English Classes…

By  | April 6, 2011 | 1 Comment | Filed under: Misc

beowulfAs a social studies teacher, I have always been interested in English classes. Having some basic mastery of your native language (i.e. to effectively read, speak, and write) is pretty important when teaching in my area. With this in mind, I came across a couple interesting articles which address some modern problems with this subject area…

First off, I have a NYT opinion piece, where a college instructor is describing how and why integrating micro-blogging (including Twitter and IM’ing) into a freshman writing curriculum has value: Teaching to the Text Message

I’ve been teaching college freshmen to write the five-paragraph essay and its bully of a cousin, the research paper, for years. But these forms invite font-size manipulation, plagiarism and clichés. We need to set our sights not lower, but shorter.

I don’t expect all my graduates to go on to Twitter-based careers, but learning how to write concisely, to express one key detail succinctly and eloquently, is an incredibly useful skill, and more in tune with most students’ daily chatter, as well as the world’s conversation. The photo caption has never been more vital.

Another reason why this may have value (when presented in appropriate measure in a class curriculum) is that these are areas where most students have some familiarity with the forms…the fact is that many students use these types of written communications already… It doesn’t take much to see that this might be a valid subtopic to cover, in that the students are (by their use of these tools) already interested in them.

This next article is one which I disagreed with …at least until I finished reading it… the author present a cogent argument why teaching , and having student worry about such tropes as split infinitives, and dangling participles may be pretty worthless for everyone…and that there are far more valuable things to inculcate into students than late 19th century perspectives about how the language is ‘supposed’ to be used.

It’s time for English teachers to stop teaching that the earth is flat
http://blog.oup.com/2011/03/english-teachers

Perhaps the most important grammar lesson to learn, then, is to trust our language instincts instead of mimicking some ideal which turns out to be a moving target. We need to finally leave the eighteenth-century prescriptions behind and aim for language that is simply good enough to do the job of expressing whatever it is we need to say. And when we study language, we should study what it is, not what someone thinks it should be.

From a comment to this article:

It was Orwell who said that sometimes our instincts fail in which case it is necessary to have recourse to sensible and not overly subjective rules of style, which can indeed be broken. Orwell was a master of plain speech and an adherent of cutting out unnecessary words. I think this is the real key. As Pinker says in ‘The Language Instinct’, it is the lack of editing and drafting which is really the sign of bad English and grammatical prescriptions are mostly Early Modern add-ons stemming from a desire to emulate Latin.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Be Sociable, Share!
 
Tags: ,
Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

Re: Teaching to the text message

Just a couple of comments regarding the quote that selected.

I think there is a very questionable and unstated assumption lurking in within the proposal to adopt the change to shorter forms. The writer implies that the problems of plagiarism and other practices will lessen if only the form of the assignments are changed. If only the hurdles are lowered then everyone will no longer have to cheat. I don't think it works that way in practice, I think an unmotivated student is going to lower their effort based on the demands of the teacher. Don't you agree?

Doesn't it seem that all too often we hear of curriculum reforms coming from teachers that just seek to replace the 'hard bits' they have to deal with?

One last point: The portion of the argument about today's kids social media experience makes traditional writing methods ill suited for them makes the tacit assumption that they were any better suited to yesterday's kids. Kids from your and my era found structured writing assignments very much different than the writing we had done outside the school curriculum. My point is that the discipline of writing in these time honored forms doesn't come naturally, nor did it ever. Teachers who argue that blog/twitter approaches be embraced _in place_ of more traditional forms have a potential conflict of interest since the new forms would make them more popular with their students, and would probably reduce the challenge of teaching their classes. And who, after all, should be deciding what these forms should be? The composition teacher is preparing students for work in other subjects or later in life. Are they really in a position to make these changes? Maybe the composition department should survey the staff in other departments regarding the quality and style of the papers produced by their students (who probably take composition to prepare them.) I assume that they would get some push-back regarding the proposed changes, but I should be careful, these changes might look attractive to them too!

Translator

Subscribe