In a message dated 7/31/06 8:49:57 AM, [log in to unmask] writes:


>    As a coordinator of the project, I would like to say first of all that
> I have no interest in simply affirming the value of Warriner's, or even
> of an approach that says once people fix all their errors, they can
> learn something interesting about language. From the first, our
> position has been that knowledge about language is the primary goal,
> and that "error reduction" is something that will routinely fall into
> place if we aim at this higher goal. (Not at all discrediting
> "correctness," just believing that it doesn't happen with a shallow
> knowledge base.)
> 


As a newcomer to this list, I want to thank Craig for his clarifying message. 
  When he writes, "from the first, our position has been that knowledge about 
language is the primary goal, and that "error reduction" is something that 
will routinely fall into place if we aim at this higher goal," he clears up a 
certain puzzlement I've experienced in my couple of weeks on the list.

I teach, primarily developmental writing courses, at a community college 
outside Baltimore.   Many of my students are bright and have interesting ideas to 
express, but make so many errors with the conventions of standard written 
English, that the effectiveness of their writing is seriously compromised.   And I 
have one fourteen-week semester to help them get ready for college-level 
writing courses.   

From my perspective, of the two goals--"knowledge about language" and "error 
reduction"--error reduction seems much more urgent and much more important to 
my students' success as writers in a world where writing ability is an 
essential component of success.   I, of course, recognize that there is more to 
effective writing than control over the conventions, but I also recognize that a 
plethora of errors in any piece of writing will render it ineffective, 
regardless of its other qualities.   On the other hand, if I were working on the Scope 
and Sequence Project, which I take to be a description of twelve years of 
instruction, then I think I would be much more enthusiastic about the position 
Craig describes.

I also see the value of "knowledge about language," by which I think ATEG 
means something like the long list of terms Joanna posted a week or two ago.   In 
an ideal world, I would agree that providing that kind of "knowledge about 
language" is a worthy goal, but in the real world my students and I inhabit, I 
have to give priority to the more practical and achievable (in 14 weeks) goal 
of helping them reduce the severity and frequency of error in their writing.

I know there are some in our profession who share my goal and are trying to 
develop, to use Rei Noguchi's term, a "writer's grammar," a grammar that 
emphasizes just those terms and concepts that are necessary to eliminate most 
errors.   For example, the distinction between direct and indirect objects is 
important in Latin, but not in English where there is no difference in word forms in 
these two slots.   So, I would leave that distinction out of my version of a 
"writer's grammar."    Joanna's list includes more than sixty items; mine 
would include about a dozen.

I was particularly struck by Craig's pointing out that "from the first, our 
position has been that knowledge about language is the primary goal, and that 
"error reduction" is something that will routinely fall into place if we aim at 
this higher goal."   

I wasn't aware of that ATEG had made this commitment.   I had 
thought--without much actual knowledge to base this assumption on--that ATEG was a "big tent" 
organization with members who agreed that the teaching of grammar is 
important, but who might disagree about the goals of that instruction and the means to 
accomplish it.   The implication in Craig's post seems to be that there are 
two approaches--the "knowledge about language" approach and the "Warriner's" 
approach. It seems to me that there is at least one more: an approach that 
recognizes the weaknesses of the traditional approaches but that is trying to 
develop a more enlightened way of teaching students a grammar that will empower 
them to write successfully in the real world.  



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/