A New Approach to Grammar

I really liked Deborah Dean's article entitled Grammar without Grammar. The article specifically outlines some new and fresh ways of teaching old and worn out material with a creative spin. Dean starts off by telling the reader how she more or less rejoiced when daily language and grammar requirements were lifted at her school. She thought that this would give her more time to spend on writing with the students, but she soon found out that there was no common language with which to discuss student writing without the grammar lessons. Not wanting to go back to the way she had previously taught grammar Dean decided to use an old technique, sentence immitation. In reviving this strategy in her classroom, I think that Dean's success in getting it to work with the kids was that she used modern methods of delivery in getting the kids to immitate sentences.

The first modern strategy that Dean used in getting her students to appropriately model sentences was modeling the technique herself. In addition to pulling sentences from other publications to attempt to duplicate, Dean offered sentences of her own for students to match as well as working with students to immitate some of the examples that she used from other authors. In short, Dean showed the kids how to complete the required task by doing that task with them. Another modern technique that she used was to allow the kids to write on any topic which they desired as long as it was classroom appropriate. This kept the material engaging and personal for the students, and in my opinion, it probably yeilded positive results much more quickly. Third technique that Dean used was to scaffold student learning through the immitation activities. She eventually had the kids combining two, three, and even four immitated sentences in a row, and even began to put occassional content stipulations on the sentences forcing the kids to write about one focused topic. In this way, Dean was able to prepare kids to face specific writing prompts by getting them used to writing on predecided content and material. Lastly, she kept the activities gamelike and fun for the kids. During many classperiods the sentence writing turned into a competition or contest which further enticed the kids to participate at their highest level.

Overall, I loved this article. I think it was a fabulous synthesis of many of the skills that we are being taught in the program. This is a great example of how a little teacher ingenuity with the proper techniques can produce some fantastic results. The only concern that I have with the piece is that she noted at the end that the kids would not be able to name or recognize the rules and usage patterns that they had been learning if they had to. This makes me worry about them not being exposed to the common language of standard english grammar that they might need to posses as their schooling progresses. Sure, she has gotten the kids to write better, but how will they be able to explain their writing choices and practices when go through college processes of editing and revising. What if they get into linguistics courses and other fields where some base knowledge is required. Would this type of teaching be a problem?

This link takes you to a website that will send you daily grammar lessons and tips through your email. It might be helpful in conducting these types of lessons. You can also search the site for specific grammar topics.
http://www.dailygrammar.com/archive.shtml

Tangential Writing and Assessment

Upon completing the readings for this week, I have gleaned two important ideas for my future teaching. The first is to be relaxed enough in my writing assignments and prompts to allow for the expression of student ideas and concerns. In other words, I need to be flexible in the sense that some of the best student writing may develop out of tangents or topics that are seemingly off topic. The second is that assessment needs to be pointed and purposeful with clear goals and expectations. As Spandel says, "Good assessment does not come about by accident. It is the result of clear vision and thoughtful planning" (97). Indeed, by implementing forms of backward design and other such lesson planning activities our writing assignments follow naturally and linearly from our methods of assessment. So, out of these two points the question then arises, how do we ensure that our students' writing meets certain standards and requirements set forth by the curriculum and state while at the same time allowing them the freedom to express themselves through their own unique voice and writing style?

To answer this question I lean heavily on Spandel's third right. In this right, Spandel makes it exceptionally clear that we must not be overly rigid in our prompts or assignments. As she says, "If we truly believe that writing is thinking then we must let our writers go where their thinking leads them - and as far as it will take them" (36). In essence, Spandel is saying that to get the most out of our young writers we must use prompts and other starting points for writing as simply starting points. We must encourage our writers to go beyond the initial ideas for writing that we present to them and force them to push themselves into new directions. I really agree with this practice. If we do not coax our students to branch out on their own in their writing topics and direction how will they ever write anything truly interesting. We will simply get formulaic dull writing by sticking to the prompts.

In order to assess these tangential endeavors that our students set out upon we must, as noted earlier, have a firm plan in line for assessment. We must not grade tangetially in order to match the somewhat tangetial ideas developed by students. Instead, we should lay out clear and concise expectations for how their writing should function. For example, instead of grading based on a formula we should take into account the strengths and weaknesses of a piece, in what way may the writer improve the most, and did a piece accomplish its overall goal. In this sense, we may allow our writers to improve and polish their craft without making their craft our own. We lend constructive criticism, make sure requirements are met, and encourage writing to tangentially move beyond those requirements. By doing this, we are allowing students to maintain their own voice and unique style of writing while at the same time helping them to find the best possible way to express their ideas. In closing then, through assessment and flexibility we are able to nuture the tangential tendencies that must be developed in all writers to truly be successful. Our teaching should reflect this philosophy, and if it does we should be allright.

