I thank Tim for the excellent explanation also. I would only add that Hillocks' account actually covered a great many studies, many of which did show a correlation between grammar teaching of some kind and positive changes in writing, but when it came to those he considered sufficiently reliable to include in the analysis, the number shrunk to a handfull. In addition, I always wonder about what that "little" means whenever someone writes "little or no."
I agree with Christine that the SAT test could be discussed. Christine, I'm looking at the samples available on the Educational Testing Service website for the SAT II test and they show sections on Identifying Sentence Error, Improving Sentences, and Improving Paragraphs, together with the holistically graded writing sample. Could you clarify how the test will be changing, and what the Grammar section will include, if you know? As to the current test, it seems to me it's focus on grammar and mechanics is not extreme: there are no questions about parts of speech, spelling and capitalization are not issues in the multiple choice questions, and punctuation comes up only in the context of sentence structure and meaning.
Brock
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar on behalf of Christine Gray
Sent: Sat 1/31/2004 3:30 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Cc:
Subject: Re: Hillocks??
Tim, thank you for clarifying the Hillocks' research for me. I had never heard of them.
I posted here about two weeks ago that the new SAT will have a section on writing and a section on only grammar. I was surprised that no one commented on that; perhaps everyone already knows about these parts of the revised SAT.
Again, thank you,
Christine Gray, in beautiful downtown Baltimore
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Hadley, Tim
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2004 3:25 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Hillocks??
Christine,
I'll answer, in case Brock doesn't see your post. George Hillocks (there is only one of him) published _Research on Written Composition_ in 1986. It was a meta-analysis of many aspects of the teaching of writing, including the grammar issue. Hillocks attempted to collect studies where it was possible to calculate an "effect size," thus (supposedly) standarizing the results of many studies done under different circumstances, with different populations and sample sizes, etc. The idea was to be able to compare these studies as "apples to apples" and see what results emerged.
Hillocks's scope, analysis, and conclusions were much more thorough than those of Braddock, et al. in 1963, and some of his insights in certain areas of writing instruction were very valuable. Unfortunately, his negative conclusions about the effectiveness of direct grammar instruction were marred by a number of problems, including a small number of studies (5), imprecise definitions (he didn't include "sentence combining" with grammar), etc. His summary was, "One of the strongest findings of this study . . . is that grammar study has little or no effect on the improvement of writing. The same is true for emphasis on mechanics and correctness in writing" (225). Needless to say, many people (in and out of ATEG) did not agree with Hillocks's conclusions.
I am very interested in the call that Brock has alerted us to because this topic (the efficacy of explicit grammar teaching) is precisely the focus of my dissertation (currently in progress) at Texas Tech. I'll be following up on this, and I hope others will also either respond to the call or share information and insights.
Tim Hadley
Ph.D. candidate, Technical Communication and Rhetoric
Texas Tech University
-----Original Message-----
From: Christine Gray [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Sat 1/31/2004 1:23 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Cc:
Subject: Re: Hillocks??
Brock,
Who are the Hillocks and what are/were their simplistic conclusions?
Christine Gray
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Haussamen, Brock
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2004 12:45 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Call for papers on grammar research
The May issue of the journal Research in the Teaching of English will include a call for literature reviews that explore research topics that need re-visiting and that hold significance in terms of educational policy and practice. One example will be the efficacy of explicit grammar teaching, especially to linguistically and culturally diverse populations.
Considering how heavily English education is saddled with the Hillocks' simplistic conclusions about grammar teaching from nearly 20 years ago, this call seems like a good opportunity to try to right the record and review newer studies. Anyone interested in further information, beyond the call in the journal itself, can contact co-editor Anne DiPardo at [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> .
Brock Haussamen
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/
|
