I appreciate the focus of Bll McLeary's proposition.

He wants to reach a definition of our collective opinion on grammar
taught within the writing process, and grammar taught on its own.

I agree with the first part of his statement, quoted below.  Perhaps
this statement does meet with universal agreement on our list:

> Perhaps I should have pointed out that "grammar" is not
> antithetical to the process approach to teaching writing. Most
> schemes of the process approach include a stage on editing. In
> line with the basic theory behind the process approach--that
> teaching should occur during the writing process--grammar
> (however one defines that term) would be taught primarily during
> the editing stage.

However, I personally do not agree with the second part.  I am one
who believes that grammar, even when taught apart from the writing
process, improves writing.

> Now, if I am wrong about my assumption concerning our
> collective wisdom, I would like to know that. I do not propose
> to argue that subject again. So here is the question: Am I wrong
> in assuming that we have already agreed that traditional grammar
> and traditional exercises, especially when taught outside the
> writing process, are ineffective in helping students improve the
> correctness of their writing?

Maybe as a group we can focus on the first of McLeary's
statements, and leave the second aside.

Robert Einarsson