Here is a link to the Writer's Digest website on which you will find helpful and unique writing prompts that can be used to stimulate a variety of students.
http://www.writersdigest.com/writingprompts.asp?goto=closead

Editing, Drafts, and Failure

Upon completing the reading assignments for this week I couldn't help but think how more often than not my own teachers struggled to provide enough time for the revision process to take place. While I don't feel like I was cheated or short changed in terms of writing or producing drafts, it is important to realize that writing always came relatively easy for me. On most assignements I recall being given time to produce a rought draft, time to edit that rough draft, and then time to rework our drafts to produce a final copy. The whole process was fairly neat and organized, and I never felt that my rough drafts were all that different from my final copies. Even now as a college student, I find that time constraints and due dates afford me the opportunity to scan drafts for usage and punctuation mistakes along with changing a sentence here or there to clarify an idea that I am trying to present. Yet, there have been plenty of students that I known who find that this neat and tidy method of producing writing is not nearly enough. Either this method does not afford them the amount of time that they truely need to polish their work, or their concern with usage and punctuation inhibits the natural flow of their ideas to the point where no amount of revision can resesuitate their work. All of this caused me to question the best way of going about writing in a school setting. We have to be flexible enough in our grading to allow for the occassional failure of the students, yet we have devote enought time to writing in order to nuture the advancement of young writers.

Spandel's fifth right, "The Right to Write Badly" helped me to tackle some of these issues. At the beginning of the chapter she presents the metaphor of a writing teacher acting like a swimming coach, believing in his or her charges and encouraging small but noticable amounts of progress. After all, one can't learn to swim if one is not willing to get into the water (64). Similarly, writing is not a one shot deal, although it is often approached as such. As Spandel says, "identify the topic, think through the topic, write the piece" (65). Unfortunately, Spandel agrees that there is not nearly enough time for students to experience the true process of writing and revising their work in school, but she does suggest that through a substantial amount of practice, and through using short versions of revision consistently, kids can develop the tools necessary to producing good writing. She also adds that by encouraging your students to write in order to learn instead of for assessment you will be able to produce more competent writers.

Thus, my take away from this whole reading and writing experience with Spandel is that we need to be compassionate educators. Do not place students in fear of the read pen as this will only limit what they feel like they can truely say, or as Ballenger notes, "driving their voices into silence" (76). Prevent there from being hang ups on writing grades, and do this by nuturing kids through the process. I am reminded of how Aaron Doering coached us through our technology course. He taught flexibly and passionately. He encouraged us to spend time learning the programs and becoming familiar with each of them, and ultimately he was more concerned with what we learned and took away from this process than by our abilities to produce perfect work. Writing is much the same way, and I hope that I am able to find a way to emulate these practices in my own teaching.

At the website below you will find a message board for students who are 16 or older which encourages them to write about their English studies. This might be a helpful tool in getting kids to write as they might identify with some of the common problems other students are having. Also, it's a low risk form of writing that encourages them to simply thow out ideas without being too concerned about usage, punctuation, and all that other stuff associated with well polished writing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/websites/16/site/english.shtml

The Shelf Life of the FPT

For this week's reading I found the Wesley and the Wiley articles to be the most useful and stimulating. While the other four writers provided some good insights and reasoning in explaining their views on the five paragraph essay or theme, I thought that Wesley and Wiley were very convincing in their comments. For example, I first read Nunnally who posited that while the FPT may teach students unity, coherence, and development of their ideas, it is a constraining form that does not encourage much growth. Furthermore, at the end of his essay he says that while secondary teachers should seek to teach beyond the FPT he would rather have incoming college students know its form and advantages rather than having them come to college clueless about how to write a well organized paper. Wesley actually calls Nunnally out on this when she says that such a frame of mind only encourages the status quo. In other words, encouraging teachers to go beyond the FPT and then saying that it is probably ok if students don't know much beyond the FPT, as long as they know the FPT inside and out, is dangerous. Wesley calls for a break from the format of the FPT which limits the potential of students' writing. She says that by teaching kids to break from the form you are teaching them to voice their concerns, communicate, and think for themselves. I find this very helpful because, after all, aren't these the real world applications that we want students to have? Sticking to a form makes the acquisition of these skills very difficult.

Wiley, echoes these sentiments as he suggests that we first teach kids the formula, and then allow kids to deviate from that formula as they see fit. Wiley says that formulaic writing serves a purpose in the sense that it allows low achieving and struggling students a place to begin when faced with a blank page. It provides a guide for how general writing should look to those who don't really know how to go about producing this type of writing. However, formulaic writing "stiffles ongoing exploration, and encourages premature closure of complicated issues." Thus, in order to get higher level thinking from our students we must encourage them to move beyond a form and explore their own ideas and discoveries. I personally agree strongly with these statements. Once we give kids a starting point for writing it is up to us to encourage them to take their writing as far as it may go. This means breaking the constrictive form of the FPT. After all, how much can really be said in five paragraphs, and after a certain point how good can that writing really get. The FPT has a shelf life for students. Once they have opened the container the FPT tends to spoil very quickly, as they find other ingredients with which to write.

Here is a website with some helpful teaching suggests for how to begin to move beyond the conventional five paragraph essay. Although the suggestions represent small steps, this site provides a starting point for doing more with the FPT.
http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/tburke1/beyond.html