ways I tried out this time through. We need to embrace knowledge,
reclaim context, and give a deep enough base of understanding to handle
standard English and standard discourse conventions. Once you begin to
understand how hard that is for a teacher in Peter's position (or
mine), inheriting underprepared students that need to be brought
quickly up to spped, we have an even greater case for much better
preparation in the public schools.
   The big enemy right now, I think, is the myth that it's all about
error, that conscious knowledge isn't needed (or useful), and that this
knowledge is simply "acquired" while attention is on other things.
Maybe a few people do OK with that, but the vast majority of students
are not well served. Peter is to be commended for being very open about
this problem. I think a task force is a wonderful suggestion.

Craig

 Peter,
>
> I, like you, work with adult products of the current little-to-no-grammar
> ELA philosophy.  I, like you, work to develop a writer's grammar for them,
> while at the same time appreciating the need for greatly improved K-12
> grammar instruction in the future.  ATEG is supportive of both goals.
>
> I don't mean to speak for Craig--he can, and probably will do so very
> eloquently.  However, I will say with great confidence that the text that
> you quoted was not directed at people like us at all.  Instead, he was
> trying to move the scope and sequence project past an inertia caused by
> the
> occasionally strident bickering of a very vocal, but very small minority
> who
> refuse to respond to cogent counterargument or refuse to move on when
> their
> position isn't widely held.
>
> I have been with ATEG and this listserv for four years now and have
> learned
> much from the discussions and profited greatly from the conferences.  ATEG
> is, as Craig calls it, a very broad tent, welcoming a wide variety of
> views.  I, like many others here, wrestle with the same problems that you
> do.  You are a clear and welcome voice for us.
>
> John
>
> On 8/6/06, Peter Adams <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> I found Craig Hancock's recent post about the discussion on this list
>> very
>> helpful in understanding what this list is "about," but it also left me
>> with
>> a question.
>>
>> Apparently, ATEG has agreed on "knowledge of grammar" is the prime
>> goaland that the development of a recommended "scope and sequence" for
>> grades K
>> through 12 or perhaps through 16 is the way to accomplish this goal.
>>
>> I find the arguments for this position impressive, and, if I knew more
>> about the approach, would endorse them enthusiastically.  I do worry a
>> little that the project may become encumbered with too much terminology,
>> too
>> many new terms in place of more familiar (if less accurate ones), and
>> too
>> much depth of analysis.  But perhaps these concerns will prove to be
>> unwarranted.
>>
>> However, as I have made clear in earlier posts, my concerns are
>> different.  I am not opposed to the emphasis on "knowledge of grammar"
>> as a
>> goal for long term instruction in the school system.  In fact, I agree
>> that
>> its success will go a long way toward solving the problem I am concerned
>> about: that the writing of many adults I teach at my community college
>> is
>> marred by serious and frequent errors in grammar, punctuation, and
>> usage.  A
>> long-term project to emphasize "knowledge of grammar" in our schools
>> will
>> not help this generation of students, and it is they that I am focused
>> on.
>>
>> In the few weeks I have to assist them, I need to focus on helping them
>> reduce the error in their writing (and, of course, work on other large
>> writing issues like focus, coherence, development, and organization--but
>> on
>> this list I want to focus on the grammar issues).  To make progress on
>> this
>> task, I think my goal should be developing a minimalist
>> grammar--emphasizing
>> those terms and concepts that are helpful in mastering control over the
>> conventions of formal writing.
>>
>> What I hope to find on the ATEG list is others who would like to discuss
>> strategies for doing this.  I would like to discuss questions like the
>> following.  What would constitute such a "writer's grammar"? How might
>> such
>> basic concepts as subject and verb, sentence and independent clause be
>> explained more clearly than the way they are in traditional handbooks,
>> which
>> my students find incomprehensible.  How might students be encouraged to
>> transfer whatever we can teach them about eliminating error into their
>> own
>> writing?
>>
>> However, I wonder if I've come to right place when I read Craig's
>> observation that, "*The Scope and Sequence I would like to help work on,
>> the one endorsed by the ATEG conference, takes 'knowledge of grammar' as
>> a
>> prime goal. Once that is set in motion, then anyone who believes that
>> conscious knowledge is not important or that traditional grammar already
>> solves all our needs should simply work on a different set of goals or
>> get
>> out of the way."  And later when he adds, "* If someone interrupts to
>> say
>> that this is not important to them, so it shouldn't be important to us,
>> or
>> that traditional grammar never included it, then the work can't get
>> done."
>>
>> Please note that I have no objection to Craig and others working on
>> their
>> goals, but I am startled by the suggestion that my having a different
>> goal
>> means I am "getting in the way" and "interrupting."  The ATEG web site
>> states that "ATEG, an Assembly of the National Council of Teachers of
>> English, is a national forum for discussing the teaching of grammar, and
>> welcomes all views on the role of grammar in our schools."  If, in fact,
>> it
>> has been decided that this list is a place to discuss the "knowledge of
>> grammar" goal and others are not welcome, I would appreciate that being
>> made
>> explicit.
>>
>>
>> Peter Adams
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Peter Adams
>>  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/