I returned form a very positive, very invigorating, inspiring ATEG conference to face a back load of student papers, so I have been catching up on that while working my way toward a short report on Scope and Sequence. Rather than reply to the skeptics directly, I'll just give a quick perspective of my own. The assembled group now seems to be drawing alliances from a number of different areas, including foreign language teaching and the Connecticut Writing Project. There seemed a unanimous consensus in favor of A scope and sequence project, including all the different aspects of that: how it would be assessed, how teachers would be trained, and so on. We had fine assistance from Tim Hadley (background to NCTE opposition), Deb Rossen-Knill (background understanding of assessment), and Amanda Godley (questions related to all aspects of teacher training.) We looked at drafts on rationale and a position on standard English (as presented to all members via the list before the conference) and a very early draft of Scope and Sequence(from Cornelia Paraskevas, who has been trying to follow the suggestions of our working group), all of which was well beyond the scope of the time allotted to us. But we did spend considerable group time settling on the wording of an opening statement, which is here presented: Students should have explicit knowledge of the nature and structure of language. In addition to its value for understanding what it means to be human, this knowledge is a powerful tool that helps students to develop critical thinking, to explore cultural diversity, and to strengthen reading and writing. Accordingly, as educators, we propose a systematic framework for the teaching of grammar. I don't think we can present a scope and sequence that will please everyone in all its aspects. That hardly seems a reason not to try. Nor should we apologize for being a group that has long included robust disagreement. I think the jury will be out on its efficacy and effectiveness until it is put into place and closely monitored, and we should be very open to that happening. We should always let the world know that there are a rich array of alternative perspectives, many of which have gone into our own core understanding. We can offer a series of definitions that includes alternative definitions. If we decide not to use "gerund", for example, we can at least explain how the term is used within the traditional grammar that it's a part of. One of many pleasures at the conference was seeing the presentation from two teachers, Alan Zepp and Thom McHugh, from Cook County Maryland, where a project has been underway for a few years now to reintroduce grammar systematically into the curriculum. Alan showed us work that was being done with somewhat needy freshmen. Thom showed us work done among advanced placement seniors. And it was clear that everyone is benefiting from this sequenced understanding, the beginning teachers who know they are setting things up as well as the later teachers who have something substantial to work with and build on. The plan is to have volunteers for all aspects of the project, including work on definitions, which Herb has volunteered to coordinate. I envision the project as an important part of the ATEG website, even as a work in progress. We have an NCTE panel set for November, at which time we will report on the ongoing project in its current form. I still think the world is now hungry for reasonable advice about the reintegration of grammar into the public school curriculum. As a professional organization whose mission is promoting and supporting the teaching of English grammar, Scope and Sequence seems a natural step. I couldn't have been more pleased at the results of the conference. We got wonderful participation from very talented people, and the conference as a whole embraced the project as an ATEG project. We should encourage tough questions and be prepared for thoughtful criticism. I think we can come up with a program that's so much better than the hodge podge currently out there. Craig 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/