To give you a feel for the other side (also from UIC, but nonetheless relevant to all) is Ann Feldman's book "Making Writing Matter." She and Stanley Fish were "nemisi" (nemises?) at UIC, Stanley of the "Save the world on your own time" view and Ann of the "engaged university." As previously cited, Fish believes in forms and structure - learn the forms and the content will follow and never, ever should the teacher or the student assume an advocate role in the classroom (hence, "save the world on your own time"). Ann's view is that students should write about the world outside the university, even to the point of taking positions with outside organizations (presumably not with a Republican office holder or a Tea Party activist), but always assuming the role of an advocate. Some of my students from high school enrolled at UIC and were involved in the Feldman school of first year comp at UIC, and I got the chance to see the papers they wrote - I was extremely disappointed. I've used the principles of the Graff/Birkenstein book (I thought it was too advanced for a high school class) with exceptional results - I've even used it with remedial students. One of my assignments (although admittedly not on a remedial level) was to have the students write about gun control - but they could not take a position. They had to analyze the arguments, rather than argue a position themselves (as it turns out, this is the latest writing test on the GRE!).
Geoff Layton
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2011 17:50:27 -0700
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Holding their interest
To: [log in to unmask]
Geoff:
Thank you for your insights. Two things that struck me right away were:
1) I am presuming students won't be interested in grammar or writing as subjects in and of themselves.
2) The subject is writing, and I should treat it as such rather than focus on specific subjects or approaches that will lead the students into writing, but make the focus on writing seem secondary.
I'm going to look at the Graff/Birkenstein text that you mentioned. I've been away from the field for two years now, so I'm anxious to see what's going on.
Carol
--- On Sun, 8/7/11, Geoffrey Layton <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Geoffrey Layton <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Holding their interest
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Sunday, August 7, 2011, 7:02 PM
Carol - There are, I think, two ways to look at the problem that I assume you're referring to - student lack of engagement in the basic writing class (or any other writing/comp course for that matter!). Sometimes, as you indicate, the way to approach it is to make the subject matter more "interesting" (although what is interesting to one student may not be to another) - and the way I've seen that addressed is to focus on current events, social issues, and politics (often, of course, they merge into one). Unfortunately, tackling "big subjects" (the environment, racism, the budget crisis, etc) is tough enough for professional writers, and it's routine to see basic writers totally fall to pieces when the subject matter becomes "interesting."
Another problem with this approach is that it pretty much leaves the grammar to take care of itself, often in "mini-lessons" or "grammar in the context in writing" where
grammar and mechanical issues are dealt with after the fact. The problem here, it seems, is that grammar and mechanics don't begin to cover the writing problems of freshman basic writers - even if every grammar "error" gets corrected, the writing is still a mess.
The other way to address the problem is to work on the assumption that student interest grows along with their command of the subject matter - in other words, the more they learn about how to write, the more engaged/interested they become in the act of writing. This is the idea behind the book "They say/I say: The moves that matter in academic writing" by Graff and Birkenstein. Although at first it may seem geared to higher level writing class than what you have (the book was written to deal with first-year freshman writing problems at UIC), the approach is still a sound one - to help students gain control over their writing. As Stanley Fish says, "Drill
students in the forms that enable meaning . . . What students must learn are the forms; the content will follow."
Geoff Layton
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2011 13:12:00 -0700
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: 22 Britannia Road
To: [log in to unmask]
I just re-joined the list after a long time away. I'll be teaching basic writing and grammar to freshman community college students. I'd appreciate any suggestions and practical exercises for basic writers to make the subject more interesting for non-enthusiasts!
Carol Morrison
--- On Sun, 8/7/11, Jane Mairs <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Jane Mairs <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: 22 Britannia Road
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Sunday, August 7, 2011, 3:18 PM
There are too many argumentative and angry exchanges in this listserv and too few productive discussions.
I am leaving.
Jane Mairs
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brad Johnston
Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 9:19 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: 22 Britannia Road
For those not set for html, color and graphics by whatever name, this will be hard to follow.
.br-had.sun.07aug11.
