John,
    You seem to be making very thoughtful decisions about how to help your
students. If there's an important hoop, you have to take it seriously,
but you don't need to be subservient to it.
   When I look at SAT sample questions, I find about one in four
perplexing. I think they want students to "intuit" a better sentence,
but they also want those intuitions to match the intuitions of the test
makers, which, I have to admit, are not always the same as mine. I see
the same dynamic at work with writing teachers who rewrite students'
sentences in ways that sometimes seem arbitrary or idiosyncratic. In
effect, they want the students to share their intuitions, to write like
them, without reflection on how difficult (impossible?) that might be.
I think this is one symptom of an overall loss of knowledge about
language, and you're right: the students affected the most will be
those whose background is different from the testmakers. Testing
explicit knowledge would level the playing field. All students would be
on equal footing.
   As much as possible, I want students to own their own writing. They
should be free to break conventions if they can do so knowing what
those conventions are. They should make choices that they feel best
convey their own evolving intentions. Knowledge of conventions and
knowledge of rhetorical options are more important than behavior.

Craig

 >

 Craig,
>
>  I see another side of this issue every day – students who do very well on
> SAT questions aren't necessarily better writers for all their awareness (
> I hesitate to use knowledge) of SAT error patterns. And then the
> insinuation is made, yet again, that grammar instruction doesn't improve
> student writing. Your point about conceptualization is well taken; so,
> while the SAT test doesn't necessarily approach that aspect, it's more
> upon me as a teacher of that test-taking population to approach essential
> skill sets with a larger picture in mind – the rhetorical function of
> grammar in a particular phrase, paragraph, etc. We should always hope for
> transfer of knowledge within and across disciplines, and as we all know
> the SAT isn't constructed to demonstrate that type of thinking, I find it
> a matter of classroom practice.
>
> The SAT and related test-prep methodology and practices manage to keep
> students tracked and stratified, which to me is of even greater concern
> (and a matter for a different thread). Those who do well have paid to
> learn how to do well, or at least better than the average test taker. It's
> that student who also can afford to pay to actually attend the school he
> or she was "smart enough" to get into. Let's be courageous enough to admit
> that "school" is a glorified class system of haves and have nots and that
> Education has done a fine job in keeping those distinctions in proper
> working order.
>
> But back to the change in curriculum addressed by the article, we can hope
> it moves beyond correctness and into the dynamics of language. I was
> pleasantly surprised to watch my young nephew, in the 4th grade, learn
> about predicates and adverb phrases explicitly (while I have 11th grade
> students who arrive unable explain nouns, verbs, prepositions, fragments,
> etc.) ... but again, it's a step on a greater staircase. If we want others
> (let's start with NCTE, yes?) to believe that this particular, specific
> type of knowledge is valuable and can in fact improve student writing -
> which I fully believe it can - then the rest is up to good teaching.
> Purposeful, explicit, critical, rigorous, and ongoing instruction at that.
>
> Thanks...
>
> John
>
>
>> Karl,
>> It's interesting that they still equate grammar with
>> "conventions" and
>> with error, though they open up with more sophisticated terminology.
>> The SAT test doesn't measure explicit knowledge about language; it
>> simply asks you to find (or intuit) the best choice among options.
>> There isn't, for example, a need to identify a structure as a
>> prepositional phrase or modal auxiliary. No need to handle the "in
>> early morning dawn" type of question we have been discussing other
>> than to choose it as an alternative. It's interesting that they also
>> separate proofreading and grammar from "more conceptual" skills,
>> clearly not even aware that other views of grammar are possible. (One
>> core concept of cognitive grammar--grammar is conceptualization.)They
>> still don't seem to be making the judgment that knowledge about
>> language is valuable in itself.
>> This is pretty much true of the National Governor's Standards
>> as well.
>> They are a bit better, but still old school in their construal of
>> grammar. Whether you are for it or against it, it still seems to be
>> focused on correctness.
>> >
>> Craig
>>
>> I'm surprised that no one has brought this up. It appears Texas
>> schools> are going to get a lot more explicit grammatical instruction.
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-grammar_15met.ART.State.Edition1.14a5f2e.html
>> >
>> > When Texas was arguing about new curriculum standards, I heard
>> a lot
>> > about the fight over the science standards, but nothing at all about
>> > English standards.
>> >
>> > Are there any Texas educators on the list who would care to comment
>> > about what difference these changes are making in the trenches?
>> >
>> > 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/
>> >
>>
>> 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/
>>
>
> John Chorazy
> English III Academy, Honors, and Academic
> Pequannock Township High School
>
> Nulla dies sine linea.
>
> 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/
>

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/