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/