From: Geoffrey Layton <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Sunday, August 7, 2011 12:17 AM
Subject: Re: 22 Britannia Road
Thanks, Brad - now we're getting somewhere! Indeed we are, thanks to you! A thousand welcomes. The next step is to analyze the change in meaning between the two tenses. Holy cow! Where have YOU been for the last dozen years? For example, I'm not sure that it's accurate to say that "there is nothing the word 'had' can do for a past tense verb that the verb cannot do for itself." A past tense verb, G. The motto doesn't say 'a verb', it says a PAST TENSE verb. It seems to me
that "had" does something extremely important to the past tense verb in this particular piece of writing as the simple past which one? would put <Aurek> Janusz in a place where the writer doesn't want him. The perfect tense implies that the goodbyes HAD BEEN said before Aurek finds himself in his current situation, Indeed they were, but not 'had been'. Exactly the point. The past tense of 'to be' is 'was' and 'were', not 'had been'. The good-byes were said earlier. Lotsa things happened earlier. All Gaul was divided, Teddy Roosevelt stormed San Juan Hill. Lotsa things. which it seems to me is exactly the position in which the writer wants his character to
be.
All past events were preceded by other past events. That's not what the past perfect is for. The past perfect is a specialized device that lets us show that by the time something happened, something else had already happened. If you like ... "By the time Janusz found himself on the train, he had already left home and in doing so, had said his good-byes to his wife." A bit back-handed but this is exactly why the past perfect is not just a convention. It provides a distinct time-sequence separation. Thanks for the push down that road.
Geoff Layton
.br-had.sun.07aug11.
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2011 20:41:41 -0700
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: 22 Britannia Road
To: [log in to unmask]
Brad and Martha,
Here's a juicy one, from "22 Britannia Road", by Amanda Hodgkinson, c.2011, page 24.
In carriages up and down the train, soldiers were singing and sharing jokes but Janusz stayed silent. He prayed Silvana and Aurek would be safe. He'd said good-bye casually, as if he were just going out to buy a newspaper. He'd told himself it was braver to leave like that. He'd met up with his father
a few days before and that had been the old man's advice.
"Don't dwell too long on saying your good-byes. Women always cry and make a fuss. Make it quick. Good-byes are best kept short. Be strong and you'll make a good soldier." His father had looked down then, his hand hovering over Janusz's shoulder. "Just make sure you come back in one piece."
Now Janusz regretted the way he had left. In truth it hadn't been bravery that had made him turn his back so quickly on his wife and child. It had been the hot tears that had pushed at his eyes as he'd brushed Silvana's cheek with a kiss. His father had been wrong. She'd been the brave one, standing there dry-eyed, holding their son tightly in her arms.
Thirteen 'had's in the quote. Once you get on the Had Highway, it's hard to find the exit ramp.
I have an idea. The first 'had' -- where she writes, 'He'd said goodbye casually' -- is a nice example of the Bad Grammar Flashback Convention, which the schools of "creative writing" all teach as the way it should be done. Let's assume the author wrote, as she should have written, "When he left his home, he said goodbye casually", and then take it from there. Disregard that first 'had' and consider the last 12. Apply the past-tense default to each of them and see what you get. What makes sense? What conveys the intent? If the past tense says what it should say, that's the one you want. Don't put 'had' in front of it. "There is nothing the word 'had' can do for a past tense verb that the verb cannot do for
itself."
For Geoffrey, here's the way it should have been written:
In carriages up and down the train, soldiers were singing and sharing jokes but Janusz stayed silent. He prayed Silvana and Aurek would be safe. [When he left his home], he said good-bye casually, as if he were just going out to buy a newspaper. He told himself it was braver to leave like that. He met up with his father a few days before and that was the old man's advice.
"Don't dwell too long on saying your good-byes. Women always cry and make a fuss. Make it quick. Good-byes are best kept short. Be strong and you'll make a good soldier." His father looked down then, his hand hovering over Janusz's shoulder. "Just make sure you come back in one piece."
Now Janusz regretted the way he left. In truth it wasn't bravery that made him turn his back so quickly on his wife and child. It was the hot tears that pushed at his eyes as he brushed Silvana's cheek with a kiss. His father was wrong. She was the brave one, standing there dry-eyed, holding their son tightly in her arms.
As you can see, there is nothing the word 'had' can do for a past tense verb that the verb cannot do for itself.**
** Clear statement of position, for Geoffrey's consideration.
.br-had.sat.06aug11.
.
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/
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/
|
