ATEG Archives

February 1996

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Larry Beason <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 14 Feb 1996 11:27:16 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
Emily,
At my scool, all secondary-education English majors & minors must
enroll in a 400-level grammar course that focuses not so much
on pedagogy but on grammar itself (we have another course that
deals more w/ pedagogy).  The course varies depends on who
teaches it, but most of us focus on traditional grammar, with
varied degrees of exposure to transformational grammar.
 
I initially was skeptical of this course & its focus, but student
feedback (both in class & alumni surveys) shows it to be perceived
as one of the most useful courses they take--even if they don't
teach grammar directly.  We even use traditional diagramming, stressing
that it is simply a visual attempt to represent structure.  And
I believe it works very well in helping students "see" what syntax
means and the many holes of traditional grammar.  It has actually
turned out to be one of my favorite courses to teach, largely
because traditional grammar helps highlight some of the many
oddities of formal English.
 
The text we use is Mark Lester's Grammar in the Clasroom (Allyn &
Bacon, I believe).
 
Hope this helps!
 
larry beason
Eastern Washington Univ

ATOM RSS1 RSS2