Bob,

Are you talking about "National Standards" a la the system used in France?
Every school in the U.S.A. should be on page twelve by the fourth week of
the school year-sort-of-thing? I don't think, even if it COULD happen, it
ever would. Even if it DID happen, I doubt that it would accomplish what
we're after. And certainly it would stifle any creative teaching.

Paul E. Doniger
The Gilbert School

----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Einarsson <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:30 AM
Subject: Re: Johanna's distinction


> The combination that Ruth proposes looks ideal to me:
>
> > it seems to me that a combination
> > of the two (utilitarian and theoretical) is appropriate.  If a basic
> > understanding of grammar is taught in the formative years (sentence
> > diagraming, which demands an understanding of terminology, which lends
> > itself to correct punctuation, etc.), then it seems a natural
progression
> > for the advanced high school student and the college student to be
taught
> > "grammar as a subject of study, akin to bio, math, chem..."
>
> But the reservation that she points out is also unfortunately too true:
>
> > I realize, of course, this line of thought unrealistically
> > assumes that every student arrives at the advanced high school/college
> > stage with a strong grammatical foundation.  Why is it that things
always
> > look better on "paper?"
>
> So the only solution is a comprehensive grammar curriculum,
> including both skills and theory, distributed across the whole k to
> college education system, and uniform across all school systems
> in North America.  Allright!
>
> Isn't this the ultimate goal of the ATEG and also the 3S document?
>
> R.E.
>