>
>I really don't understand the reluctance of our profession to help our
>students learn labels for the grammatical structures we expect them to
>manipulate.  We are the only discipline that shies away from giving our
>students a language with which to discuss what they're working with.  We
>humans learn what the world is all about when we learn to label its parts.
>
>
>Martha

I've thought a lot about the issue of why we have grown so reluctant to
teach grammar and its terminology. I think it stems from two  related
reasons. The first is that teaching grammar has not proved useful in
improving students' writing--which was, for many teachers, the only
justification for teaching it in the first place. Second, and certainly
related, is that many (perhaps most) teachers have failed in their attempts
to teach students enough grammar to make it useful. Grammar, I would say,
is remarkably resistant to being taught. Furthermore, there is little point
in teaching labels for concepts that most students do not and, perhaps,
cannot understand.

I realize that these claims are controversial and will immediately be
disputed. I could supply a modest bit of evidence to support them, and I
could also point out that other subjects, such as math, are also resistant
to being taught. But let me forge ahead into exploring why grammar is so
hard to teach.

Some reasons are well accepted. For example, many teachers and textbooks
still rely upon unscientific and inaccurate explanations of grammatical
concepts, and many claims made about grammatical concepts are downright
untrue. That would certainly interfere with learning.

Another theory is that many students lack what is called "language
awareness." Until students learn to pay attention to language as an object,
the theory goes, they will be unable to learn concepts about language.

Yet another explanation is that students simply find grammar uninteresting
and unworthy of their attention. In other words, they lack motivation for
learning. To them, grammar is a lot of work for no payoff. (Again, sort of
like learning algebra.)

Another explanation is "use it or lose it." That is, unless students
encounter grammatical concepts and terminology in their reading and
conversation, they are unlikely to remember even the little bit of
knowledge they have acquired. Since teachers of other subjects seldom know
enough grammar to use it even when it would be applicable (a situation akin
to math phobia), students won't encounter enough applications of grammar to
retain it. Maybe we need Grammar Across the Curriculum (or GAC).

However, I suspect that none of these reasons is adequate to explain fully
why grammar is so hard to teach. My theory is that grammatical concepts are
a unique combination of visual, aural, motor, and linguistic elements that
our teaching methods are inadequate to address. In comparison understanding
a concept like photosynthesis is easy.

Furthermore, even our labels for grammatical concepts are problems. If you
understand the morphemes in the word "photosynthesis" (which is not hard to
do), that helps you understand and remember the concept behind the term. By
contrast, words like "adjective" and "preposition" are no help whatsoever.
It's not that the words aren't made up of meaningful morphemes; it's that
meanings are either unknown or unhelpful to students. The terms can only be
memorized, and what must be memorized is easily forgotten.

In the end, if teachers cannot successfully teach grammar, and if the
labels used for grammatical concepts fail to help them in the teaching, it
is little wonder that so many are reluctant to teach either the concepts or
the terminology.

Bill





William J. McCleary
3247 Bronson Hill Road
Livonia, NY 14487
716-346-6859