Craig,
   Thanks for the thoughful response. I think I understand what you are saying, but I also think that those who argue that instruction in grammar is useless or harmful are either misled, ― or right. Those who are misled are so because of NCTE's incompetent research and resolution against the teaching of grammar. I have referred to my support for my statement before, but just to document it again, see: http://home.pct.edu/~evavra/KISSMS/Investigation.htm
On the other hand, I would argue that some people who claim it is useless, or even harmful, are right, primarily because it has been taught as a compilation of incomplete, often contradictory definitions, and it has been taught as if all these definitions somehow fit together systematically. Because of the quagmire of definitions and theory, no one has, to my knowledge, been able to go beyond the terms to show how grammar really can be related to writing, reading, literature, and logic. They cannot do so because, in order to apply the grammar, students and teachers need a common set of concepts. And they not only need to "know" these concepts, but they also have to be able to recognize them in randomly selected sentences.
     Personally, I don't believe that the debates about grammatical terminology will ever disappear, nor should they. Essentially, the debates are now coming from different grammatifcal theories which are based on different perspectives, different questions, about language. These debates are healthy, but they do not belong in the K-12 classroom. They don't teach quantum physics in high school. Students first need a basic foundation. What that foundation should be for grammar is, of course, the important question for us, but my sense is that the only way to resolve that is not to argue about definitions and theory, but rather to develop various, clearly identified models. I'm offering KISS as one such model. This is what I argued for at the Seattle conference, but the members decided that they wanted to develop only one set of terms, etc. I pouted then (I'm really a little kid at heart.), but I was right. Grammar Alive  hasn't arrived yet, but no one picked up on my previous statement that it probably contains a 10-page list of terms, as if they all form one coherent system. I want Johanna (and whoever wants to work with her) to develop a consistent pedagogical grammar, even though I know it will be significantly different from KISS (or will it)? But then, of course, I also want demonstrations of how, when, why, etc. that grammar can and should be taught at different grade levels, just as I am trying to do in KISS.  The only way to prove that instruction in grammar is helpful is to demonstrate its effectiveness.
     Thanks again,
Ed

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/