In a message dated 8/24/06 5:06:31 PM, [log in to unmask] writes:


> In England the anti-grammar battle began with an attack by Andrew
> Wilkinson on teaching grammar (NATE bulletin, Vol.1:2, Summer 1964), his
> main evidence being three research papers which he claimed 'proved' that
> teaching grammar had no effect on the quality of students' writing.  I took
> the trouble to check his references, and found that they did no such thing:
> 

I'm sure most members of this list are aware of it, but in case some aren't 
let me call your attention to Martha Kolln's important article, "Closing the 
Books on Alchemy" in CCC 32:139-51 (1981).   This article is a thorough and 
devastating discussion of the studies on which Braddock's statement that "In view 
of the widespread agreement of research studies based upon many types of 
students and teachers, the conclusion can be stated in strong and unqualified 
terms: the teaching of formal grammar has a negligible or, because it usually 
displaces some instruction and practice in actual composition, even a harmful 
effect on the improvement of writing."   Martha shows convincingly that the the 
studies on which this conclusion is based are flawed and that they show no such 
thing.

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/