Just a footnote to your last comment about schools that teach grammar from third
grade one:  One of the many things we need to keep in mind in trying to determine
the effects of grammar teaching is the fact that it may or may not be supported
by a good writing program, and so forth.  Home language and literacy are also
important factors.

Connie Weaver

David D Mulroy wrote:

> With all due respect to opposing points of view, I think that Jeff Glauner
> has it right.  What is desperately needed is the systematic study of
> grammar from the beginning of a student's formal education.  I am working
> on a book making this case from my perspective as a classicist at a public
> university.  My impression is that ignorance of grammar has caused a
> serious decline in writing ability among college students and has made it
> impossible for most of them to learn a foreign language.  (In this
> respect, my campus is typical.  With the possible exception of Spanish,
> the foreign language departments are all dying.) I joined ATEG in order to
> gain further insights into the issue, and have certainly not been
> disappointed.
>
> >From what I have seen, the research used to justify the elimination of
> grammar is relatively short-term.  In other words, it has been demonstated
> that the addition of grammar lessons to English composition classes does
> not improve writing.  This seems to me to be a very obvious and
> unimportant conclusion, since grammar, like a arithmetic, takes a long
> time to learn properly.  There are schools that teach grammar
> systematically from the third grade on.  Anecdotal evidence suggests that
> their students do extremely in all aspects of the language arts.  If the
> NCTE research were correct, the opposite would be true.  Students who
> wasted all that time studying grammar should be severely crippled by the
> time that they reached high school.  In my book, I think that I will
> urge studies to compare the achievements of students with such curricula
> with others.  All of your comments are welcome.
>
> David Mulroy
> University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
>
> On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, JEFF GLAUNER wrote:
>
> > You are probably right about the research, Bill.  That is going to be an
> > uphill battle--if anyone steps up to fight it.  I think, however, that the
> > first step is for us to develop the teachable, useful grammar.  There are
> > two states I know of that haven't waited for the research.  Missouri and
> > Colorado have mandated the return of grammar to the curriculum, at least to
> > the teacher education curriculum.  (Are there other states doing this?)  If
> > we can concentrate on getting useful things going in these states, good
> > researchers--not just from research universities, but elementary and
> > secondary teachers from large school districts--will come forward to study
> > and report.  My daughter, an elementary teacher and a budding researcher,
> > will be teaching in Missouri starting next year.  I have already tagged her
> > to do some classroom research at the primary level with the grammar I have
> > developed.  It is largely for my own use in improving my course, but, if we
> > could get the entire building to buy into the research, something
> > publishable might emerge.
> >
> > Jeff Glauner
> > Park University
> >
> > > Grammar was bounced out of the curriculum because of abundant research
> > > showing that the study of grammar had no useful effect on writing skills.
> > > To put grammar back into the curriculum will require not only developing a
> > > more accurate, teachable and learnable system of simplified grammar but
> > > also conducting research showing that the new grammar does something
> > useful
> > > for students. The research will have to be quantitative and of sufficient
> > > validity to be published in refereed journals.
> > >
> > > In my opinion, nothing less will do the trick. It's too bad that we don't
> > > seem to have ATEG members from research universities who might have the
> > > time, money, and necessity for doing the needed research.
> > >
> > > Even in the unlikely eventuality that these conditions could be met,
> > > grammar would still have to fight its way into the curriculum against a
> > > tide of new material being added because of the new standards and tests.
> > >
> > > Bill
> > >
> > > William J. McCleary
> > > 3247 Bronson Hill Road
> > > Livonia, NY 14487
> > > 716-346-6859
> >